Liveblogging Sarah Palin's speech

Hm. I dunno about starting out with the nat'l sec stuff. But then, I'm more crunchy con than con. I'm sure she'll get on to other things.

Not a great, natural orator, but hey, it's working, imho.

She's gonna eat Biden's lunch. Maybe Obama's too. I am loving this.

It is an amazing moment to see a woman as the nominee to be the vice president. All reservations aside, it is a great moment for America and women.

I've never seen her speak at length until tonight. The family comments are very touching, and very American. This is an impressive woman, and the "Fargo" syntax is endearing . It will be a huge mistake for the Dems to say much about her, much less attack her.The Obami see clearly;this woman is a threat. People are going to identify with her.

I'm voting for Obama, but I've been disgusted with the coverage of Palin's daughter's pregnancy. It's shameless and has no place in the public eye.

That said, by actually introducing her entire family during her acceptance speech, isn't she begging for more of the same?

LOL at the sister licking her hand to fix the baby's hair. My wife and I almost fell off the couch! Been there. Done that.

Dan, I kinda see your point about the family, *but* it's traditional for candidate's families to be introduced. People knew who chelsea was, but the media left her alone. Maybe it's apples and oranges, however.

Remember, Biden introduced his ninety-something-year-old mother.

I still think it's astonishing that she could be president, but I'm really liking her speech so far. It's too bad she's on a ticket with McCain.

A thought re: hockey. Minnesota. It's a GOP target, right? That's why the convention is in St Paul, right? Why Pawlenty was considered for VP, right?

Palin is a bona fide hockey mom.

Minnesota has the most impressive hockey community in the United States. There are a LOT of hockey moms (and dads) in Minnesota, as well as other Red States.

Hmmm. Just a thought.

WOMEN OF AMERICA... PLEASE DO NOT GET EMOTIONAL IN YOUR VOTING. The Palin choice was a scheme to reel you in. Wise up! Do you really think someone who tries to play with the minds of women is the right candidate. Come on...wise up! Hockey Moms! Wise up! There using our estrogen levels and our caring nature to win am election. Im so disgusted with Mccain! Obama 08..just as simple as that.

Ok, now she's lost me, sounding like just another modern GOP thug. Oh well.

Tepid response on her condemnation of the "bridge to nowhere." I guess everyone knows by now that she was for the bridge before she was against it.

Gene, great minds! Heh.

She's naturally funny without forcing it. Natural is the word I think of listening to her; Hawaii Gov. said "authentic", yeah to that, too.

McCain was a POW?

Who knew?

Have you actually listened to Obama Bugg? Many of his speeches are full of specifics. His acceptance speech at the DNC outlined something like 17 specific plans for solving our very serious problems. As one example, I'm all for a tax cut that I will actually get, rather than one for people who have plenty of money as it is.

It's not often a speech leaves you wanting to bathe.

Did you listen to the speech, EvanF? Or did you type that line out a couple hours ago and cut and paste it? Wow. And are you saying she's better than Obama?:)

That was fantastic. Great presentation and delivery.

Didn't impress me at all --- she sounded like a child and she had the same old talking points.

Some candidates use change to further their careers, and some use their careers to further change. Oh yeah baby!
This lady nailed it, over and over and over. She was fantastic.

Looking at the comments, here's what I'm thinking: Conservatives like me, looking for something -- anything! -- to get excited about just got excited. People who disdain the GOP weren't gonna have their hearts strangely warmed by her, no matter what. Some Hillary voters, some independents, will warm to this. Net gain for the GOP. I mean, really, who is she going to push away, anyway? Country club RINOs in states that go blue usually anyway?

This was the best she could do? Obama and Biden drew sharp contrasts with McCain without actually belittling him. Did she (and Guiliani) really need to mock Obama's community organizing? Come on. I know this is standard GOP garbage, but you'd think that after the last eight years, they'd want to shake things up.

I guess not.

This is what war chatter sound like, right ?

I thought she did a terrific job, and I was prepared to be disappointed given the events of this week, the pressure, etc. She's the first major Republican candidate in a long time whom I've found really likable. Poise, charm, a good sense of timing and delivery, and that quality of sincerity--a great combination.

