The Luxury of True Reproductive Choice
If John McCain wins the election, Sarah Palin will no doubt do what she can to overturn Roe v. Wade. Will she also support subsidized child care and higher ed for teen moms poorer than Bristol?
No doubt this was a difficult personal decision, made in consultation with her doctor and with the advice of her husband, Todd. As a dedicated foe of abortion rights, Palin might have leaned against termination from the start, but if it were all a slam dunk one has to wonder why she had any prenatal genetic tests at all. I suspect that when Palin and her family received the news they agonized late into several nights before deciding they could take on the challenge of raising a disabled child.
Now we have the additional revelation that Bristol Palin, Sarah and Todd's 17-year-old daughter, is about to have her own baby in a few months. No doubt this provoked a heated family debate as well, one that ended in Todd and Sarah's affirmation of unconditional love and support.
And, you know, that's great. It really is. Some may talk about overpopulation and whether a mother of five can govern (accusations of sexism, in that case, stick); others may talk about moral values and the failure of abstinence education and accuse Republicans of hypocrisy. But teenagers are mercurial, parents busy, and mistakes get made. The day we can no longer welcome a new life into the world, we might as well hang it up as a species. The warm reception given baby Trig and the pride the Palins claim to feel about Bristol's pregnancy speaks to the sincerity of their convictions. It would be small-minded of all of us not to admire what is in fact not hypocrisy, but a stunning absence of it.
It would also be taking a narrow view of things, however, to forget that the Palins are a two-income family: The mother is a public servant, the father is a union worker, and they no doubt have excellent private health insurance. Both Bristol and Sarah Palin have the luxury of exercising true reproductive choice, and continuing with pregnancies that would have devastated—financially and emotionally—many an ordinary family. A recent Gates Foundation survey found that one-third of female teenage dropouts cited pregnancy as the reason they couldn't stay in school. Another survey studied women in their 30s who were once teenage moms and found that only 3 percent of them completed a college degree. Just in Alaska, families with Down syndrome children—half of whom have congenital heart defects in addition to some degree of mental retardation, hearing, and vision problems—report long wait lists for subsidized medical care and special education programs.
If John McCain wins the election and Palin becomes the kind of vice president who exerts any influence over policy, she will no doubt do what she can to overturn Roe v. Wade and make abortion illegal again. That's her calling and her base; that's the reason she has, as campaign talking points would have it, "energized" the conservatives who eluded the maverick McCain. But what I wonder is this: Can we also expect that she will fight for longer maternity leaves and subsidized child care? Will she fight for programs that assist parents in raising disabled children, and force private insurance companies to pay for their care? Will she make it possible for a working-class college student to provide her child with a solid education in a safe neighborhood, and finish her education herself?
Doubtful. Paradoxically, kindness toward mothers and children in need—in the form of food, shelter, and education—is not a value the party she belongs to, including that energized base, upholds. Just this year, Palin used her gubernatorial power to reduce funding to Convenant House Alaska's Passage House, a program that "assists young mothers in developing skills such as healthy parenting, money management, priority setting, housing acquisition and social skills development." John McCain's health care plan, which promises only to lower the costs of medical care and offer families health savings accounts, would do little to lessen the financial burden of expectant mothers or parents with disabled children. Consequently, it will do little to reduce the number of abortions. As the Guttmacher Foundation has found, in more than 32 studies conducted in 27 countries, the second most common reason women give for terminating a pregnancy is socioeconomic, including "lack of support from the father, poverty and unemployment."
If Sarah Palin's pro-life agenda doesn't factor that in—and doesn't fight to give families equal access to health care and education regardless of their economic status—it's not only inhumane but ineffective. As Hillary Clinton reminded us so long ago, raising a child takes a village. And if the McCain-Palin ticket wants any segment of her disaffected supporters, they will spend their time in Minneapolis crafting a new plan for the nation's 47 million uninsured—one that will allow them, like Sarah and Bristol, to have their babies in a political culture of unconditional love and support. And, even, pride.
Page 1 of 1 
Well said. I really hope that this is brought to the spotlight.
Right on. I appreciate the recognition that Palin is living according to her convictions- something so many people across the political spectrum do not do. But the "right to life" has to include more than a guarantee of biological survival through birth.
