Is that the story? I'm sure there are many pregnant teenage girls throughout the US. The media is trying to make Britol's plight into a story. The are also trying to make a story of a disabled child. As Obama has said family, especially children, are off limits. Why can't the media lay off?
If she's not the first pregnant teenage daughter of a presidential or vice presidential candidate in a major party, she sure is the first in a long time, so there is the novelty aspect.
Whether it's newsworthy can be debated forever, but by the definition, it's news. It's unusual for the circumstances, and in the 24 hour news cycle, that's good enough.
What facet of the media are you talking about though? The MSM has done a very good job of handling the pregnancy story. US Weekly is not the MSM.
There were always going to be people who took the story and ran with it, but of all of the major news outlets, very few have overplayed the story.
And where were the people denouncing the coverage of Jamie Lynn in US Weekly?
__________________
Quoth David Banner: "Like a pimp"
It's not a beer belly. It's a gas tank for a sax machine.
The reason the Palin stuff is such a clusterfuck is because McCain didn't vet his candidate. He didn't see any of these story lines coming, and had no counter-narrative in place when all these stories began to break at once.
The McCain campaign is responsible for the news reporting of the the major independent news organizations?
That the McCain campaign was unpreparded to deal with the rumours and allegations is quite true. But you seem to be excuse the media's reporting because the McCain team was not ready with a spin.
BTW, Ninja roughly speaking (changes yearly based on age) risk for Downs is 1/1000 - over 40 it increases to 1/200 (around 1/100 is the stat they use in the US, and maybe 1/400 around 35 - working from memory here) at which point the test for Downs because a good statistical call (because a needle is injected into the amniotic sac - amniocetses (spelling??). there is about 1/200 chance of a miscarriage from the test).
__________________
Peter
After all, diamonds are a girl's best friend…
If she's not the first pregnant teenage daughter of a presidential or vice presidential candidate in a major party, she sure is the first in a long time, so there is the novelty aspect.
Exactly. Chelsea turned out to be hot, and for all I know has been sexually active since she was 16 or younger, but her mother isn't up on an "abstinance only" Barbaro and she's probably had access to birth control for as long as she's wanted it. Back to the hypocricy issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja
Whether it's newsworthy can be debated forever, but by the definition, it's news. It's unusual for the circumstances, and in the 24 hour news cycle, that's good enough.
What facet of the media are you talking about though? The MSM has done a very good job of handling the pregnancy story. US Weekly is not the MSM.
There were always going to be people who took the story and ran with it, but of all of the major news outlets, very few have overplayed the story.
And where were the people denouncing the coverage of Jamie Lynn in US Weekly?
Chris Matthews (yeah, I can't stand him either) has been asking the McCain/Palin campaign for ANY examples of the media, besides US Weekly, talking about the Palin family issues. So far all we get back it "all of them, everybody, a bunch" kind of bullshit response.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Some Pushback on Sarah Palin
The meme going around is that John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin is the most bizarre choice of deputy since the Emperor Caligula chose his horse Incitatus to be consul. Katha Pollitt pushes back:
Katha Pollitt: I knew Incitatus. Incitatus was a friend of mine. Sarah Palin is no Incitatus!
Thought this was humorous. Not quite sure as to the point.
I used the example of the National Enquirer because they had the story of Bristol Palin's pregnancy, apparently before McCain did.
Then, to avoid being embarrassed by the Enquirer, Palin chose to get ahead of the story and issue a press release.
Concurrent with this was the tale about Palin's bizarre trans-continental flight to deliver Trig in Wasilla, after her water had broken in Dallas, IIRC. I read exactly one "story" about this, which was really just a bunch of links on Daily Kos describing the odd series of decisions Palin made on her way back to Wasilla.
I should also say that this was a "diary," posted by a reader on Daily Kos, not part of the main blog. And it was quickly removed by the administrators. Other readers attempted to put up more diaries about Trig's parentage, but they were also quickly removed. None of this appeared on the main blog, the one controlled by Markos Moulitsas and his staff. So that's as close to "the media" as that "story" got.
Palin's decision to announce her daughter's pregnancy was a two-fer: It kept the National Enquirer from putting out information first, and it headed off the rumor about Bristol actually being the mother of Trig.
