Looks like McCain has picked his VP...

Hobbes

is_that_so wrote: »

I would imagine she's more likely to get sympathy than opprobrium.

I am not sure how she would get sympathy for her actions prior to delivering. If anything I would have more respect for her if the daughter story was true. As her actions would be more along the lines of pro-choice then pro-life at the delivery point.

While I agree with the reasoning for removing kids pictures, it is seen as damage control.

Here is how I see it played.
1. daughter part is false, so the repubs will emphasize on that while trying to distract from the actions prior to delivery. In fact they will push this hard and fast so media are pushed in that direction and it dies out in a week or so.

2. The daughter part is true. This works great from the pro-life'ers as it means she was protecting her daughter to have a proper life and keeping the child alive. however it means she lied to the public, more importantly lied on official documents. So pull out an adoption papers or something like that. If that is the case then in Rove style the media will be allowed to whip itself into a frenzy for a while at which point Palin will eventually will ante up the documents and ask her family be left alone, blah, blah, blah. *liberal media* can be blamed for attacking her children.

Hobbes

OK this is the picture that KOS links to as March 9th (called Best of 08).

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/v-gallery/story/339587.html?/news/alaska/v-enlarge/story/339587-a339583-t3.html

Appears a new page has appeared which claims the picture is now from 2006.

http://www.adn.com/photos/v-gallery/story/509850.html?/1521/gallery/509852-a509987-t3.html

Numbering on html is even higher.

BenjAii

is_that_so wrote: »

I can understand that. Our Bertie asked the media here to stay away from his kids. Mary McAleese's kids do not make the news nor do Cowens' nor Kenny's.

Well she can hardly be bothered about that can she ? as she has had them all trotted out for People magazine this week.

I wonder will this story gain a life of its own as the Obama is Muslim emails did.

If any of the Kos Daily stories "facts" ( given with more brevity here http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-69834 ) do prove to be true, it makes her actions very suspicious. Especially with regard to the 8 hour flight while in labour, if that were true it would be utterly bizzare behaviour.

I remain a sceptic on all of this, it is just too outlandish that the Repulicans would not have had her vetted.

GuanYin

Oh this is nonsense. That girl obviously just has puppy fat, and as medical records are under Federal and not state control, she would have to have some very powerful and stupid friends to change medical records.

Hobbes, I've seen plenty of women come to deliver who did not look pregnant, it depends entirely on the woman.

Besides any of which THIS

Bristol is pregnant in these pictures. She is not carrying belly fat, which grows outwardly wide, and does not become dome-shaped. That's because fat is generally evenly distributed around the abdomen and a fetus is not. Bristol's chest is sticking out, a normal body reaction when sucking in stomach muscles.

Is just pure stupidity.


Regarding african american voting, I have no doubt that they are voting for Obama, I said I would like to see proof it is racially motivated. I don't see anything there that proves that.

As for Obama Vs Palin, only in your mind. Here we tend to compare tickets, and the aspects of the ticket. I think Biden is at the moment, above scrutiny, McCain, Obama and Palin will be focused on until they find a skeleton in Biden's closet.

Hobbes

BenjAii wrote: »

Well she can hardly be bothered about that can she ? as she has had them all trotted out for People magazine this week.

Found a recent comment that stated the other day the baby and the girl in question were left in on the bus while the rest of the family were paraded.

The pictures looked different. I did a check and the 2006 picture is in fact the March 9th one with a soften filter applied to it and shunk very slightly. Can see this if you zoom in you can still see the previous jpg artifacts generated.

The iReport link gives a better breakdown then KOS.

Hobbes, I've seen plenty of women come to deliver who did not look pregnant, it depends entirely on the woman.

Well here is a picture of her pregnant (undated, but pretty sure it wasn't this year).
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080831/capt.529a19dfc6774f308117d4be16d30c8d.veepstakes_palin_ak516.jpg?x=229&y=345&q=85&sig=5f7FFPyR6pApAkrAXznM1w--

If it was any one-two things it wouldn't even be an issue. The time from when the leak was to when she got delivered is well over 10 hours (9 hours from when the speech took place). Her speech wasn't at 4am when the first time it was reported. From what I have found so far on that day what she did was tantamount to inducing a miscarriage. She did pretty much everything your not supposed to do.

BenjAii

To be fair, if you look at the People magazine photo I linked to earlier, the daughter seems to still have exactly the same (or more) fat, that everone is attributing to her pregnancy.

Hobbes wrote: »

Found a recent comment that stated the other day the baby and the girl in question were left in on the bus while the rest of the family were paraded.

