Unless Sarah Palin knocked her up herself, this is not at all relevant. I think Obama has handled this well by also pointing out that his mother was 18 years old at the time of his birth. Obviously, shame on anyone who would dig personal dirt on a political candidate.
Ordinarily, I'd agree. But the McCain campaign made Palin's kids part of its justification for picking her, and her decision to have the Downs Syndrome child was particularly emphasized.
You can't sell yourself by trumpeting your "family values" and then complain when people ask questions about your family.
But the test for Palin isn't whether or not her daughter gets knocked up in the first place, but how they handle the situation. To drag this into the open as dirt is inexcusable. The relevant piece would be how the family responds to this adversity, and put it in the context of their platform (i.e. she holds very strong pro-life beliefs, so did she hold firm in this when confronted with the issue directly?) I'm very adamantly pro-choice, as I am with most things. I believe Palin is holding true to her own platform, although I disagree with it.
But the test for Palin isn't whether or not her daughter gets knocked up in the first place, but how they handle the situation.
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but that's not how I was raised. A teenage daughter getting knocked up says a lot about the parenting (or lack thereof) that happened beforehand. You don't get to just look at how the parents react to it, as if they had nothing to do with it happening in the first place. She's their daughter.
Don't get me wrong. I'd much rather this campaign/debate be focused on more relevant issues. But, again, family values is what McCain/Palin are selling. They brought it into the campaign and put it center-stage; not the bloggers or the Democrats or anybody else. Supposedly, her family values somehow make her qualified to be vice president. When that's the argument you're making, you don't get to declare family matters like this out of bounds.
Palin and McCain brought her kids into this campaign. I'd rather kids didn't have to deal with that kind of stuff. I liked the days when kids were off limits. But the decision to change that was Palin's. She decided to run on her kids. She can't blame anybody else for the ramifications.
Were those the days when a girl would mysteriously go live with a relative for 6-9 months, transferring temporarily to another school? I think we've made progress in family values by confronting these issues head-on instead of brushing them under a rug and pretending they never happened. When we're talking about family values, are we talking about how the family looks to outsiders, or are we talking about how successful the family is in teaching its sons and daughters how to take responsibility for their actions?
Were those the days when a girl would mysteriously go live with a relative for 6-9 months . . .
No, those were the days when candidates ran on their political record and policy proposals, not on their families. Palin and McCain explicitly, intentionally made her family one of her main selling points. They're the one who argued this is somehow relevant to being vice president of the U.S.
dutyje:
When we're talking about family values, are we talking about how the family looks to outsiders, or are we talking about how successful the family is in teaching its sons and daughters how to take responsibility for their actions?
Again, I think it's giving the parents a free pass to say all that matters is how they react after the fact. When we're talking about family values, we're talking about whether you've instilled values in your kids such that they don't go around having sex and getting knocked up at 17 in the first place. It's not just about taking responsibility for your actions; it's about taking responsible actions in the first place.
As for whether or not we're talking about how the family looks to outsiders, of course we are. We -- the voters -- are all outsiders. Palin and McCain made her family values central to her qualifications for office. That means we have to pass some kind of judgment on her family values. The fact that she and her husband failed to give their daughter the values that would have kept her from getting pregnant in the first place is extremely relevant to that judgment.
It's extremely unpleasant and, as I said, I liked it better when all this was kept off the agenda. But Palin and McCain (and the last thirty years of religious conservatives) are the ones who put it ON the agenda. Not the Democrats or the liberals or the media or the bloggers or anybody else. All those people did was take what Palin and McCain said was crucially important, and treat it like it was crucially important.
Moreover, the fact that she accepted the job of running for vp when she knew her family's situation and what a political campaign would expose her daughter to doesn't speak very well of her family values, either.
OK...so now that it is out that Palin's daughter IS PREGNENT. What do they do now? Did she not know till after she was selected and this doesn't follow her conservative views. The religious side of the party are not going to like this. I think it's possible that a lot of people will be sitting out of this election on both sides.
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but that's not how I was raised. A teenage daughter getting knocked up says a lot about the parenting (or lack thereof) that happened beforehand. You don't get to just look at how the parents react to it, as if they had nothing to do with it happening in the first place. She's their daughter.
