Breeders breeding breeders: will this horror never end?
Darleen has already noted the release of the story, by the McCain campaign, that Bristol Palin, the 17-year-old daughter of Gov. Sarah Palin, is pregnant and will marry the father of the child.
But here’s the interesting bit, politically speaking. From Reuters:
Senior McCain campaign officials said McCain knew of the daughter’s pregnancy when he selected Palin last week as his vice presidential running mate, deciding that it did not disqualify the 44-year-old governor in any way.
In the short period since she was announced last Friday, Palin has helped to energize the Republican Party’s conservative base, giving the McCain camp fresh energy going into the campaign for the November 4 election against Democrat Barack Obama.
McCain officials said the news of the daughter’s pregnancy was being released to rebut what one aide called “mud-slinging and lies” circulating on liberal blog sites.
According to these rumors, Sarah Palin had faked a pregnancy and pretended to have given birth in May to her fifth child, a son named Trig who has Down syndrome. The rumor was that Trig was actually Bristol Palin’s child and that Sarah Palin was the grandmother.
A senior McCain campaign official said the McCain camp was appalled that these rumors had not only been spread around liberal blog sites and partisan Democrats, but also were the subject of heightened interest from mainstream news media.
“The despicable rumors that have been spread by liberal blogs, some even with Barack Obama’s name in them, is a real anchor around the Democratic ticket, pulling them down in the mud in a way that certainly juxtaposes themselves against their ‘campaign of change,'” a senior aide said.
Many on the left will believe, quite mistakenly, that such an announcement is likely to weaken Palin’s support among “the hard-right conservative base”. But in fact, it will do no such thing — first, because the “hard-right conservative base” that liberal Democrats consistently invoke is largely a caricature that lives only in their minds and as a convenient trope in their rhetoric, from whence it can be trotted out as a foil and a boogeyman on cue; and second, because those energized over the choice of Palin include many disaffected libertarians and classical liberals who were, until the announcement of the Governor’s candidacy, set to either sit the election out, or else cast a protest vote for Bob Barr.
That the Palin family — by dint of ugly rumor mongering from “progressive activists” and a compliant left-leaning press that was cynically situating itself to pretend that these rumors “needed investigating” — was all but compelled to release information about their teenage daughter, is precisely the kind of thing that drives real civil libertarians and privacy advocates crazy, especially because the information has nothing whatever to do with Governor Palin’s candidacy, but instead invades the privacy (and quite possibly affects the “choice”) of a minor.
This kind of savage smear campaign by leftists and so-called “feminists” — a campaign that forced a young woman to make public a very private matter in order to stop vicious rumors about the Palin family — suggests that, when it comes to “privacy concerns” (NSA data mining for terrorists = bad; demanding the release of a Governor’s medical records = good; parental notification for abortions performed on women under a certain age = bad; insisting that the world be privy to the private sexual and family concerns of the seventeen-year-old daughter of a conservative = good), “progressives” care about such things only insofar as it protects their political interests and advances their political agenda.
The left, as it has now been shown in one of the ugliest incidences of McCarthyite bullying I can remember, has no core belief in privacy, or even an investment in actual “choice” for women — unless the woman in question falls in line with their particular orthodoxies, that is. Anyone else is an “anti-woman” woman, and as such is subject to public exposure and ridicule.
The ironic thing is, Bristol Palin’s political beliefs aren’t even known, beyond (I assume) her support for her mother. But hey: all is fair in love and war, and suddenly, the progressive left seems quite unconcerned with “collateral damage” and “the children!™
Hopefully, any real feminist — not the kinds of second wave “establishment feminists” who have eschewed the end game of equality for the politically charged power politics of identity group activism and grievance pimping — will be so appalled by what has transpired over the last several days that they will run screaming from the “enlightened” base of the Democratic party: totalitarian “progressives” who have devoured Alinsky like he was a particularly plump and inviting veggie burger.
They are what they pretend to despise. And in the quiet moments between attacks, I suspect many of them recognize this, and secretly curse what it is they’ve become.
update: thor argues in the comments:
If Sarah Palin thinks so highly of privacy and her family matters then why in the hell does she want to dictate to others regarding their decisions of Ã¢â‚¬Å“privacyÃ¢â‚¬Â and Ã¢â‚¬Å“family mattersÃ¢â‚¬Â when it comes to pregnancy?
This, my friends, is a breathtaking moment of hypocrisy (pun driven too).
My response, which is actually a general response to this kind of question, is really rather simple: Being anti-abortion is a position with respect to a practice. So far as I know, Palin is not calling for the bombing of clinics, or the harassment of women who make the choice to have an abortion. It just happens to be her opinion that abortion is wrong — just as it is thor’s opinion that hicks from Alaska have no business doing anything other than skinning bears and making little beer-swilling trailer trash urchins for him to sniff at.
Perhaps Palin believes fetuses are children, and as such, are entitled to protection of the law. This view is shared by many people — and plays to a libertarian concern over the hierarchy of rights: if a fetus is a child (or eventually is defined as such by scientific advancement), does that child not have the right to life? For my part, I believe eventually science will make this a moot question as viability of the fetus outside the womb is extended. Which is why right now I remain reluctantly pro-choice. But for me this is a difficult question — and the easiest answer, it seems to me, is to dismiss the fetus altogether and pat yourself on the back for supporting women when what you are supporting is a practice that may help some women and may harm others.
— None of which has anything to do with “privacy.” Again, Governor Palin has not, that I’ve seen, called for a Constitutional Amendment banning abortion. Rather, she has stated her opinion on what to her appears to be a moral issue.
Being against the practice of abortion has not impelled Sarah Palin to put up a statewide list of those who have had abortions. Those who advocate for parental notification aren’t advocating for a scarlet letter.
So, as is so often the case, thor’s “argument” is a piece of vindictive misdirection. As I say, I’m (reluctantly) pro-choice. But even so, I believe Roe v Wade was bad law — and pointing it out, or even disagreeing with a particular reproductive practice, does not necessarily suggest that one is trying to stick her nose into another woman’s uterus. Instead, they believe that what they are doing is acting as an advocate for an unborn child.
And science — by way of advancements that keep the fetus viable ever longer outside the womb — seems to be moving the debate in their direction.
Alas, from a left/feminist perspective, looks like Bristol is gonna be “punished with a baby.” And a husband. And a tight-knit family that supports her. Poor dear.
Lesson: teenage sex is good and shouldn’t be discouraged provided we have a mechanism to kill off whatever we call that thing inside that acts as a “punishment.” I mean, who knew it would be the left who saw sin growing in a young woman’s womb?
First, Marcotte proves to be a Calvinist — and now the argument of the left appeals to hardcore Catholicism?
Wow. Strange days, indeed.
Wonder how the product of a single mom, Barry O!, will treat this shameless wilderness hussy…?