No, she'll say "leave it to the market" and forget about it. I'm sorry, but some (not all) of these conservatives love to show off their crosses, go to church, get involved in youth group, and parade their religion like an accessory. And yet, when it comes down to it, they don't give a sh*t about the poor. They think gays getting married is a bigger threat to this nation than poverty, than the unprotected nuclear-bio-chemical weapons floating around the old USSR, and CERTAINY more than all the children and wedding parties our missles are incinerating in Afghanistan. Subsidized maternity care and maternity (AND paternity rights) is nasty socialism that good red-blooded Americans want nothing of. So, don't get your hopes up, I won't.
Accidents happen, and since the official Alaska birth control policy is abstinence - accidents will happen. The only thing that upsets me is what will happen to this young couple. Will this young man be able to support a wife and child? What happens to his plans for education? Not my life, not my problem but when my children were teens we told them that we prefer that they wait for marriage to become sexually active but we also told them about methods of birth control if they choose not to listen to us.
Have a friend who gave birth to a Down's Syndrome daughter and didn't hesitate one second when she saw her to keep her, now that is something else, no tests no all night discussion. That is courage. Palin obviously didn't have the same feeling. Sorry Palin had been vocal about her family values whern the crunch came she did the right thing but it took some agonizing!!? Her pro life is biblical however the "tho shalt not kill" suddenly has all manner of added qualifications after the first breathe is drawn and its an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, Sorry her pick and choose Christian values leave me cold, have met women and men where the 19 commandments have no added qualifications, now thats courage.
IS THIS ELECTION ABOUT JUDGMENT?
Sarah Pahin uses poor judgment and the GOP makes her out to be a hero!
The issue should not be about Sarah Pahin not having an abortion. The issue is that she did not have the good judgment to use birth control. Any intelligent person knows that when you choose to have unprotected sex at 43
you have a very high probability of having a child with Downs Syndrome. The republicans are making her out to be a hero because she used the bad judgment not to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.
These responses floor me. The liberal mindset is said to be open. Yet, is anything but open. The fact that palin chose to have sex w/her husband of 20 years and it resulted in pregnancy. Stop the press! Where's the birth control? Shame on her!
Does the liberal mind live in the moment? No spontaneity? So, I take it all sex is scheduled, or planned and one must be dressed appropriately before engaging. Sounds like a session of bathing my dog. My point is; judge this lady on her political merits, not of whom she has been sleeping with for the past 20 years, her husband AND PROVIDER. Face the facts you close minded people, it is not who she is that left you cold, it is who picked her. Get a life!
They say Palin's daughter is a private family matter and shouldn't be covered... Then why the heck should there be national abstinence programs or laws on abortions?
Then why even bring her family into the campaign as a 'family values' talking point? They want their cake and eat it, too. "Look! My son is in the military! Look! We're a family! Oh, no, You're not allowed to rebut this with any negative points. That's a low-blow."
Her family goes to the very core of her flaws in leadership. No birth control results in having a kid... at 44 years old... which turns out to have Down's Syndrome (which is related to the age of the mother). There are reasons why 44 year old women either use protection or get themselves or their partner sterilized.
Abstinence education (plus no birth control) is directly tied into her own daughter getting pregnant at 17 years old and out of wedlock.
Her questionable judgement has put her entire family at risk, and she wants to see her judgement exported at a national level.
No. Her family is a banner case against her own policies.
Au contraire, Jimmy me boy. I don't care who she sleeps with or how she handles the consequences. I don't like her politics.
I think women/families/people should be allowed to make their own, personal choices. I think digging up the tundra for 12 years for 6 months worth of oil is a stupid waste of resources. I think science is like the law - it's about following the evidence to what you can prove, not what you believe.
And just what exactly does not liking who picked her have to do with 'getting a life'?
You think traveling to a conference in Texas in an advanced state of pregnancy with a trisome baby was "according to her convictions?" Or boarding a 9 hr flight AFTER her water broke? You can deny it all you like but I say she was trying to induce a stillborn event. Convictions my ass. Wonder what kind of "decision making" actually went into her daughter's grim future of being saddled with a self-described redneck husband and ababy before she's even old enough to vote?
[deleted] all of these people. In spades
I’m glad that this article really hit home the lack of social responsibility the republicans have in their bible-thumping, narrow-minded mantras. Yes, they can yell “smaller government” and “lower taxes” but heaven forbid that the government denies them their Medicare check if something were to happen that they couldn’t support themselves. They would be the FIRST in line for the government hand-outs that they previously ranted so hard about. This core of hypocrisy not only sickens me but also weakens our nation.