"Do Republicans not understand the globalized nature of the oil market (i.e., oil drilled in the US gets sold to the highest bidder anywhere in the world)?"

Uh...if there's more oil on the worldwide market, making less of a gap between supply and demand, wouldn't that drive prices down? If there's more oil folks won't bid as high.

"Do Republicans not understand the globalized nature of the oil market (i.e., oil drilled in the US gets sold to the highest bidder anywhere in the world)? Or do they just think that we're too dumb to understand it?"

scepticj-Average Americans are not too dumb to understand the basics of supply and demand.

Brit Hume on FoxNews: A star has been born.

Irenaeus: We're how many billions in debt and the Dems are into big government? Please, please get real. As I remember it, we had a balanced budget and a thriving economy eight short years ago. And, of course, all of us dems hate babies: our own, our grandkids. Not one of us will see a pregnancy through. Could we drop the insults?

Irenaeus -

Yep, I listened to it - as we speak. Who said anything about Obama? That's not the point. All I said was it's exactly the same line we've been hearing every Republican convention since Reagan. For 28 years we've been hearing about how the Republican party is full of just plain folks guarding the small-town America against those elitits in Washington who want to take all our money and sell out to our enemies.
Which party is it that's had the White House for 20 of those years?

As I said - she's one heck of a speaker. Well chosen after all for to help sell McCain.

She was pretty good. And she has a very nice-looking family. But I don't see how any criticisms of her are "off the table" now. It's politics - she's going to be hit with plenty more criticism between now and November for her far right-wing views, fondness for earmarks, ethical lapses, and who knows what else. I do hope the family/baby stuff is over with though.

Jaybird, of course it's politics, and there's plenty of room for appropriate criticisms. I'm talking about the sexist stuff, the family stuff, and even the experience stuff.

Oh, and it bears re-posting:

New York Times, July 3, 1984:

"Where is it written that only senators are qualified to become President?... Or where is it written that mere representatives aren’t qualified, like Geraldine Ferraro of Queens?... Where is it written that governors and mayors, like Dianne Feinstein of San Francisco, are too local, too provincial?... Presidential candidates have always chosen their running mates for reasons of practical demography, not idealized democracy…. What a splendid system, we say to ourselves, that takes little-known men, tests them in high office and permits them to grow into statesmen.... Why shouldn’t a little-known woman have the same opportunity to grow?"

If you ignore troopergate, emails, the bridge to nowhere....you might think she was the real deal. Too bad facts get in the way.

Rod, can you answer these realities:

Palin raised taxes as governor
supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it
pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor
tried to ban books at the local library
thinks the war in Iraq is "a task from God"

That is your idea of a star ?

John E., the Enquirer report only briefly mentions, almost as an aside in a longer hit piece, that "one of her enemies" (off the record, of course) says that there are "rumors" that she had an affair.

It's not exactly on the same level as the Enquirer itself alleging John Edwards' affair after a months-long major investigation.

Governor Palin's speech tonight was an upper deck home run.

Ultimately, the Presidential race is going to come down to McCain vs. Obama. But I guarantee that Palin will come out of this thing a major star for years to come, no matter what happens on November 4.

Alphabetical roll call bein' read, and I have to say, I'm kinda pleased Mrs Palin comes from the state of Alaska where they had the b**ls to reserve 5 of their 29 votes for...?

RON PAUL!

If Sarah's future includes just a shadow of what the REVOLution wants to make young Americans aware of then, as Martha Stewart would say, that's a good thing! I'm likin' her more each day...
BUT I hope she has more such independantly-minded friends back home, and that her family and faith keep her rooted and preserve her from being corrupted by the process (so that she may learn to decline certain of those "redmeat" lines being fed her as Gene alluded to "...and he's worried that someone won't read them their rights." since unthinking populism is a dangerous thing, and Americans have had 8 years enough of anti-intellectualism -- which is what I think is where Peggy Noonan is comin' from, I believe she's not dissembling, she's just havin' to get used to passin' the torch kinda like Mrs Palin is with Bristol - time does not stand still. This campaign is the last stand for those who made a livin' from the Reagan myth (either for him or against, like the Clintons), the world is VERY different now, and American has a lot of catchin' up to do!

