« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Palin's latest little secret
Well, we knew there had to be some hidden reason why Sarah Palin was so adamant in her anti-choice stance, even to the point of denying a woman’s right to choose in cases of rape and incest. Now we know! This little segment was part of the Sarah Palin Revealed special on CNN. It slipped by almost unnoticed.
GRIFFIN: At the same time the relationship with Todd was taking off. Fall day in 1988, Heather planned to meet Sarah and Todd at the state fair, but the two never showed up. Instead, they headed to the courthouse and learned they needed two witnesses to be married.
BRUCE: They walked across the street to the pioneer home and asked in the lobby if someone would like to be their witness and a couple of volunteers had to wheel -- had to push the other one in their wheelchair, across the street to the courthouse. I don't think they had rings. I'm not even sure.
GRIFFIN: Sarah's father, Chuck, took the news well.
CHUCK HEATH: They eloped. I thanked them, saying you saved me a lot of money.
GRIFFIN: Almost eight months later , Todd and Sarah's first child was born and they named him Track, after the sports season in which he was born. Over the next four years, four more children would come, Bristol, Willow, Piper and Trig.
Track’s birth date information was released just recently. There is no data that states Track was born prematurely. This would have been publicized by the Palin team, and would have been addressed in the CNN program. It is a big deal. I know, because my first child was premature.
Mother and daughter are both walking advertisements for the Family Planning Council.
Comments (16)
This is not new information. This was known pretty much right away that she had been pregnant when she was married. It was talked about that her daughter was not repeating that pattern and the irony of Palin's abstinence sex ed preference was curious under the circumstances. I say that because most parents tend to do something to try to keep their children from making the same mistakes they did.
September 15, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cross-posted here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/15/11564/4006?new=true
September 15, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words "Do as I say; not as I do". Regardless, I don't think Bristol listened to her advice, do you?
I have neither seen nor heard any other mention of this. As far as I can tell, there is no data anywhere on the subject. Can you provide any? Track's birth information was only recently released.
FYI: I am a father of 6 children.
September 15, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
So what. I mean seriously this is stupid.
Much more important is that someone would name their child after the sport season they are now in. Really? That's the explanation?
Now if they had called him Javelin that would have been cool.
September 15, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe he's really named Track because that's where she got pregnant.
September 15, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Economides I think you are missing the point.
Granted candidates' children have nothing to do with how the candidate will govern. However this is a referendum on the failure of abstinence only programmes. They simply do not work. It is not fair to teach abstinence only.
Had Sarah Palin's daughter, Bristol, been given the information beforehand how likely is it she would be pregnant today.
Population Action International reported that 44 births per 1000 occurred in females aged 15 - 19 between 2000 - 2005 in the US. Since Bush made abstinence only a cornerstone of his presidency, teenage pregnancies increased exponentially to 750,000 a year. Bristol is more than a statistic as are each of the 750,000. They are real people, teenagers, whose futures have been unexpectedly altered, but did not need to be.
The article did not say how many babies were put up for adoption or abandoned. I would venture to guess as little as 10% -- I have no idea if it could go as high as 30% or more, but it would not surprise me. Nor did it say how many of those pregnancies were due to rape or incest.
Whether we like it it or not teenagers have sex.
The only logical solution to reduce the number of (unwanted) pregnancies (abortions and sexually transmitted dis_eases) is teach abstinence-only along with preventative measures -- combined are successful.
Eliminating abortions completely will never happen. Giving teenagers options they will make better choices. Equally important women retain dominion over their own bodies.
If Sarah had been open to teaching Bristol abstinence only along with sex education it is doubtful we would even be having this conversation.
So no this is not about Sarah or Bristol personally.
Abstinence-only does not work -- Sarah and Bristol are simply the proof thereof.
September 15, 2008 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've submitted two articles, both of which address the same subject--some swing voters' statements that they are voting for Palin because she's like them. Neither one got published. What gives?
johnhughmcfadden@hotmail.com
September 15, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey! I figured this out on my own - posted on a mommy board and tried to comment on it in Huffington Post articles. At LEAST a week ago. And what was MY reasoning? When I learned that Todd was 22 with a DWI, and they weren't married yet, that struck me as odd. Afterall if you are still dating your high school sweet heart, you're from a small town, it's pretty unusual to not even be ENGAGED. Well, then learning they eloped to "save money" I googled their wedding date (end of August) and their sons birth month (the next April.)