Im not sure i agree with this 100%. I mean, seriously, did your parents have 100% controll over you? I know mine didnt over me. my parents did do everything right. my parents did teach me good values and not to do drugs and all that. I did my own thing anyway. this doesnt make my parents bad parents. it makes me a bad child.
it comes down to personal responsability on the part of the daughter.
she did decide to run on her kids. its her responsability to make this work. so far shes doing a good job. (as far as i can tell i mean, im not in that household)
My issue with this is that part of her platform and now part of the McCain/Palin platform is teaching absistence in schools. No Sex Ed, no handing out condoms or even any instruction on how to use them. This is what was taught at the school her daughter went to, worked well eh?
Im not sure i agree with this 100%. I mean, seriously, did your parents have 100% controll over you? I know mine didnt over me. my parents did do everything right. my parents did teach me good values and not to do drugs and all that. I did my own thing anyway. this doesnt make my parents bad parents. it makes me a bad child.
it comes down to personal responsability on the part of the daughter.
I may disagree with you on a number of things, but I'm in complete agreement here. Parents can do the best job in the world of trying to instill values and morals into their children, but children grow into people who make decisions, and whether those decisions reflect the values they were taught or flagrantly disregard them is not the fault of the parent, but the choice of the child.
I may disagree with you on a number of things, but I'm in complete agreement here. Parents can do the best job in the world of trying to instill values and morals into their children, but children grow into people who make decisions, and whether those decisions reflect the values they were taught or flagrantly disregard them is not the fault of the parent, but the choice of the child.
Sorry, I can't go along. I'm not saying children become 100% what their parents want them to be, obviously, but nobody has more control over what kind of person a child becomes than that child's parents. If the child goes seriously off the rails on what the parents say is the most important thing in the world (and especially when that most important thing is "family values" itself), then barring mental illness, it reflects one of two things: something gone wrong in the parenting, or the parents are mostly just talk when it comes to the thing they say is the most important thing in the world.
maybe its just me but i feel that too many people spent too much time pointing too many fingers at too many other people.
point the finger at yourself from time to time.
my parents did a great job giving me information on drugs and alcahol and sex. i KNEW what i was doing was wrong. but i I made a poor decision, not my parents. i would never blame them for something stupid I did.
My parents did a great job instilling family values in me, too. It showed in my behavior. I give them credit for that.
I'm all for personal responsibility. The Palins should take some for the way they raised their daughter.
My parents raised me well, and I have grown into what I consider to be a pretty good person because of that. But, in addition to that, I have my own personality, my own beliefs and my own morals that were not instilled by my parents, but rather I found myself through searching to find who I am.
A person's upbringing can only account for so much of what they turn out to be. And in this case, let's face it, kids do dumb assed things all the time and there are very real consequences... this just happens to be another one of those incidents but much more high profile.
A person's upbringing can only account for so much of what they turn out to be.
good point
so now it comes down to a classic nature vs nurture.
lemme give another example: my wife has a brother. they are less than two years appart. they were raised in the same house and had geneally the same morals instilled on them.
he is a total tool. he cant hold a job, dropped out of school, and does all kinds of drugs.
my wife has a degree, a great job, and doesnt do drugs or any other classic "misbehavior"
were both the cause of the parents influence?
some people are just dumb. my wifes brother is - and maybe so is palins daughter. (I dont know her personally so i cant make that call.) The Palins may have very well done a great job and done all the things "right" (again i wasnt in the house i cant make that call) but free will and a few bad moments in her (the daughters) life and we have this.
A person's upbringing can only account for so much of what they turn out to be.
good point
so now it comes down to a classic nature vs nurture.
lemme give another example: my wife has a brother. they are less than two years appart. they were raised in the same house and had geneally the same morals instilled on them.
he is a total tool. he cant hold a job, dropped out of school, and does all kinds of drugs.
my wife has a degree, a great job, and doesnt do drugs or any other classic "misbehavior"
were both the cause of the parents influence?
some people are just dumb. my wifes brother is - and maybe so is palins daughter. (I dont know her personally so i cant make that call.) The Palins may have very well done a great job and done all the things "right" (again i wasnt in the house i cant make that call) but free will and a few bad moments in her (the daughters) life and we have this.
I'll give another example that essentially supports your point. I have two sisters, both younger than myself. All three of us were made and raised by the same two people, and yet as adults we are vastly different people.
I consider myself to be driven, strong willed and constantly striving to better myself. I've not lived a perfect life thus far, I'll admit that I've screwed up more than a few times, but I am an honest person with strong morals and a willingness to stand up for that.
The sisters, well they're somewhat alike. Weak willed, little to no drive to accomplish much of anything. I'm sure they are fairly moral, but neither will defend what they believe.