"UPDATE.3 'I guess a small town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except you have actual responsibilities.' Cha-ching!"

Rod, have you ever met a community organizer? Ever worked with one? Ever sat down for a one-on-one with a community organizer? Or have you allowed your understanding of community organizing to develop in line with loose portrayals in partisan speeches and shoddy reporting, unfettered by real investigation and unsullied by nuance?

The nature and evolution of the profession--some would say vocation--of community organizing in the United States is one of the most poorly understood, underreported phenomena to enter the national discourse with the nomination of Barack Obama.

I have known and worked closely with community organizers from Chicago, New York, Detroit, and now, Philadelphia. Let me say this unequivocally about the profession: it is ruthlessly self-critical, tirelessly dedicated to the cultivation of ethical leadership, and more honest in its pursuit of true accountability in the exercise of power than any other group I've ever encountered.

Perhaps the reason community organizers and their ilk go unseen and misunderstood is that, within the philosophy now widely adopted in the profession, community organizing seeks as its ultimate goal not the elevation of the organizer as leader--leader though she may be--but the full and active participation of the members of a community in the political process and, by virtue of this participation, in their own future.

The true community organizer leaves very little in the way of tangible accomplishments because that is NOT THE POINT. The point is to guide and inspire others to become leaders. The point is to push, to motivate, to identify individuals and groups of individuals to take an active part in their futures. If this sounds like nebulous turf, it is; however, the organizing is merely tactical. Ultimately, it is the ACTION of community members that define the work and its goals (by action, I mean any orchestrated effort by a community to pursue its self-interest by working with or against those individuals or groups of individuals in which power is concentrated). And let me say again without descending into hyperbole: Community organizing is very, very hard work, and the responsibilities of an organizer are very, very serious.

I don't feel particularly slighted by Palin's dismissive comment. I didn't expect any better an understanding from her, just as I don't expect many staunch anti-war activists to understand the complexities of being a soldier (though some do, just as some establishment figures understand--and often fear--community organizers). But to see you reinforce such a feeble-minded conception of community organizing by embracing her barb--well, to be honest, I don't know that I expected any better of someone who is clearly allowing his emotions to be discomposed by water cooler chatter masquerading as serious discourse...But a guy's gotta hope, right?

It was a great political speech, but she can express herself well in an unscripted interview too.

I saw her on CNBC on Saturday in a long interview with Maria Bartiromo, mostly discussing energy. Transcript and video at
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26462569?__source=RSS*blog*&par=RSS

"The Steel Magnolia" has brought me on board with "The Maverick".

Thanks for that, hermanage. I was thinking about that gratuitous sneer myself. My best friend's youngest son runs a community center back in my home town. He puts together programs for children and old people. He gets kids scholarships so they can go to camp and stay out of trouble in the summer. He recruits volunteers to tutor them after school. He goes to bat for poor people who are about to be evicted or lose their heat and lights. There really isn't any aspect of community life he's not involved in. Everyone appreciates what he does, including the DA, who is one of his biggest fans. You wouldn't believe what a big-hearted, smart young man this is, or how hard he works. For this, they pay him a salary that covers his necessities of life only because he's living in a house owned by his big brother, and he's close enough to home that he can drop by his mother's house to grab dinner a few times a week.

All these things are the things conservative Christians SAY they want done by non-governmental organizations. By private citizens, right? What do they think these people look like? Well, I guess they wouldn't know, because the right wing isn't out there on the streets showing any of that compassion they claim they feel. The people doing the job look like my friend's son. They look like those community organizers Sarah Palin just made herself sound like a twit by sneering at.

her manage (or whatever your tag is):

Thanks for the funniest post in ages. A "community organizers" is professional? Uh, no - doctors, fire fighters, cops, judges, those are professions. Community organizers are generally partisan hacks living off some foundation grant, who spend their time lobbying for whatever is the fashionable cause de jure. But you did get one thing right when you said, "The true community organizer leaves very little in the way of tangible accomplishments." So true.

