I don't think it [sic] an exaggeration to say that this girl (and her boyfriend) have caused a crisis of global significance, and if her parents are serious about "the responsibilities of adulthood," Bristol ought to face the consequences, including about 45 minutes in front of the klieg lights while reporters shout stupid questions.
Right, that's not an exaggeration at all, dude. Jesus. Look, teenage girls in podunk towns get knocked up all the time. There's not much else to do. It even happens to the children of politicians, seeing as how they are just as vulnerable to the effects of hormones and such.
I think the situation is mildly humorous, in the sense that McCain's campaign has turned into one of those "if it warn't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all" narratives. Other than that, I couldn't care less. It's not a profound statement on Roe v. Wade either way, nor is it the "crisis of global significance" that pathological meatballs like Stacy McCain (no relation, one hopes, to Straight Talk) are howling about. Get a fuckin' grip, bro-ham.
Bristol Palin, like any other child of a politician, is probably proud of what her mother is doing, but she didn't sign on to have her life serve as a palimpsest for emotionally unstable cybergoons to trace their projected anxieties upon. Her situation might somewhat defuse the silly clamoring over how being a mother of five automatically translates into the kind of leadership skills required to manage a complicated, interdependent global empire. And it emphasizes yet again how little vetting was done by Straight Talk's team, and how impulsive he himself is when it comes to important decisions, which reveal more and more about his decision-making process, such as it is. And you would think it would make the abstinence-only obsessives (such as, um, Sarah Palin) rethink their ridiculous assumptions, but of course you'd be wrong on that one.
But that's about it. I'd bet that if most of us just stood back from this one, we'd see how quickly some of these goofballs descend on the poor girl, as if her personal choice was any of their goddamned business. By their fruits shall you know them, as they say.
[link via Atrios]
3 comments:
Her situation might somewhat defuse the silly clamoring over how being a mother of five automatically translates into the kind of leadership skills required to manage a complicated, interdependent global empire. And it emphasizes yet again how little vetting was done by Straight Talk's team, and how impulsive he himself is when it comes to important decisions,
I find myself agreeing with John Caruso about the whole "experience" trope, and I have to say that I don't think McCain choosing her was a sudden impulse as much as a grudging need to do something for the snake-handlers, who don't like him already and without whom the Republicans have no chance of winning anything.
*...the ludicrous notion that it requires "experience" to be the figurehead at the top of the pyramid of American empire. Do these people really think Palin lacks the experience to implement the corporate agenda at every turn, to cater obsessively to the interests of the wealthy and privileged, to bellow and posture and order up a fresh helping of bombs for the people of yet another helpless nation, to mouth the platitudes that pacify us with the illusion of substance and the seductive doctrine of American exceptionalism? Call me crazy, but I think she'd somehow manage it.
I don't think McCain choosing [Palin] was a sudden impulse as much as a grudging need to do something for the snake-handlers, who don't like him already and without whom the Republicans have no chance of winning anything.
The story that's floating around is that McCain wanted Lieberman, his campaign and party advisors wanted Romney. Palin is seen as basically an impulsive compromise. The obvious lack of vetting and preparation shows exactly how much of a gut pick she was.
Being a bit of an anarcho-syndicalist at heart, I can definitely relate to what people like Caruso and IOZ and Dennis Perrin (and many others) have been saying. I agree that even if Obama wins, the new boss ain't gonna be all that different from the old boss, at least not to the extent that his true believers need to believe.
And I acknowledged earlier that if McCain pulls this out, probably very few of the advisory staff will change at all. McCain will get the same dunderheaded policy advice from the same bottomless well of stupid-ade the PNAC crowd has in their back yard. No mystery there. So yeah, the experience thing is a bit overrated to begin with.
But it's also not entirely hypocritical for libs and pwogs and such to cry foul over that question. The conservatards brought it up and beat it into the ground, and now they think they've turned the tables with an unknown who is ideologically planted in the 19th century. There's not as much daylight between the two sides as most of us would like on every issue, but the differences are actually substantial.
The corporate fascist data-mining state ain't going anywhere. But for now it's a start to put the least destructive set of policies put into place, and roll back the Cheney regime's excesses where possible.
I think voters' expectations, not just the candidates themselves, merit some serious vetting as well. Too many people, of either party, seem to regard the candidates as empty vessels, avatars of "change", whatever that is. But they don't seem to want to change themselves, which is why we keep ending up here.
Hi
I think these are so nice informations for us.
Post a Comment