Palin, quite an attractive woman, opened her mouth, screeched, smirked, and made these strange minor facial motions that, almost imperceptibly, converted her into a spiteful Medusa-Gorgona. It was fascinating! The level of expressed meanness was so high, as if it was her intention to intimidate everybody.
It is courageous to have a child with DS and dedicate her life to a child. But I see no virtue when a 8-month pregnant woman takes multiple long-distance flights to further her carrier (though she has a PROVIDER, as one of the guests reminded), which most likely resulted in the premature birth, and then, just 3 days later after the delivery, abandoned the baby to other people's care and moved on with her ambitions. No substance in Mrs. Palin. She betrays the very principle she advertises.
Sarah Palin no doubt had support from her family, and her church while going through her pregnancy, but there is another aspect that is not being mentioned; As a mother of five children, she was out of the work force several times during her life. I don't know what kind of coverage she had as mayor of a small town.(I assume she has coverage as governor) but one thing that was constant was her husband has a good job, a union job, with a living wage, and health benefits.
Pro-choice advocates never claimed the choice would be an easy one. Women agonize over deciding whether or notto terminate a pregnancy, unlike many other women, at least Sarah Palin didn't have to worry about health care and how she would support her child. This made it a just a little bit easier to make her choice.
Good to see something so balanced. Lacks the knee-jerk reaction and cynicism so easy to succumb to in partisan politics.The question, "will she also support subsidized child care and higher ed for teen moms poorer than Bristol?" seems to beg the question given Ms. Lewis' observation that Palin already did quite the opposite in her own state when provided the opportunity. I also second Vera from Sedona's opinion (see below) that Palin's aversion to birth control at the age of 43 may have increased the chance of a Down Syndrome child. Still, this was Ms. Palin's personal choice and must be respected. It is unfortunate that Palin, in opposing Roe v Wade is not willing to allow others to make their own personal choice.
Palin wont turnover Roe Vs Wade. Its a political football thats far to useful to be outlawed.
"Why have genetic testing at all?"
So you can prepare for the possibility of raising a special needs child.
With my last child, I didn't have genetic testing. As it turned out she had hydranencephaly and lived only an hour and 35 minutes after birth. Am I going to have genetic testing with future pregnancies? You bet. Because when an ultrasound first revealed a problem and my regular OB/GYN thought our daughter had hydrocephaly, we started hustling trying to find out what would happen with a preemie (hydrocephaly means you usually end up delivering a little early so you can get a shunt in sooner and help mitigate the brain damage) and what kind of adaptive equipment would help her. We also got in to a fetal/maternal specialist as quickly as possible.
So everyone out there: please, please don't assume that all genetic testing will do is determine whether you're going to carry the child to term. There are other valid reasons for testing, those test results are neither good nor bad, just information.
Jimmy, dude, it's us libs who started the sexual revolution. As far as we're concerned, the Gov could do the whole Alaska legislature, for sure, and, like, we would not EVEN care.
"to reduce funding to Convenant House Alaska's Passage House" should be redacted as not entirely true. It is VERY unfortunate that many "pro-life" groups tend to practice social darwinism in economics and politics. Catholics are pushing a very progressive "Platform for the Common Good" (votethecommongood.com), which you may want to bookmark to use to educate "cafeteria Catholics" who only tow the Catholic line on anti-abortion issues.
Katherine -- thanks for the clarification; I hadn't considered that.
CF: It is true. I didn't say "slashed," I didn't say "eliminated." I said "reduced" -- from $5 million to $3.9 million.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/palin_slashed_fund...
Palin is nothing new. What would be new is for a politician who does do what s/he claims. All that has happened regarding Palin should be expected - contradicting, hypocritical, self-serving, etc. A choice is a choice, no matter how it is labeled. If McCain-Palin does make it into the White House, America will become a very scary place for Americans - rightless, freedomless, moneyless, and hopeless.
Tina, I hear Russia calling you. When I look at things, it is the OB ticket recommending more federal spending. You want your g-kids paying off your debt?
Is anyone in the "other" camp (McCain/Palin) reading this? They could (oops) learn something about this sometimes oversimplified (for political purposes) issue of abortion rights. Your points are well taken and should be shared.
In the September-October 2008 issue of Sojourners, a progressive Christian periodical on the religious left, Reverend Jim Wallis quotes John McCain (on the anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s assassination) as having said:
"Some people lament privately, others are brave enough to take their call for change into the public arena. Martin Luther King III has done his father's legacy proud this week by courageously insisting that our nation's next leader do something about the poverty that ensnares over 36 million of our citizens. I will answer his call, and tell him and the American people today that I will make the eradication of poverty a top priority of the McCain administration."