So, what accounts for this? In the nature vs. nurture argument, we also have to consider friends to be part of the "nurture" side, and the parents are not the only ones to raise their kids, the influence of those around the kids must also be factored in.
As for Palin's daughter, you're right, you can't say she's dumb as you don't know her, but you can say that she made a dumb mistake, because we all do, her's just happens to be bigger and more high profile than most.
A person's upbringing can only account for so much of what they turn out to be.
Of course. But at 17? At 17, it's an awfully high proportion.
As for friends, of course friends matter a great deal. But friends are also a function of parenting. There were people my siblings and I simply weren't allowed to be friends with, even if we'd wanted to be.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to say this is all the parents' fault and the daughter skates free. She made her choices; she's responsible for them. I'm just saying the parents also made their parenting choices, and they're responsible for those. ISTM a lot of people are giving them a free pass on that, while praising them for "taking responsibility" after the fact; they're getting a presumption of innocence that, frankly, a similarly situated politician from the other side of the fence would never get. If Chelsea Clinton had turned up pregnant in 1996, or one of Al Gore's daughters in 2000, and the parents reacted exactly as the Palins have, do you guys think the "family values" crowd (for whom Palin was selected as veep) would be praising the Clintons or Gores for "taking responsibility?"
BTW, you both mentioned that the daughter's mistake was one lots of people make, just hers was more high-profile. Well that last part is also the result of a parent's decision, not the daughter's, but she's having to live with the consequences.
17? I have a little trouble with that also. But this is Alaska, its different up there from what I understand. It also says a lot of how they have handled it. Remeber the Bush daughter that was supposedly getting drunk and she apparently had a fake ID. Kids will be kids. They will do dumb stuff but its how they handle the aftermath that I think really counts.
If Chelsea Clinton had turned up pregnant in 1996, or one of Al Gore's daughters in 2000, and the parents reacted exactly as the Palins have, do you guys think the "family values" crowd (for whom Palin was selected as veep) would be praising the Clintons or Gores for "taking responsibility?
yes. the Family values people dont seem to care what side you are on. they have thrown many a republican under the bus as well. but those cases arent the point of this discussion
I dont so much look at them as ""taking reponsibility" after the fact" as much as "dealing with it" Im not saying the daughter is innocent at all. im also saying that the parents are showing their values in how they are dealing with the childs mistake. they arent looking for the kid to look innocent. im sure they are dissappointed in her. but that is a private conversation in the palin household. Family is family and i would hope that my parents wouldnt scold me in front of the national media. I hope they would stand by me no matter what. the daughter made a mistake. the family is dissapointed, but they are family and need to support her and deal with the ramifications.
you both mentioned that the daughter's mistake was one lots of people make, just hers was more high-profile. Well that last part is also the result of a parent's decision, not the daughter's, but she's having to live with the consequences.
I dont htink i did. but again, you may not be talking to me.
i personally dont care how high profile they are. all in all they are still people.
I have never enjoyed the arm of the press. Most things in politics have to do with personal lives and especially issues/problems that most every person family has dealt with or has a friend that has. Really who has a perfect life? ah, no one. If more time was spent looking and questioning political stances and decisions rather than digging up dirt or jaw-jacking over "did you ever smoke weed" "did you have an abortion" "are you into sex that has to do with rubber dolls"? then maybe there might be more checks in who is in office. Honestly what someone did 20 years ago should really have no merit on their current standing, unless it is a continuous problem or something really bad. 17 is no innocent age these days, hell 12 year olds were thongs and see through shirts down my street. Kids have sex at all ages these days that's no surprise, so I really don't see why this is such an issue with her being VP.
Comments
You can't sell yourself by trumpeting your "family values" and then complain when people ask questions about your family.
Don't get me wrong. I'd much rather this campaign/debate be focused on more relevant issues. But, again, family values is what McCain/Palin are selling. They brought it into the campaign and put it center-stage; not the bloggers or the Democrats or anybody else. Supposedly, her family values somehow make her qualified to be vice president. When that's the argument you're making, you don't get to declare family matters like this out of bounds.
Palin and McCain brought her kids into this campaign. I'd rather kids didn't have to deal with that kind of stuff. I liked the days when kids were off limits. But the decision to change that was Palin's. She decided to run on her kids. She can't blame anybody else for the ramifications.
