Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 371 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Ed Schultz, Partisan Hack on Sarah Palin Pregnancy Mud. Keep the Kids Out of It.

In response to news that Sarah Palin’s young daughter is pregnant, radio talk show host Ed Schultz just spent a segment huffing and fluttering about it all, then uttered the following over the air:

Well, the Republicans released a statement accusing the Democrats of mudslinging on this. I just say, if it’s mud, then why did the McCain campaign send out a press release about it?

Would you want Ed Schultz taking to the national airwaves to talk about your young kid’s faults? How cheap.

What utter bullshit to suggest that if a campaign sends out a press release about their own candidates or candidates’ families, then what they’re responding to can’t be mud. By the same logic, the utterly unfounded claims that Barack Obama doesn’t have a birth certificate (secret foreigner!) or is only faking his Christianity (secret Muslim!) aren’t mud because the Obama campaign has sent out press releases responding to those claims.

The reason that the McCain campaign sent out a press release about Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy is because of the personal mudslinging bullshit that goes on regarding candidates’ families. Yes, from the Democratic Party too.

Would everybody please show some empathy and keep Sarah Palin’s kids out of it, just like Al Gore’s kids should have been kept out of it, just like George W. Bush’s daughters should have been kept out of it, just like John McCain’s adopted daughter should have been kept out of it? Keep the kids out of it. Unless you’re a trivial person, it’s not the real reason you’re against Sarah Palin for Vice President. I mean, please. On her youngest child, if she becomes Vice President, she’ll get a fucking nanny. Duh. That’s what Presidents have done for a century at least. Is it only an issue with you because she’s a mother and not a father? And come on, anybody’s kid can fuck up, figuratively and literally. If you are going to push for judging adults for everything their kids do, you’d better hope your son or daughter is an absolute saint. Sainthood is a fiction.

What matters is that Sarah Palin is unfamiliar with the job of the Vice President, is unfamiliar with foreign affairs, is unfamiliar with national politics, wants to use the public schools to have her religion shoved down your kids’ throat, is interested in taking away women’s freedom to marry and to control their own bodies, and is a drill-happy mistress of the oil industry whose version of “taking on the oil companies” was to chastise the oil companies for not drilling the hell out of our natural preserves faster. On the issue of sex and kids, what matters (as J. Clifford’s pointed out) is that Sarah Palin doesn’t want kids whose hormones are raging to have any form of sex ed that actually is education about sex.

Those are the issues with Sarah Palin that matter.

Have some compassion for her kids and please keep them out of it.

7 comments to Ed Schultz, Partisan Hack on Sarah Palin Pregnancy Mud. Keep the Kids Out of It.

  • Wait a minute, Jim. These things matter – not because Sarah Palin appears to be a neglectful mother, which she does, but because Sarah Palin supports right wing policies that hack and slash community resources for supporting our children. She opposes reasonable science education. She opposes reproductive choice for women who find out that they have Down’s Syndrome fetuses. She opposes comprehensive sex education.

    These family issues are relevant because Sarah Palin wants to force her family’s values on everyone else, and her family’s struggles show that the Palin model for family bliss doesn’t always work out as Palin’s ideology says it should.

    No, we shouldn’t be attacking Bristol Palin, but yes, we should be pointing out the neglectful right wing policies that made her pregnancy so easy. No, we shouldn’t say that Sarah Palin can’t be a Vice President because she has an infant with Down’s Syndrome, but yes, we should point out that the right wing claim that we can just do away with abortions and everything will work out fine isn’t realistic, and we should point out that if Sarah Palin were not in the position of being able to hire nannies, she would have a lifetime of extremely hard mothering ahead of her, and might not be able to go back to work for quite some time.

  • AT

    Sorry Jim, I totally agree with J. Clifford here. If Sarah Palin wants to tell everyone that abstinence only education works, then the fact that it hasn’t worked in her family is relevent. Palin could have kept her child out of this by refusing to accept the nomination for VP. Nobody twisted her arm.

    Regardless of this scandal, she is an incredibly wreckless choice for VP. That she will have a chance at taking the presidency should McCain win and subsequently die should scare the hell out of us all.

  • Jim

    AT, you could have kept your family out of this by not posting your comment. Nobody twisted your arm.

    So please inform us in detail of any embarrassing sexual escapades in your immediate family. It’s entirely relevant if I want to be able to evaluate the basis for your statement.

  • Ralph

    I don’t think we should avoid what are, to me at least, the obvious ironies here.

    I mean, after all the hay the Republicans made out of a semen stain on a dress, they suddenly want privacy?

    They’ve got a long record as the anti-privacy party. They are in favor of massive government spying on Americans and parental consent laws, and against the privacy rights of pregnant women.

    They’ve also got a really long record of making “political hay” (a term we’ll hear more than once before this is done) out of what ought to be private–family, religion, sexual orientation…

    Now they want a pregnant teenager’s privacy to be respected. OK, yes, I agree. But why this one in particular?

    In addition, this pregnancy undermines a lot of conservative myths:
    Teenage pregnancies won’t happen in “good” families.
    Abstinence-only education prevents teenage pregnancies.

    Why should the Palin family be granted privacy when the Republican party wants to take privacy away from the rest of us?

    The ironies are tremendous, and I think we should talk about them.

  • I don’t think its wrong to suggest that
    ” if you cannot manage or control your children ”
    then in some shape or another
    ” you might not manage the country as well as I would want you to ” …

    Seriously.

  • AT

    Jim, why do I need to remind you that Im not running for the second highest office in our country? Are you really not wise enough to see the distinction?

  • Jim

    I’m afraid that no, I am not that wise. Tell me what the distinction is that merits dragging a kid into it but not dragging your kid into it when we are talking about the same issue.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>