Then you figure back then she had to be at least 6 weeks to even KNOW she was pregnant, and pg is actually 10 months long, she was probably between 6-8 weeks pregnant when they eloped.
But sadly nobody cares! Oh wait, if this were OBAMA and his wife, the conservatives would be *all over it* as evil premarital sex. :-)
September 15, 2008 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Larry, none of this really matters to most voters including this one. It seems like you are majoring in the minors here.
September 16, 2008 1:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
This info was out the first weekend Palin was nominated. I read it several different places. I don't believe in abstinence based sex ed but I don't see the Palin family's adventures in breeding as evidence for or against sex ed programs.
One of my friends volunteers for Planned Parenthood. Her kids had ALL the info, condoms were available in their home, and all they had to do was ask to get any other birth control. My friend made it very clear there would be no lectures or judgments. Her middle daughter still got pregnant at 17.
Teenagers always think it won't happen to them.
September 16, 2008 1:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
It nevertheless indicates that she doesn't follow what she is preaching to the rest of the country, and didn't, even though/when she was a "true believer" as a kid.
September 16, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Self-righteous, sanctimonious left wing-nuts. So many young people today have children and NEVER intend to marry or provide a Christian home. Christian churches today are full of unmarried parents. Todd and Sarah have been married for so many years. Being a Christian does not mean you are perfect in every way from the day you are born. Sarah has grown as a Christian over the years. We all need forgiveness, even B.O. I don't know any Christians who are perfect. If all you are doing is trying to smear her as a Christian you will always fail. When will the libs figure it out? And it is so sickeningly sexist to hear about this wonderful mother and wife being treated like a tabloid hussie. Nobody talks about Obama's early romances. Nobody mentions Biden's college days. GET IT?
If you're trying to point out that abstinence doesn't always work, I agree. Young people fall in love and lose control. It happens. Yet, I'd rather try to teach abstinence to a 17 year old girl than hand her condoms and say oh well, go for it. How many teenagers have you given condoms to? I'm sure they will tell you that Track has been a blessing to them. Would you deny them that blessing? Getting pregnant is a personal issue, not to be governed. Abstinence is a good approach, however if a young person wants birth control, they should have it. As a blogger mentioned earlier, it doesn't guarantee they will use it.
September 16, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmm, I didn't see one post here that specifically mentioned Christians. You state "So many young people today have children and NEVER intend to marry or provide a Christian home."
So am I to assume that by providing a Christian home is the ideal situation for young couples who plan to raise children? You might be interested in my List of GOP Family Values Hypocrites http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/9/92917/08176/506/512072. You will notice quite a representation there from the Christian community, including numerous cases of incest, rape, and yes even bestiality.
Your reference to "Self-righteous, sanctimonious left wing-nuts" is laughable and very typical of those from the far-right who project their own misgivings onto others.
Incidentally, I know of no one (on the left) who has dissed abstinence education in schools, as long as it is taught side-by-side along with contraception. Unfortunately, it is those on the Christian-right who insist on adding "only" to wearing those purity rings.
September 16, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a fabulous case of the pot calling the cauldron black. Puhleeze - get thee away from thy pulpit. Nobody has mentioned smearing someone due to their Christian belief - the point is that Sarah Palin has put her morals on the line here -nobody else- and she is full of hot incense.
Abstinence is a fairy tale. Palin would deny women in this country reproductive rights. Not talking about sex education with their kids is one of the biggest blunders a parent can make. Good for her if she can make lemonade out of lemons in her life - a lot of girls aren't so lucky. And speaking of luck, good luck to her daughter, Bristol. She's gonna need it.
People who equate sex education with permission to have it are either living in the 19th century or have their own demented agendas about keeping young women pregnant. Do these same people think teaching a 16-year old how to use a shotgun is the same as giving him'her permission to shoot somebody? Is giving a kid a driver's license permission to drag race in neighborhoods? It's all about informed choice, isn't it? Choice is not exclusive to liberals; however, it would seem that conservatives like Palin don't like women having a lot of choices. Guess it involves a lot of, what's that word? Thinking, oh, yeah.
And by the way, Holier-than-Thou Christians are most often the ones who are the moralists on Sunday but the party-folks on Saturday night.
September 16, 2008 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
This struck me as odd:
Obviously, 5-month-old Trig is not 5 years younger than 18-year-old Track, so that got me doing some (very simple) research.
From Wikipedia:
Scratching my head about CNN's copy editors.
September 16, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or could Wikipedia be wrong? Some college professors will not accept papers in which Wikipedia was utilized for research.
September 16, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment