Statement from Sarah and Todd Palin

ARLINGTON, VA — Today, Sarah and Todd Palin issued the following statement regarding today’s Reuters story:

“We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us. Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support.

“Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family. We ask the media to respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates.”


  1. Sounds like a message from parents who were not engaged in the upbringing of their kid. Having children is a serious position of responsibility. Having kids isn’t hard – raising them into productive and responsible adults is the hard work. Sounds like the new VP candidate was absent from her daughters upbringing.

    The whole thing about Palin is offensive. The rush to appoint a running mate regardless of qualifications, all in an effort and panic to get the vote – no matter what – this is someone who appears to be nice enough but without any experience. We know she’s been an absent parent of her own kids. I’m really dismayed about the republican party they let us down with poor choices this election. I’ll probably vote for Obama.

  2. Would you like to rephrase that, Wilson828? I’ll give you a few hours before I rip you to shreds.

  3. nope….. no retraction of my impression and opinion.

  4. Talk is cheap isn’t it…. so much for being effective … you don’t see this as an important indicator of future performance of an important govt leader? If not, then by what measures do you hold as a standard of performance? Granted this is one, but it says something.

    Palin backed abstinence education
    Posted: 02:00 PM ET

    (CNN) – Sarah Palin, who announced on Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, indicated during her run for Alaska governor that she was a firm supporter of abstinence-only education in schools.

    In a 2006 Eagle Forum questionnaire, Palin indicated that she supported funding abstinence-until-marriage education programs instead of teaching sex-education programs.

    “Explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support,” Palin wrote in the conservative group’s questionnaire.

  5. Ok, then I’ll give it my best shot.

    First, I don’t think it has anything to do with Joe Biden’s vice-presidential bid that his teenage son fathered a child out of wedlock. Children sometimes behave in ways we wish they would not, but that doesn’t mean the parents are at fault. (Yes, I reversed this situation to suggest how ridiculous it is to make Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy an issue.)

    It’s wonderful that Obama is nice and photogenic, but I think he lacks experience to be at the top of the ticket. It’s not like Biden is running for POTUS and Obama’s the VP pick. That might work better.

    Obama’s going to miss his daughters’ childhood if he’s elected, so it’s really a good idea that he’s defeated next November. We’d be doing him a favor I’m sure he’ll appreciate in the years to come, especially since Obama’s wife is a big-shot attorney and isn’t home every day to make sure her daughters are perfect through the teen years.

    Do you have children? Do you work? It’s hard to believe that you would damn a working woman and exonerate a working man in this day and age, but that sure sounds like what you’ve just done.

  6. You’ve done better. This is not your best shot. Maybe because it’s a holiday – I dunno – but this was feeble at best. Back to the yard chair, beer and brat with you!

    And while you’re in your yard chair think about this …. if McCain dies (because he’s old) you’ll have Palin as Prez… right? Feel comfy?

    The Republican party has presented a disappointing candidate this cycle. And I’m a republican.

  7. Cindy, the issue is not whether a parent has a child involved in an unplanned, out-of-wedlock pregnancy; the issue is that particular parent’s fairly untenable position on sex ed previous to her daughter deciding not to “abstain” as requested. That’s what makes it an issue and a sad irony.

  8. Calling this a sad irony is appropriate. Saying that Sarah Palin is responsible for her daughter’s pregnancy is not. (I had just been reading about the abstinence stance – that’s something new to me.)

    Wilson828 – I’ll tell you something quite firmly. I’d much rather have Sarah Palin as President than Barack Obama. I also think that McCain’s health is fine. Remember Obama has a history of drug abuse, and that can weaken a person’s body in unexpected ways. I’ll take old and freckled over young and strung out.

  9. Now Cindy, let me tell you something quite firmly, that you’re being emotional and sexist in your statement about choosing Palin as Prez. This is someone who was announced just 3 days ago as a VP candidate – with 3 days of candidate knowledge on issues you’re already jumping behind her to support her as a Prez candidate? And we’ve only just begun to learn of her … most recently we’ve been discussing one small facet of her character. You’re slinging mud and you should take the emotion out of it. Or is this only because she’s a woman and so are you? Away with you … you … you …. you … Brookfield mommy! Back to your yard chair!


  11. Wilson828, you are disgusting. I’d hide behind a screen name, too, if I were as ignorant as you.

    CJ, you’re right. We’ve all got ’em.

  12. I made a valid point….. no one is hiding behind anything. Easy to call names and discount someone’s opinion isn’t it Cindy? Why even post this topic if you didn’t care to debate it fairly? You are disingenuous to say the least.