As for whether or not we're talking about how the family looks to outsiders, of course we are. We -- the voters -- are all outsiders. Palin and McCain made her family values central to her qualifications for office. That means we have to pass some kind of judgment on her family values. The fact that she and her husband failed to give their daughter the values that would have kept her from getting pregnant in the first place is extremely relevant to that judgment.
It's extremely unpleasant and, as I said, I liked it better when all this was kept off the agenda. But Palin and McCain (and the last thirty years of religious conservatives) are the ones who put it ON the agenda. Not the Democrats or the liberals or the media or the bloggers or anybody else. All those people did was take what Palin and McCain said was crucially important, and treat it like it was crucially important.
Moreover, the fact that she accepted the job of running for vp when she knew her family's situation and what a political campaign would expose her daughter to doesn't speak very well of her family values, either.
it comes down to personal responsability on the part of the daughter.
she did decide to run on her kids. its her responsability to make this work. so far shes doing a good job. (as far as i can tell i mean, im not in that household)
point the finger at yourself from time to time.
my parents did a great job giving me information on drugs and alcahol and sex. i KNEW what i was doing was wrong. but i I made a poor decision, not my parents. i would never blame them for something stupid I did.
personal responsability.
I'm all for personal responsibility. The Palins should take some for the way they raised their daughter.
A person's upbringing can only account for so much of what they turn out to be. And in this case, let's face it, kids do dumb assed things all the time and there are very real consequences... this just happens to be another one of those incidents but much more high profile.
so now it comes down to a classic nature vs nurture.
lemme give another example: my wife has a brother. they are less than two years appart. they were raised in the same house and had geneally the same morals instilled on them.
he is a total tool. he cant hold a job, dropped out of school, and does all kinds of drugs.
my wife has a degree, a great job, and doesnt do drugs or any other classic "misbehavior"
were both the cause of the parents influence?
some people are just dumb. my wifes brother is - and maybe so is palins daughter. (I dont know her personally so i cant make that call.) The Palins may have very well done a great job and done all the things "right" (again i wasnt in the house i cant make that call) but free will and a few bad moments in her (the daughters) life and we have this.
i love debate. thank you guys for lettimg me get all political without getting mean about it.
i love free speach.
keep disagreeing wiht me. this is kinda fun.
... or agree if you think im right. nothing wrong with a friendly debate.
I consider myself to be driven, strong willed and constantly striving to better myself. I've not lived a perfect life thus far, I'll admit that I've screwed up more than a few times, but I am an honest person with strong morals and a willingness to stand up for that.
The sisters, well they're somewhat alike. Weak willed, little to no drive to accomplish much of anything. I'm sure they are fairly moral, but neither will defend what they believe.
So, what accounts for this? In the nature vs. nurture argument, we also have to consider friends to be part of the "nurture" side, and the parents are not the only ones to raise their kids, the influence of those around the kids must also be factored in.
As for Palin's daughter, you're right, you can't say she's dumb as you don't know her, but you can say that she made a dumb mistake, because we all do, her's just happens to be bigger and more high profile than most.
As for friends, of course friends matter a great deal. But friends are also a function of parenting. There were people my siblings and I simply weren't allowed to be friends with, even if we'd wanted to be.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to say this is all the parents' fault and the daughter skates free. She made her choices; she's responsible for them. I'm just saying the parents also made their parenting choices, and they're responsible for those. ISTM a lot of people are giving them a free pass on that, while praising them for "taking responsibility" after the fact; they're getting a presumption of innocence that, frankly, a similarly situated politician from the other side of the fence would never get. If Chelsea Clinton had turned up pregnant in 1996, or one of Al Gore's daughters in 2000, and the parents reacted exactly as the Palins have, do you guys think the "family values" crowd (for whom Palin was selected as veep) would be praising the Clintons or Gores for "taking responsibility?"
BTW, you both mentioned that the daughter's mistake was one lots of people make, just hers was more high-profile. Well that last part is also the result of a parent's decision, not the daughter's, but she's having to live with the consequences.
I dont so much look at them as ""taking reponsibility" after the fact" as much as "dealing with it" Im not saying the daughter is innocent at all. im also saying that the parents are showing their values in how they are dealing with the childs mistake. they arent looking for the kid to look innocent. im sure they are dissappointed in her. but that is a private conversation in the palin household. Family is family and i would hope that my parents wouldnt scold me in front of the national media. I hope they would stand by me no matter what. the daughter made a mistake. the family is dissapointed, but they are family and need to support her and deal with the ramifications.
i personally dont care how high profile they are. all in all they are still people.