That same issue of Sojourners quotes Mike Huckabee as saying, "I'm a conservative but I'm not a nut. If my choice is a government program or a hungry kid, then give me the government program."
According to Huckabee:
"One of the things I'm frustrated about is that Republicans have been infiltrated by hardcore libertarians. Traditional Republicans don''t hate all forms of government. They just want it to be efficient and effective. They recognize that it has a place and a role. Growing numbers of people in the Republican party are just short of anarchists in the sense that they basically say: 'Just cut government and cut taxes.' They don't understand that if you do that, there are certain consequences that do not help problems. It exacerbates them."
Jim Wallis reports that Huckabee told a "values voter" gathering in 2007, "I do not spell G-O-D...G-O-P. Our party may be important, but our principles are even more important than anybody's political party."
For the most part, however, it appears to be business as usual in the Republican party. Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, says:
“Senator McCain’s choice for a running mate is beyond belief. By choosing Sarah Palin, McCain has clearly made a decision to continue the Bush legacy of destructive environmental policies. “Sarah Palin, whose husband works for BP (formerly British Petroleum), has repeatedly put special interests first when it comes to the environment. In her scant two years as governor, she has lobbied aggressively to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, pushed for more drilling off of Alaska’s coasts, and put special interests above science. Ms. Palin has made it clear through her actions that she is unwilling to do even as much as the Bush administration to address the impacts of global warming. Her most recent effort has been to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove the polar bear from the endangered species list, putting Big Oil before sound science. As unbelievable as this may sound, this actually puts her to the right of the Bush administration. “This is Senator McCain’s first significant choice in building his executive team and it’s a bad one. It has to raise serious doubts in the minds of voters about John McCain’s commitment to conservation, to addressing the impacts of global warming and to ensuring our country ends its dependency on oil.”
Back in the early '90s, George Bush Sr. referred to environmentalists as "the spotted owl crowd," making it clear that Republicans don't understand environmentalism. "And (yet) they call themselves 'pro-life'," mused Fox News' token liberal commentator Alan Colmes a few years ago.
I am disheartened by Sarah Palin's record on the environment, ties to Big Oil, but not surprised. She is, after all, a conservative Republican, running for VP on a Republican ticket. I wonder if Sarah Palin still believes in abstinence-only sex education, now that her daughter Bristol faces an unplanned pregnancy. To her credit, Sarah Palin is a member of Feminists For Life, an organization that is both pro-woman AND pro-life. I wish pro-life Dems (a political minority) had the kind of visibility within their own Party that pro-choice Republicans (also a minority) have in theirs.
Well said, Ms. Lewis! Since hearing Palin, I too wondered--"OK, so she makes it 'work' as a working mother, but what from her experience would she make into national policy for the rest of us?" Till we get an answer, her oft-touted experience is nothing but personal anecdote.
I thought that the Republican convention was in ST Paul, thanks for keeping me informed!
Of course we wouldn't see anything like national health care and more educational aid for poor mothers, or their babies.
That 'pro-lifers' believe that life begins at conception and ends at birth is not a joke. Sadly, it's the truth. Why? The entire pro-life movement is about controlling women, not about care of women and their babies. Remember, coercing women into abortions is illegal (and it happened in the days before Roe v. Wade).
Maria, I had the same visceral response to a woman with superficial beauty, but was immediately out put off by her adolescent self-obsession. Her facial expressions were so cutesy as to befit a 16 year old; like she was like flirting with the audience.
No she won't support child care nor will she support education programs for teen mothers She will support the death penalty, gun ownership, home schooling, book censorship and outright book banning, creationism in the schools, drilling in ANWAR, and the repeal of endangered species laws. She represents a very watered down version of the Taliban, but given time she will strengthen her strong drive to lead us into the previous century.
Thank you for pointing out, so tastefully, the problems in our system. You hit the nail on the head. It's easy for the halves to talk about the ought to's when the economic and social support is there. Unfortunately what goes around comes around and Mrs. Palin may have to reconsider her stance on funding cuts or face a very unhappy populace.