Live-blogging the speech at SoundPolitics.com, a conservative political blog in the very blue city of Seattle: http://soundpolitics.com/archives/011437.html

The base is pumped.

You needed so very much to find a reason to vote for McCain other than the main reason you voted twice for Bush...and you got it in an articulate, talented, savvy social conservative fundamentalist female.

Except that I've never voted for Bush once, much less twice. I don't Duhbya; I never have. I also don't like this idiotic war -- so I suppose Palin and I will have to disagree about that.

And I don't know if the GOP is fed up with grassroots religious conservatives, but I can damn sure tell you we're not so hot on them and their quadrennial (unmet) promises to defend life either.

But I can tell you with some certainty that the heart of the GOP and its conservative religious base absolutely *loves* Sarah Palin and everything about her. Until she came along and rescued McCain, he was just a Bob Dole retread in my book.

So we'll vote for Palin in droves out here in flyover country, if it's all the same to you. If McCain happens to be elected as a result, so be it.

Palin as VP selection is brilliant - she has so many groups to touch - special needs children, mothers, working mothers, small town, conservative, etc. Dems would be wise to select their strategy. I liked the speech and connected. I loved her daughter licking her hand to wipe the babies' hair. Priceless for a mom! By the way, community organizers??? That's nothing new - I think they used to call them churches?? I'm just sayin'.

One more thing, to those who are interested: the Wanderer report is about ten years old, not a few years as I typed. However, money collected by the CCHD is still given as grants of tens of thousands of dollars or more to many different IAF organizations, along with some community organizations that are not connected to the Industrial Areas Foundation, according to documents on the CCHD's website.

Rod's too young and too impressed by good looks.
Palin was very competent with the speech Mr. Scully wrote for her. She communicated toughness in the face of the personal attacks on her and, worse, her family. She believably drove home the reform message (change I can halfway believe in, unlike BHO's "change").
She remains an asset to the ticket, in my personal opinion (I'm more enthusiastic, though not giddy) and in my amateurish read of the mood in red state America. That's plenty good enough.

oh yes, and I'm from Ohio, too!

"Too bad the only policy I heard was that she will reduce dependency on foreign energy using every single possible form of energy known to mankind."

I felt the same way when the only economic policy Obama mentioned in his speech was to "close corporate tax loopholes."

As for the Constitution and Miranda rights comment, Palin was talking about terrorists when she said this and the Constitution was designed to protect the citizens of America. Not every person in the whole world.
Also, it really bothers me that people are commenting on the fact that she didn't actually write this speech. Every politician has their speeches written for them. Do you think Obama wrote his own speech? Clinton? Any of them? No. They have speech writers. It's a little unfair to comment on her not writing her own speech or reading a teleprompter as if she is the only one who does this.

"I don't care how hard-working, effective, and responsible community organizers are, they don't have legally vested responsibility for a community in the same way an elected executive does."

First off, how can one be "responsible" without responsibilities?

Second, tell me: How can I hold my mayor or my elected executive "legally" responsible for my community? Please. An elected official is held to the same civil and criminal laws as any other citizen--and if anything, elected officials enjoy connections that often immunize them from prosecution. From where I stand, most elected officials feel accountable to groups who control large voting blocs, individuals with money, and other politicians to whom they owe or with whom they wish to leverage favors. Legal recourse to one's own interests is protected only insofar as laws have been broken; plain ol' recourse to one's own interests is protected only insofar as an individual or group can leverage power with an elected official.

But hey--if you want to paint Palin's service as a legalistic one, be my guest. This only proves my point. I know community organizers who have given 30+ years of their lives working in obscurity in service of others. And you're right--they don't feel compelled by law, because theirs is not a legalistic calling. But to say that community organizers are not invested in their communities is patently false. Then again, I'm guessing you don't know any community organizers and are speaking far outside your areas of experience.

"Herm, all that to say "He didn't run anything.""

I'm tempted to simply type "?", but sometimes even adults need their hands held. If you recall, this was a response to Palin's comment that community organizers don't have real responsibilities, and how this response speaks to a larger misconception of community organizing. Nowhere in my post did I say he didn't run anything, nor could that be inferred from my comments. To clarify, community organizing, as a profession that aims to build power by organizing people, does not lend itself (nor should it) to easy successes and vainglorious lists of accomplishments. Successes by marginalized, poor communities are frequently modest ones--sometimes as simple as getting a legislator to meet with a community group--but by such modest gains, communities come to understand how power operates, what civic participation means, and how interests are protected.

The operative principle in the argument that Obama didn't have responsibilities as a community organizer is akin to that in claim that a US soldier languishing in a Vietnamese prison is not technically "fighting" for his country. Both take an extremely narrow view of what responsibility, sacrifice and accomplishment mean, and both misunderstand service to country as something seen in terms of personal advancement. Obama should be credited for engaging in an activity DESPITE which he has thrived politically (and by "despite which," I am referring to how little understanding the general public has of what community organizing is).

"A "community organizers" is professional? Uh, no - doctors, fire fighters, cops, judges, those are professions. Community organizers are generally partisan hacks living off some foundation grant, who spend their time lobbying for whatever is the fashionable cause de jure. But you did get one thing right when you said, "The true community organizer leaves very little in the way of tangible accomplishments." So true."

Wow. So many illustrations of my point in one paragraph, I hardly know where to start. Again, your narrow view prevents you from understanding (and your tone leads me to think you never will), but let me just point out a few of the more glaring errors:

1) You seem to say that professionals are those who live off something other than foundation grants (you make no other real distinction between 'doctors,' etc, outside of this one). Not sure I quite follow your reasoning, since grants are just another way of paying people for work that is not directly profitable--like, say, men and women in uniform, who are paid not because their work generates wealth, but because individuals see their work as important enough to pool their money together and finance it.

2) Organizers energize others to pursue their interests within legal frameworks of power. This means getting people together, explaining how power works, encouraging groups to exercise that power in pursuit of interests. Gee, that kind of sounds like what middle- and upper-class Americans do every day--and with the help of actual lobbyists and deep purses. What you dismiss as fashionable causes de jure (I can only presume because you are somehow not affected by them) are often things such as unemployment, crime, health care, education, and political corruption.

3) Work that is not directly profitable is often--not always--difficult to characterize in terms of accomplishment, especially work that is meant to inspire others to accomplish. Have you ever asked a teacher to list his/her accomplishments? If you know any teachers, especially those from challenging schools, you know that victories are often small and unaccounted for. Again, the analogy with the military is again apt. What did John McCain "accomplish" in Vietnam? Can I infer from the fact that we lost that war that McCain's participation in it is somehow diminished? Of course not. Your claim is equally silly.

Sig, In 2004 there were 22,341 Catholic parishes and missions in the US. Using your 800,000 figure of pregnant teens, that would mean each parish or mission would have to support an average of 36 girls. That seems like something doable. Especially considering that not every girl would need everything provided by a church and considering that other non-Catholic churches could be depended upon to help (as they do now). The problem is that the girls aren't all spread out evenly 35 to a parish. I do support the local crises pregancy organizations run by Catholic groups in my parish and dioscese. I'm sure Erin does too. What would be ideal of course (without getting into the perfect world of no un-marrieds having sex and getting pregnant to begin with), would be for each girl to be able to tell her family and get the kind of support for delivering her baby that Bristol Palin and little Spears got. Whether she then decided to raise the child herself or give it up for adoption is another issue.

Karth wrote: "Sarah Palin's ability to make a good speech does not and cannot hide her utter lack of character and personal/family discipline. Her lack of ability to control her own family and her flaunting of her wayward daughter's (and said daughter's impregnator's) actions reveal a coarseness of morals and lack of discipline that cannot help but be carried over into her public life."

Karth, I find this position of yours disgusting in the extreme. It is without a doubt the most anti-life, pro-abortion position anyone on this board has ever expressed. You render her daughter and future son-in-law as objects to be reviled instead of people created in the image and likeness of God and fellow sinners who we ought to forgive as we hope to be forgiven. Your position actually encourages abortion, because only by hiding and covering up "her wayward daughter's" shame by a quick and private abortion would Sarah Palin remain eligible in your eyes for public office--because how would you then ever know she had this "lack of character and personal/family discipline" you find so terribly disqualifying, coarse, and hideous?