  13. Disingenuous? I don’t think I’ll worry about your opinion since you’ve repeatedly told me to go back to my yard chair.

    If you’ve made a valid point it’s been awfully hard to find in all of your name calling and finger pointing. And we can debate it fairly as soon as you answer if you are a parent, and if you have worked.

  14. You’re silly. I am a parent and I have and do work.

    This conversation from me is closed.

    Anyone reading this thread will see it for what it is.

    Tune into CNN, MSNBC or FoxNews and they are at the convention and it’s all about Palin and her current list of issues.

    You’re well suited to your blog, travel trips and other silly business …. I’m sorry I engaged you in conversation.

  15. Wilson is another jerk who crawled out of the sewer to make attacks on Republicans. Why is it that the Democrats are so evil and hateful? Their plans for the Republican convention are despicable! What a bunch of losers! Can’t win on ideas, so they try it with evil tactics. If you watch CNN or MSNBC it’s no wonder your brain doesn’t function anymore. Get lost loser!

  16. Grant, you’re headed to the Holy Land! You don’t need this stuff.


  17. Shawn Matson says:

    In all fairness, Grant, if Palin was a Democrat I could easily see you ripping her to shreds about how she must have supported a “impure” lifestyle or some other garbage. You’re a star at those same tactics that Wilson just employed.

    That being said, I don’t really think that this is anyone’s business. I don’t think it should be politicized. However, the reason why it’s such a controversy for me is that McCain showed a serious lack of executive judgment with the Palin pick.

    Not because she’s pregnant. CJ hit the mark for me on that. I don’t even necessarily see it as being “wrong” as Grant and other more conservative people might. I see it as troubling because she’s probably not mature enough to raise a kid (lord knows I’m not). But then again, some of the best kings, queens, lords, and ladies were born unto teenagers.

    So just hear me out.

    We’re learning now that most in the McCain campaign didn’t know about the pregnancy (or her flip-flop on the Ketchikan bridge to nowhere, her fundraising for Sen. Stevens’ 527 etc) until Palin announced it. We’re not even sure McCain knew about it when he picked her.

    This was an unserious pick–not because of her qualifications or lack-thereof, but because the McCain camp didn’t vet her. They made a hasty decision. And a hasty decision can get you blow up–or pregnant.

    Cindy, I think it’s unreasonable to say that Palin is more equipped for the presidency than Obama. He has actual positions on issues, 12 years in (real) government, and a background in constitutional law. And if that’s not enough, he has at least a general interest in issues relevant to the presidency (foreign policy for example which she shows no evidence of even thinking about). Palin simply doesn’t measure up–it’s not about her politics. It’s about her resume and thoughtfulness.

    At the very very very least, Obama is just as qualified as Palin (though that’s not in the realm of reality).

    Reader’s digest version: Leave Bristol alone. McCain had a huge lapse of judgment. Obama isn’t incredibly experienced–but Palin is less qualified. Americans don’t want experience.

  18. Americans don’t want experience. Americans want handouts.

  19. Shawn, I’m not sure the McCain camp was hasty. I think they were cut out.

    Another perspective on the judgment question below. I think Brooks is basically correct, McCain choose a mini-me for VP. She sounds like a great governor (the last interview I saw with her was like an infomercial for her state), but not necessarily a great president or veep.

  20. Palin is more qualified than the Democrats’ choice for POTUS. 143 days in the Senate, coach for ACORN recruits, Project Vote worker are not exactly executive qualifications. You can compare Obama’s past associates: Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, etc. to Palin’s 17 yr. old daughter. Palin isn’t even the Presidential choice, she’s nominated for VP. Now which one is the candidate of “change”?

  21. Kathryn, i’d ask you to read this:

    Also, the reports are that the vetting team arrived in Alaska the day before she was chosen. To me that alone demonstrates the lack of vetting. But I think she also held out as well.

    Lucky Lady, please show me the 143 days in the Senate evidence. You’ve been spouting that talking point for a few weeks. Give me the ACORN evidence as well. Then we’ll talk.

    And did anyone hear that now on the news they are talking about Palin’s term as mayor where she raised spending my 33%, taxes by 38%, and left the city with a $20 million+ deficit when she was handed a city with zero debt?

    Sounds like the same old Republican fiscal irresponsibility to me.

  22. Shawn, I’ll give you the Acorn evidence when I get back. You are smart enough to find it yourself, but I’m sure you’d prefer to hide it.

    By the way, linking to another opinion isn’t always a great way to prove your point. Everyone wants to say Palin wasn’t vetted to smear McCain’s pick, but I doubt that’s the case. You don’t do your reputation any favors given your past links to the Daily Kos.

    143 days is all out there – the number of working days between Obama being sworn into the Senate and then announcing his presidential campaign. He felt after that time (I read one woman proclaiming she had stuff in her refrigerator longer than that!) he was ready to lead. 143 days is about 6 working months.

    If you want to see what growth does to a community and taxes, look at Brookfield in the nineties. You fail to compare the rise in spending with the rise in municipal obligations.

  23. Thanks Shawn; I didn’t make my point clear. I was not suggesting that she had been properly vetted and pulled the wool over their eyes, but that McCain didn’t give his folks the option. He went with his gut.

    Another leader who doesn’t feel the need for smart advisers? Don’t know, but it’s worrisome.

  24. Right, Kathryn, because it’s not like you’ve made up your mind or anything…

  25. Shawn Matson says:

    I linked to the article to show the list of Palin’s scandals, Cindy, not for the other person’s opinion. But you knew that.

    And Cindy, he was a State Senator for 8 years prior. Last night on Charlie Rose they had a great discussion of what makes a good president, and the scholars present (Doris Kearns Goodwin included, one of my favorite voices) agreed that experience wasn’t that important in the end. They noted the case of Harry Truman…which really hit home from me.

    Do you know what Truman’s resume looked like before he was selected to be FDR’s VP? He was, to put it lightly, a has-been. Bush/Cheney, the hallmark of experience, has ruined this nation.

    And so then you doubt that McCain didn’t vet her. Well the campaign admits their vetting team didn’t arrive until less than 24 hours before she was selected to be the running mate. Either your doubt is because of your loyalty to McCain, or you know something I don’t. I doubt it’s the latter.

    And my past links to the Daily Kos pale in comparison to Palin’s links to an Alaskan secessionist party from 1994-1996. And those “links” are a paltry sum.

    Your bawking about the taxes point is just an excuse to ignore the fact that she created over $20 million in debt. If a Democrat had done that you’d be all over them, Cindy.

    You’re fairly biased. I’m sure you’d say I am too. But I admit that.

  26. Lucky Lady says:

    Shawn, try this: There’s a lot of reading, so take your time. Be sure to go to the end where they offer: Obama’s Position and Voting Record & Notes. I have seen his connection to Saul Alinsky, Industrial Areas Foundation, Marxism and many other things. I’ll find those links another time. Gotta run.

  27. Here’s more evidence she wasn’t vetted, if you really needed it:

  28. No, barring any great drama, my mind is made up. Still not ready to divide the country into good and evil, though.

  29. Whoa, Shawn. No wonder you’re having trouble making good decisions. You’ve relied on a NYTimes article with an unnamed source as proof. I wouldn’t plan on quitting that day job any time soon.

    I’ll put up with you for a couple of days, but I’m shutting you off Shawn, while I’m gone. I’ll put you back in when I come back.

    By the way – Truman was selected to be a VP. Notice any places to compare/contrast?

    Your last two points fail. You run from the Daily Kos by throwing up a smokescreen, then you ignore the issue that taxes go up with a community’s growth by whining about me.

    (PS – yes, I’m a whole lot harder on Shawn than the rest of you. There’s a reason. He’s a well-trained debater than knows when and how to muddy an argument he’s losing.)

  30. I’ve been reading in various media accounts that McCain’s first two choices were vetoed by Republican party leaders who promised a floor fight at the convention if he put an another abortion-rights advocate on the ticket.

    I, for one, can imagine a guy like McCain – fairly impulsive, likes to think of himself as a gunslinger, reputation for kicking back at authority – staring those folks down and then saying, “All right you SOB’s. I pick [hand waving over photos] ….. HER. Satisfied, you %$%^^*s? Now, go make hay from THAT.”

    Because this is a fact: A combat pilot must believe he or she WILL NEVER DIE; they are effective because they deny their own mortality. Given that, why would McCain take seriously the idea that he needs a successor? As far as he’s concerned, he could have picked a potted plant.

    So why NOT go for the stunt nomination? And how can anyone thoroughly vet a nomination made on impulse (perhaps vindictively)?

    Met her face-to-face a few days before selecting her? Win or lose, you gotta admire the coconuts on the guy. However. I’d hate to see one of his impulsive “F.U.” moments played out on the world stage.

  31. Lucky Lady says:

    Shawn, did you get a chance to read the link I supplied? It’s all good reading, but the ACORN stuff starts at about paragraph 15 when they start talking about Saul Alinsky. is a great wealth of information. At the home page, you can look up organizations and individuals and get some background info. They’ve got listings of subversives, terrorists and even Hollywood elites. Very interesting reading.