Accidents happen especially when your beliefs, convictions, and political agenda promote abstinence only instead of fact-based, medically-accurate, comprehensive sexual health education. Speaking of accidents; Sarah Palin married her husband on August 29, 1988 and, although every road to finding the birth date of her first son Trick is blocked, I did find one blogger who says Trick's birth date is April 20, 1989. This would mean that Palin herself was pregnant before she got married. How's that abstinence only working out for the Palin family? And why hasn't anyone jumped on this story? The Palin family are the poster children for fact-based, medically accurate comprehensive sexual health education being taught in schools.
Mrs. Garside hits the biblical nail on the head: woman, obey/submit to your husband, or something to that extent. Reproductive choice is the single biggest threat to male sexual hegemony as codified by millenias worth of religious doctrine. Women who buy into this indoctrination, like veiled Muslims and fundamentalist Mormons, to cite a couple extremes, never cease to amaze me in their seemingly genuine feelings of rapturous "liberation". I can't free them, ignore nor fear them. Hopefully, we can contain them with a sense of due dignity.
I hope Obama and Biden get elected, because we are in for a railroad ride to hell if the Republicans get in power for another four years!!!
I wonder why Gov.Palin submitted herself to any prenatal testing which may have revealed a defect in her developing child if she believes so ardently in the right to life no matter what the circumstances.
In Canada this abortion issue was put to rest years ago. It's fascinating to watch a supposedly educated woman stand up and say she wants to deny women choice over their own bodies. In most countries she would be treated like political plutonium, but not in America, the supposed "Land of the Free". But this is only one of the many absurdities of the "America" myth.
Interesting. Some things that wouldn't have crossed my mind.KILL THE BABY!!!
It seems like this issue should have been put to rest in the US, too. And, yes, there are many absurdities in this country. Plenty of countries have healthcare for everyone, make the education system fair and EQUAL for everyone, and have programs that support families, as opposed to hurt families. I can never understand why any person, ant political party, would not want to help people with less than them, or who have come across hardship and need some assistance. But GOD those Republicans!!! GOD forbid they should actually want to encourage and support programs to aid anyone. But GOD they love to shove their religious beliefs down everyone's throat...their hypocritical, antiquated, selfish, disgusting beliefs!!!
As a mother of six healthy,wonderful, children I obviously understand the sanctity of human life. Only three of these wonderful individuals were planned. Those last three children were the result of failed birth control. I was within the age group with the birth of my last two births to be recommended for testing for Down's Syndrome. I chose to not undergo this testing as the test increases the risk of spontaneous abortion @ about the same percentage possibility of producing a Down afflicted child. Since I would not have terminated any of my pregnancies I couldn't justify risking the possibility of spontaneously terminating my pregnancy due to a procedure. Iam puzzeled that Mrs. Palin given her convictions would have put her pregnancy in any jeopardy simply to know wheither her child was perfect or not. However this is her choice something I have no right to judge.
It is to this question of choice that I take to issue. My children know that I chose to bring them into this world. That I accepted them unconditionally in a day & age that I could easily have terminated their lives. I believe that this reality has reinforced for them that they have always been loved & accepted regardless of the circumstance of their conception. Loved without expectation.
This brings me to why I consider the most important, intrinsic right of all women is her right to make her own choice as to when & if she will sustain a pregnancy. It devalules the very sanctity of life if it is forced upon a women & NO ONE I repeat NO ONE has the right to tell me wheither I must sustain life or conversly be forced to not sustain life.
The very act of super-imposing another persons values upon a women is just another means to subjugate woman. Women & only women can sustain life. This ultimate power over who will live or who will die is only given to a woman. A power that I believe men unconsciously perceive as a threat. After all a man with all his phyisical strength or monetary supremacy can not sustain life within his own body. The world only survives because women choose for it to continue.
If one considers the gravity of this fact it is no wonder that down through the ages man has sought out ways to not allow women control over their bodies & reproductive freedom. It is no wonder that now in this age of fundamentalist religiousity that the rights of all others would supercede the autonomy of women. I ask @ what point if after Roe vs Wade is revoked, as surely this Palin women will see this happens, will women be expected to wear a Burka? The Republican Party, a political party dominated by rich,white men, is thrilled to have manipulated the fundalmentalist religious right into believing this party is the party of "Family Values". This is really a political party intent through any means to continue to oppress the middle class in order to maintain power within the elite upper 1%. Wake up people, wake up women, the Republican Party has never been interested in the promotion of women & Palin is just a puppet.