I hope for your sake that you are very young, and don't yet know anything of mercy for sin. If you are an adult taking this position then the calumny and detraction you seem willing to engage in here is emblematic of a very troubling deficiency of character.

Thanks for the clarification, Erin. I was running on memories of things I thought you'd said in other topics, so it's always good to get a current update.

I guess we'd then have to talk about two things: what standards would you implement for determining if people are really in crisis; and what constitutes confiscatory taxation. Mr. Sig and I now pay more in taxes than we used to earn to support our whole family on. We're still well below that 250,000 dollar a year mark at which it is said one becomes rich--not to mention McCain's "five million" joke/gaffe. However, after starting out below poverty level and having a couple of our kids in that condition, we're now in the top quintile. We own our own house and we have resources to support a child in trouble.

And that gives me pause. We don't feel rich and there are quite a few things we don't feel we can afford. Three of our kids went to public schools (the fourth went to an inexpensive Montessori program and a relatively cheap Catholic high school) and all attended state colleges. Nevertheless, we have more money than 4/5 of the population. I know what it was like to live on outdated food and second-hand clothing, to have no car and no medical insurance. You bet it would be nice to have all my tax dollars back, but under the circumstances, I don't think I can complain too much about having the opportunity to help other people who aren't as fortunate as we are. Of course I'd like to see those dollars used effectively, and about that, we could probably have a whole different conversation. But I don't get how a Christian, or anyone concerned about community building, can feel self-pity because they're rich enough to be in a high tax bracket. (Not to mention the fact that a lot of those taxes go to support things the middle class likes too!)

And we believe in voluntary giving, too. I'd estimate we normally give away around 5% of our income to church and charities. That doesn't count the various donations to family and friends in need. We haven't amassed a whole lot of savings or possessions because we tend to use our money to help out the kids or other family whenever we get a little extra. So I hope Social Security does remain solvent--I might need it.

(You're right that not all of the 800,000 pregnant teens would need assistance--but you sort of dodged my question, didn't you? Do you even know how many girls are actually helped by rightwing Christian organizations? Big claims are made--some numbers would be nice. Maybe The Wanderer can help you . . . .)

Woo. Attagirl, Erin! I find myself oddly in sympathy with your remarks to Mr. Karth. Similar attitudes, expressed by her father, made one teenage girl I know seriously consider getting an abortion. She was terrified of the anger and shame her parents would vent on her after listening to them talk like Karth about others. In the end, she did tell them, and their walk turned out to be better than their talk--they did a 180 and welcomed her back into the family. I can only hope that Karth will reconsider if the same thing ever happens to him.

I also have a question for Mr. Karth: you've heaped shame on Governor Palin, but you haven't said anything about her husband. What would his proper response be? Shouldn't he be committing seppuku with a fish knife? After all, he's the father of a fallen woman. Or do we just blame the mothers here? Suppose this--or something similar, like a gay son--occurs in your family? Will you voluntarily withdraw from public life as a failure? Or will you put the blame on Mrs. Karth? Please expatiate further on your principles.

Can't believe the crap I am reading in here. Some of you mock Palin's experience yet see nothing wrong with a Male, community organizer, Senator that has missed 90% of the votes during his tenure, has NEVER held a supervisory position in his life, running for President. Give me a break! Sarah Palin has more experience in supervisory/executive roles than both Democratic Candidates. Gonna see the fireworks from this young lady. Love the way she handled the family "problem" created by the liberal press. Give them hell girl - and see you in Washington in January 2009.

I am voting for Obama but I am in love with the Palin's Down Syndrome baby. My first born daughter had Down Syndrome and she was a wonderful, wonderful person-full of life and loving everyone. His big sister is so sweet with him. It was fun to watch them.

Sorry, I didn't mean to send that yet.

I was about to add, I nearly got my head ripped off in another blog for suggesting exactly that.

You want your daughter's pregnancy not to be fodder for public comment? Fine! KEEP HER OFF THE STAGE where her swelling belly -- and her gum-chewing fiance -- are on public view!

But you see, Sis2lis, I'd be all in favor of tax dollars going to help your sister. I'd be all in favor of public conversations about disabilities like hers and what we should do, and charitable fund-raisers too to help increase the level of care she gets.

The trouble with a "big-government" approach to *everything* is that too often our priorities are skewed. Perfectly healthy, public-school educated, fully-employable people walk around with their hands out for "assistance," and someone like your sister who actually needs it doesn't end up with an adequate amount for her needs.

Or look at the rising health-care toll of the illegal immigrant situation. I'm not opposed to amnesty efforts etc., but I hear stories about public hospitals in some areas shutting their doors because of the high volume of illegal immigrants they must provide care for (by law) without receiving enough money to stay operational. Again, people like your sister end up being the ones hurt most by our mandates in favor of paying for health care for people who aren't here legally--there are real social costs to a too-open immigration policy.

Erin Manning @ 11:38 AM writes:

"You render her daughter and future son-in-law as objects to be reviled instead of people created in the image and likeness of God and fellow sinners who we ought to forgive as we hope to be forgiven. Your position actually encourages abortion, because only by hiding and covering up "her wayward daughter's" shame by a quick and private abortion would Sarah Palin remain eligible in your eyes for public office--because how would you then ever know she had this "lack of character and personal/family discipline" you find so terribly disqualifying, coarse, and hideous?"

Please read what I posted at the end of the "Liveblogging Tuesday's Republican" thread. (I posted it at 10:30 or so this morning.) I believe that post explains what I believe more than adequately. I'd copy it and re-post it here, save for the fact that it would be far too long when added to this.

Sigaliris @ 12:13 PM writes:

"I also have a question for Mr. Karth: you've heaped shame on Governor Palin, but you haven't said anything about her husband. What would his proper response be? Shouldn't he be committing seppuku with a fish knife? After all, he's the father of a fallen woman. Or do we just blame the mothers here? Suppose this--or something similar, like a gay son--occurs in your family? Will you voluntarily withdraw from public life as a failure? Or will you put the blame on Mrs. Karth? Please expatiate further on your principles."

I commend the same post to your attention that I did to milady Manning.
It's simply too long to repost in its entirety here. Suffice it to say that I do believe the father has committed the same failing as the mother; the difference being that it is Mrs. Palin that is seeking an office of high public trust.

It boils down to a matter of standards for holding office. I believe that public office is a trust. Holding office requires higher-than-normal standards of conduct for those who aspire to it than for the average citizen. Technical competence is not enough; since the office-holder potentially wields authority over many others, as well as the public fisc, additional assurances of high and correct character are in order. Senator McCain, for example, cites his conduct while being held prisoner in North Vietnam as an assurance of his quality as a potential President. Should not the same principle apply in the consideration of his deputy as well ?

In Governor Palin's case, she takes great pains to hold up her wayward daughter's conduct and her (Gov. Palin's) handling of it as exemplary. She also claims to be a firm adherent to Christian principles. Oddly enough, I do not recall teenage fornication being described as a Christian principle worthy of emulation.

Again, this is NOT to say that the wayward Bristol should be "cast out". Her conduct (and that of her parents in not merely accepting what has happened but in actually publicizing it) was a grave error, to be corrected by her marrying the father of this child---an extremely merciful position by the family, historically speaking---and raising it quietly. Were her parents not involved in public life, that would end the matter.

It is her parents' failure to ensure adequate supervision for their daughter, as well their failure to inculcate adequate self-control in their daughter, that renders Mrs. Palin (or Mr. Palin, were he the one occupying the governor's seat) unfit for higher office. What could be considered a tolerable failure on this level would be unacceptable in a matter affecting the welfare of millions---and the Vice Presidency is an office whose holder is in a position to affect the welfare of an entire country. The Palins' lapse in judgment in the matter of their daughter is simply too serious to ignore.

Your servant,

Lord Karth