When you do all this the same weekend you're named as the vice-presidential candidate on a major party's ticket, of course the media is going to wonder WTF else you're hiding. It's like the Grail-shaped beacon in the Monty Python movie.
Well, all of the controversies about Sarah and her brood don't seem to have hurt the Republicans in any way (so far). Conservatives are rallying around her, and this CBS poll now has McCain and Obama tied. Obama had a nice bump in national polling post-convention, so it will be interesting to see whether further polling also puts them neck-and-neck.
A debate between Palin and Biden will be very interesting to watch. Substance versus likability factor for sure.
Chelsea is hot? We really are lowering our standards in this country!
I thought Chelsea was downright homely as a younger kid. She looks better now, although I think a lot of it is an illusion as with her mama. Take off all the goop, and I think both would be pretty horrifying.
But only a few news outlets, like the Phoenix New Times in Arizona and the National Journal, that ran an Associated Press story reporting McCain's 1998 joke suggesting that Chelsea Clinton was ugly and Janet Reno and Hillary Clinton were lesbians.
"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?" McCain said at a GOP fund-raiser in Washington. "Because Janet Reno is her father."
Ok, so hot may be a bit of exaggeration. But she makes my "I'd hit it" list, anyway.
As for John (don't call him McSame) McCain, here's a 'toon:
But, really, it's not just more of the same. He's the maverick, after all.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Is that the story? I'm sure there are many pregnant teenage girls throughout the US. The media is trying to make Britol's plight into a story. The are also trying to make a story of a disabled child. As Obama has said family, especially children, are off limits. Why can't the media lay off?
Media has changed and evolved (maybe not for the better in my point of view) but its not the old 5 oclock news with Walter anymore. Its MEDIA 24 hours a day seven days a week and they have to find something to fill it with. Even if its mindless crap drivel about Lindsey, Paris, or Tom Cruise they fill it with something.
Since its election year they have done nothing but inundate us with every possible aspect of information even if its not worthy of anyones time or effort.
Its mostly 95% pure and utter crap intellegent people get it and understand that the rest of the mob just eats it up.
I agree with Obama that the children and families should be off limits. Stick to the party platform issues and the candidates specific plans and agendas. The problem is most Americans don't want to hear about the boring stuff they want the dirt they want the mud slinging and the nasty shit that comes with it.
__________________
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
McCain said change is coming. Just hold on another 4 years and nevermind the unemployment rate's continous rise and job loss spreading across many industries. He has a plan. Same as Bush's but it's a plan.
He also said he knows how to get Bin Laden - thank God he hasn't let Bush in on his little secret.
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
Both parties seem to have a plan for change and when you get down to it is the same platform both parties have had for many years now. I just don't know how we are going to tax our way out of a bad economy. I have seen statistics where the job losses are occurring most in states with higher taxes. I live in Indiana next to Illinois and near Chicago they have the highest tax rate in the nation when you consider state sales tax, county sales tax and local sales tax not to mention high property taxes. My hotel bill in Chicago had a 15% tax added in addition to sales taxes.
I'm not rich and I strive to be. 99% of rich people work for it and work hard. Sometimes I wonder what kind of family life they have. So, why does everyone feel that the rich need to pay increasingly more (for example, 10% of 1,000,000,000 is a lot more than 10% of 100,000) for everything.
Actually, I wouldn't mind paying more myself if it went directly to those truly in need. That does not happen with tax money. I get close to achieving that by donating to local churches. Oops... I forgot that I have to keep church and state separate.
Family's off-limits unless Michelle Obama says something that might be possibly construed as maybe anti-American to some people.
You choose your wife, also the First Lady does represent the US on many occasions. Also, anyone who has been married know that your wife affects your decisions. I don't think wives should be off limits.
__________________
"So many of our dreams at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we summon the will, they soon become inevitable."
- Christopher Reeve
Well if wives are on the table I'd love to see someone in the press ask how former librarian Laura Bush feels about Palin's little book banning campaign , then having the librarian fired for refusing some good ol' fashioned censorship.
Meanwhile the most ridiculous part of this Bristol issue is the McCain campaign (and others parroting them) accusing the Democrats and media of attacking Palin's family, when in reality it is the complete opposite. Nobody in the mainstream press raised the issue until the McCain campaign announced it in a pre-emptive release, then played the vicitim role.