Amen! It is a contradiction in terms for Republicans to insist that government's job is to require babies to be born, but it is not government's job to support needy babies and mothers where it counts. If they are going to impose birth on the poor, unemployed, and socially isolated, they need to accept the responsibility to support that life. If they want to reduce the occurrence of abortion, they could advocate for effective birth control. Ms. Palin's family has shown us how effective abstinence education can be.
two questions.... Obama in an interview says the family should be out of bounds, and the very next day Palin lines up her family on the tarmac and in full media attention...?
second question....with all the opposition to minors in bars,etc why would a mother bring out and keep a reasonably new born baby under hot lights and a raucus, loud convention if not for political purposes....?
I might add to this about Palin, if you didn't know, that she is very anti-gay. The republican legislature of Alaska passed a domestic partnership bill covering all state employees, including gay and lesbian couples, and she vetoed it. She shares the same hostility to equality for gay and lesbian citizens as does McCain.
As a gay man of 62 years always living on the margin of complete personhood and citizenship in the US (though they always seemed to fully accept my taxes), and being in a committed relationship for 17 years, this is something that also needs to be addressed.
Fortunately, my partner and I now live in Europe where we have full equality and rights and are legally married with all the rights and obligations that entails. It is sad, in this day and age, to still see one of the two (corporate) parties allowed in the US promoting such undemocratic and anti-human & civil rights policies. Where we live people are shocked that anyone in a democracy should be left out (let alone that there are votes taken in some states to see if they should be even more excluded - and sadly passing in some). The whole world is watching and finding in the US less and less to admire or emulate. Who can blame them.
""As a dedicated foe of abortion rights, Palin might have leaned against termination from the start, but if it were all a slam dunk one has to wonder why she had any prenatal genetic tests at all.""
I'm not a McCain/Palin supporter at all -- and m in fact pro-choice -- but you've got to be kidding me with the above comment. You really can't understand why a pro-life person would elect genetic testing? Maybe they thought it best to start preparing themselves for the many challenges that surely lie ahead if the baby indeed had a chromosome disorder. Not everyone believes that ignorance is bliss.
Republicans are only pro-life until the baby is born.. then mother and baby are on their own.. Besides I would think that people who claim to be pro-life and value the sanctity of human life more than the cold-hearted left would be against war which kills millions of innocent human lives and their helpless children and pregnant mothers and their unborn fetuses as well.. I am so sick of the hypocrisy.
I am glad freethinker lives in Europe. God bless him and his partner wherever they may live.
The debate rages. Our gov't has even shown reports of massive amounts of oil in ANWR adn GinnyK is a geologist who knows there is only six months of oil in ANWR.
If only there is six months of oil in ANWR and "big oil" goes after it, isn't the joke on them? Please, Mz. Au Contraire, dare I speculate you are speaking doctrine and not personal knowledge.
You know there is something rotten here , like you know a really bad smell, like a free turd in the corner, ahh.. it's alright I just realized that jimmy is still in the building
I am a lit candle in a dark room, or the turd in the party punch bowl. Whatever analogy Kressely wants to give is fine by me. It's funny how speaking your mind and not doctrine will set one apart. Take a deep breath and take it in, take it all in!
Very well put. I also hope that this issue is brought front and center.
Paris, you are right. Accidents do happen.
(On the subject of whether or not Republicans believe in assistance after the birth of the child, as a former dedicated Republican I can tell you the answer is no.)
On to some inconsistencies. First of all, a person running for the second highest office in tha nation ought to make sure the past slate is clean. I have seen quite a few pictures that leads me to doubt the Sarah Palin is Trig's mother. (Gotta love YouTube and nosy reporters.) First, the pregnancy pictures. I know some women who are in excellent physical shape may not reach the size of a house, but they at least show something. Sarah Palin was not visibly pregnant. Someone found an old picture of SP when she was pregnant with one of her previous kids and her stomach was HUGE. Supposedly during her "pregnancy" Bristol was also missing in action from the public eye for a 5 month period. Secondly, with respect to all the male readers here I will not be to graphic, but having babies 'changes' certain things. The first delivery is usually the longest and the hardest. Subsequent are usually shorter. I find it hard to believe that she could have waited very long after her water broke to deliver the baby. I lost a sister because my mother's water broke and the hospital staff took too long to call the obstetrician on duty.
If anyone has any medical facts to refute this argument, I would like to hear them. Otherwise, I am really not happy with the fact that this person just does not seem honest.
Catchum is spot-on. It is my fear that if the Rebublicans get into office it can only set us back decades. Isn't the USA supposed to be "The Land of the Free"?