Classy as always.
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
You choose your wife, also the First Lady does represent the US on many occasions. Also, anyone who has been married know that your wife affects your decisions. I don't think wives should be off limits.
Children don't affect or display your decision-making ability?
The point is, we can spin this argument all sorts of ways. If family is off-limits, then it's off-limits.
It's not suddenly off-limits because it paints your candidate in a bad light.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
As I recall (if I'm remembering the right situation) Michelle Obama was campaigning and gave a speech and it was something in the content of her speech that provoked some comments.
As far as I can see, no one is giving (or should give) Obama grief for having his kids call him on the Jumbotron at the convention - no one should give the other side grief for having the kids present and appearing on camera - that's pretty standard stuff that we see every time there is an election.
As far as I can see, no one is giving (or should give) Obama grief for having his kids call him on the Jumbotron at the convention - no one should give the other side grief for having the kids present and appearing on camera - that's pretty standard stuff that we see every time there is an election.
I've got no problem with the Palin kids being in the picture when it comes to her speaking engagements. However, I see the contradiction when they're being put in the public eye (Johnston included) while the cries of "leave them alone" are being said. Either have them out there and accept that attention will be diverted to them, or keep them out of the public eye.
__________________
Quoth David Banner: "Like a pimp"
It's not a beer belly. It's a gas tank for a sax machine.
Entertaining thread with nothing of substance to add right now. I'm just giddy over the candidate match-up because it puts my family in a quandry of choosing a woman Republican or a black Democrat (this coming from a household where "black" is still whispered or mouthed behind a hand shielding the mouth). Too awesome.
Please, continue.
__________________ No Magic Pill (the log)
My Movember page (yes, I'm slacking on pictures)
In 1916, Paddy Pearce and his men stormed the post office in Dublin and proclaimed Irish independence. From my understanding, the people were pretty much unmoved. But the British heavy-handed response, including the execution of James Connolly (who was brought out on a stretcher and propped up before being executed) galvanized the population and Irish republicanism swept the country at fever pitch. Within 2 years they won all seats in the and had declared Irish independence.
I'm not going to say it is a perfect corollary but I think their are some tenets which are similar. In emails from my sister and dad I read the same dismay at the Palin pick. It didn't matter too much since they have both become huge Obama backers, but as lifelong conservatives their reaction was interesting. There was definitely comparison to Harriet Miers. There was dismay at creationism, at the book banning, etc. Hell, I was a bit miffed as I really respected Romney. He might be plastic, but the guy has been an incredibly successful executive in the real world and most everything he's ever done he has been a success. I thought that might be helpful, but hey, I don't pick.
So I set out to read more about who this woman was...and as I wasn't working that day I flipped on the television.
Within a day there were multiple people in this forum that rarely post, but were linking to sites saying that Palin wasn't the mother of her youngest. My lawyer friend I mentioned had forwarded me something circulating about the time between Palin's water breaking and the liklihood of having a downs child. Alan Colmes blog had things about her being responsible for her child's condition, the Daily Kos ran thing innumerable posts about Palin not being Trig's real mother. When her daughter's current pregnancy came to light proving the former scandals totally unfounded, the frenzy really was on. And I watched every news network - CNN was talking about the rumors, MSNBC was talking about it, and Fox was talking about it. In fact, about the only thing they WERE talking about was right to life and her daughter's pregnancy.
Now this woman, who I can't personally understand the appeal, has higher approval than McCain or Obama. I think the severity and sensationalism of her coverage did far more to drive her popularity than anything else. I think, in a way, that the Paddy Pearce comparison holds. My bet is that the original nationwide response to her was both 'who and why?'. But as the attacks through the blogosphere and the MSM coverage amped up, there were a significant amount of people that 'circled the wagons' and thought that enough was enough. 40 million people then tuned in to watch her 'hockey mom' speech and when she ripped on washington and media elite, she suddenly had gravitas and a huge following.
Ergo, as someone who doesn't really like this ticket, but still deep down was hoping for a decent ticket, I have to say that in my her opponents have unneccesarily created a superstar. To use a word I grow tired of reading in here often...I guess you're now seeing 'blowback' at the candidate level.
In terms of her opponents, you surely don't mean the media, do you? Because the people covering this election in the MSM loved them some John McCain. Then, when the stories came out, things that were bound to come out because they weren't common knowledge at the time of Palin's announcement, McCain says that the media is evil.
What exactly then is the role of the media in our world if they are not supposed to find the background on our candidates? Now, I don't mean the pregnancy rumors, as again, that was largely untouched (and if you want to go with it on the basis that it was a cable news talking point, that's fantastic, but there's so much bullshit that is a cable news talking point, that we'd have to critically talk about everything that Bill O or Olbermann says. The MSM sites treated the pregnancy rumor the right way)
It wasn't muckraking, it was simply journalism. In the quest to find out information about a candidate, the news organizations are the ones responsible for it. Why should they be in trouble for reporting the news?
Is Palin not the target of the trooper probe? Did she not originally support the Bridge to Nowhere? Did she not say that the war was a task from God? Are these things not relevant?
I personally feel that people watched Palin because they had no idea what to expect. That was another thing about her, besides the barrage of information that was bound to come out, people had no idea about her. They wanted to know. Likeability is different than political support. Just look at Reagan and Clinton (Bill)
Her attack on Washington and media elite fascinated me, because really, the only media elite are the people in charge, and that's not a large number. And one of those elite is Murdoch, and I seriously doubt that was directed at him. As far as the Washington elite went, well.... is McCain not a member of the Washington elite? What exactly is "elite?" Why are liberals elite and not conservatives? I don't ask the questions expecting an answer, nor believing that in a greater sense, Obama isn't "elite." But, by my lewd and crude definition, she's pretty elite herself, holding one of only 50 possible positions in the U.S.
ETA: I know that what I have said sounds like I am a kool-aid drinking Obama supporter. I'm really not. I haven't given him a dime, I didn't sign up for the text message, nor have I campaigned for him. In fact, all of the Obama support on campus was annoying the hell out of me when it first started. It's just that McCain had a chance to go after swing voters but instead he went for the base, something that the Republican party has continued to play footsie with over the past eight years. Yet, McCain wants us to think that something is different. If something was really different, he would have been a true maverick and purportedly stood up to Rove and chosen Lieberman. (which probably would have been political suicide, I admit) However, he's sticking with the establishment, despite claiming change. Maybe as as a matter of survival McCain realized that he couldn't be the person he was in 2000 if he wanted to be president. That's politics. I should have expected it.
__________________
Quoth David Banner: "Like a pimp"
It's not a beer belly. It's a gas tank for a sax machine.
Is Palin not the target of the trooper probe? Did she not originally support the Bridge to Nowhere? Did she not say that the war was a task from God? Are these things not relevant?
Nick, that isn't the point and you know it. I started the whole tangential conversation by saying that the media SHOULD cover bridge to nowhere, her credentials, what she has done, etc. (as seen here...)
Quote:
I think it is great to rip apart Palin's experience, education, ethics, her views on creationism and abortion, whether she really did take money for the bridge to nowhere before turning it down etc. I'd like to know the truth on all this stuff and any candidate should have this scrutiny.
That IS their role. However, I don't know how you can't see THIS (as a very minor example) as sexist
And correct me, but your posts on 'baby's momma' etc. weren't about the issues. That is my point.
And the point is, it ISN'T news. Saying that she caused her baby's downs syndrome is NOT news. Saying and spreading lies that she didn't give birth to her youngest is NOT news. And frankly, her daughter's boyfriend isn't news. Similarly, if one of Obama's girls has a boyfriend in kindergarten, that also isn't news. Although, his girls aren't ever used by the media. For all the unfair attacks on Obama, none have been about his children. You CAN understand the differences here?
NFL: I think KOS had people blogging comments, which were removed, regarding who was the mother of the 4 month old boy. That is not one of my regular blogs. Marshall Talking Points did not mention this until after the McCain announcement.
Res Romney: He should have been the choice. Why, despite I really don't like him. He is intelligent, and even more important, competent. And while his principles seem to change to whatever electorate he is talking to, he is not evil. Competence, Awake. Needed in a president.
ps - McCain's comments about Chelsea pretty much would open him and his VP to any and all attacks in a 'tit for tat' world. But I will go along with Obama on this, and say leave the kids out of it.
Nick, that isn't the point and you know it. I started the whole tangential conversation by saying that the media SHOULD cover bridge to nowhere, her credentials, what she has done, etc. (as seen here...)
That IS their role. However, I don't know how you can't see THIS (as a very minor example) as sexist
And correct me, but your posts on 'baby's momma' etc. weren't about the issues. That is my point.
And the point is, it ISN'T news. Saying that she caused her baby's downs syndrome is NOT news. Saying and spreading lies that she didn't give birth to her youngest is NOT news. And frankly, her daughter's boyfriend isn't news. Similarly, if one of Obama's girls has a boyfriend in kindergarten, that also isn't news. Although, his girls aren't ever used by the media. For all the unfair attacks on Obama, none have been about his children. You CAN understand the differences here?
But since when did something I bring up on this board or anywhere be an example of the MSM's coverage of Palin? What does that have to do with anything? I'm not talking about this board, or the conspiracy theorists out there. I'm talking about the people getting paid to bring us the news. Last I checked, yes, I have a journalism degree, but no, I wasn't being paid to post things on this board.
While I don't think it is fair to question her parenting skills, like others have said, she has opened the door to that argument because of her public stances on sex issues. IS her daughter getting knocked up her fault? No. But, there's that contradiction there and people are going to point that out.
And I don't understand what the Obama girls have to do with this. If Bristol Palin is not pregnant, very few people know the names of Sarah's children. Plain and simple. However--like I said earlier--since she is the first major candidate to have a pregnant teenage daughter, the focus is going to be shifted. It's inevitable.
__________________
Quoth David Banner: "Like a pimp"
It's not a beer belly. It's a gas tank for a sax machine.
While I don't think it is fair to question her parenting skills, like others have said, she has opened the door to that argument because of her public stances on sex issues. IS her daughter getting knocked up her fault? No. But, there's that contradiction there and people are going to point that out.
I know Pete and PMDL debated that point in this thread or another, but I still don't buy that point, Nick. If there was evidence that Sen. Palin had preached one way and acted another, I think there is contradiction. For example, if Palin tried to sneak her daughter off to get an abortion - big contradiction. Or, we found out that Palin was seen at Sam's Club purchasing a 200 count box of condoms to hand out to her kiddos - that would be a contradiction. The fact that her daughter is pregnant doesn't reveal a contradiction, IMHO. For all we know, Bristol's finance used a condom and it broke.
I know Pete and PMDL debated that point in this thread or another, but I still don't buy that point, Nick. If there was evidence that Sen. Palin had preached one way and acted another, I think there is contradiction. For example, if Palin tried to sneak her daughter off to get an abortion - big contradiction. Or, we found out that Palin was seen at Sam's Club purchasing a 200 count box of condoms to hand out to her kiddos - that would be a contradiction. The fact that her daughter is pregnant doesn't reveal a contradiction, IMHO. For all we know, Bristol's finance used a condom and it broke.
Good point. (doing the math) she got pregnant before she got married too.
ETA: according to thinkprogress, she has supported the use of contraceptives, so my point is amended.
__________________
Quoth David Banner: "Like a pimp"
It's not a beer belly. It's a gas tank for a sax machine.
And I don't understand what the Obama girls have to do with this. If Bristol Palin is not pregnant, very few people know the names of Sarah's children.
I disagree totally. As soon as she was nominated, places like Daily Kos had tons of posts on whether Sarah is actually the mother of Trig. At that point, no one knew her daughter was pregnant. Therefore, within the first day, and for NO reason, people started involving her kids.
Nick, do you remember:
Any coverage of John Edwards daughters? Ever? Especially the first day on a lie?
John Kerry's daughters?
Obama's daughters?
Al Gore's daughters?
Liberman's?
Hell, Jack Kemp's kids (does he have kids?)
Every one of them had their kids on stage, said they loved their kids, etc.
I read a fair amount of political articles and I can NEVER recall an article about any of them. If you can't think of any articles, can you explain why "sarah is at fault for her kid's downs syndrome, Sarah secretly hid her daughters pregnancy and Trig isn't hers"...why was that the storyline few hours after nomination?
The first GOP female is elected and it is "scandal" the very first day that someone Sarah wasn't Trig's mom. And while you aren't the MSM, you also didn't invent the story up. I watched television, I SAW it on television. A LOT in that first day. Do you really not see the point I'm making or do you just not agree with the point?
Linear Mode