The pictures looked different. I did a check and the 2006 picture is in fact the March 9th one with a soften filter applied to it and shunk very slightly. Can see this if you zoom in you can still see the previous jpg artifacts generated.

The iReport link gives a better breakdown then KOS.



Well here is a picture of her pregnant (undated, but pretty sure it wasn't this year).
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080831/capt.529a19dfc6774f308117d4be16d30c8d.veepstakes_palin_ak516.jpg?x=229&y=345&q=85&sig=5f7FFPyR6pApAkrAXznM1w--

If it was any one-two things it wouldn't even be an issue.

Sand

Story sounds ludicrous and is based on conjecture, and hope more than anything else. Wheres the facts?

Wheres the doctor who delivered Bristol Palins daughter? Who faked the birth cert? Wheres the father?

All there is currently to hang this "story" on is that Bristol Palin was sick for several months. Woopdie doo. Everything else is assumptions that because Sarah Palin didnt act like the Daily Kos believes she should [ She travelled home to have her child ..... what a terrible mother she is, probably she caused the baby to have Downs Syndrome because she was such a terrible mother] she obviously was engaged in a grand conspiracy. No one notes that Palin contacted her doctor and got the okay to fly back to Alaska. No no, Daily Kos can diagnose the situation better than Palins doctors can. Palin, having already had 4 children and probably having some experience on the issue didnt seem to consider it a problem to fly back. But what does she know about it?

Its handy how she was thoughtful enough to be really bad at this conspiracy and leave loads of circumstansial evidence [ including photographing her daughter for the Anchorage Daily News, despite apparently hiding her daughter from the public...] around for gossiping purposes.

And I am wondering what the point of the story is?

Scenario A - Sarah Palin is the mother. Its a smear job. It will backfire badly on the Dems, much like CNNs botched smear job on Bush's military record.

Scenario B - Bristol Palin is the mother [ hey, lets consider the possibility..]. Sarah Palin acted to protect her daughter AND without compromising her views on abortion whilst doing so. Again, no traction for Dems - if anything it will backfire badly on the Dems as people sympathise with Palin and get angry at the Dems for muck raking.

Its just rumour mongering+bile and hatred [ see the comments on the Daily Kos story....bitterness...] blinding the Dems to the foolishness of what theyre engaged in. The justification of her pro-life views for the gossiping is ludicrous - is anyone suggesting that as a pro-lifer, if you find your daughter pregnant the morally correct thing to do is force her to have an abortion?

Sarah Palin wont be the first female politician to be attacked on the grounds of being a bad mother because shes a career politician. Probably wont be the last either.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift was the first governor to give birth in office. She had twins in 2001. She faced criticism for missteps involving her children, including asking aides to baby-sit.

If the Republicans had done something similar to Clinton, Democrats would literally have kittens about it.

Hobbes

Sand wrote: »

Story sounds ludicrous and is based on conjecture, and hope more than anything else. Wheres the facts?

Well like you I take what is written on KOS with a pinch of salt. Which is why I went through all the material to what was true/false. The daughter being the mother is the only thing that is speculation/conjecture.

Wheres the doctor who delivered Bristol Palins daughter?

If it is the same one who suggested she do a speech/fly/drive back to Alaska then in jail hopefully.

Who faked the birth cert?

Where are you getting faked birth cert from? Your referring to my comments, then it is really the only thing she could be hung on if it was true (everything else works for her not against her) and if it was I suspect she would have adoption papers to cover that.

All there is currently to hang this "story" on is that Bristol Palin was sick for several months.

5-8 months with a disease that normally doesn't last longer then 3 months. A disease that makes you loose weight, but a photo at the time the story broke was said to be around March 08 showed she had gained weight.

You also have other news sites reporting that they had spoken to children at the school who have said the saw the daughter pregnant.

She travelled home to have her child ..... what a terrible mother she is,

Travelling on an airplane at 8 months pregnancy is putting the baby at risk. Not getting yourself physically checked out when your water leaks puts the baby at risk. She travelled home only after giving the speech. That is many hours before her water started leaking.

Sorry but you can't spin that as being responsible.

No one notes that Palin contacted her doctor and got the okay to fly back to Alaska.

Actually KOS points that out as well as other sites. What it also points out is that she rang her doctor in Alaska on the phone, she did not get physically checked out by a doctor where she was, which is the correct procedure.

Its handy how she was thoughtful enough to be really bad at this conspiracy and leave loads of circumstansial evidence [ including photographing her daughter for the Anchorage Daily News, despite apparently hiding her daughter from the public...] around for gossiping purposes.

Actually photos have been started to been taken down in the last few days since it started getting mentioned online. Also the anchorage site have since reposted the same picture to a different page claiming it is from 2006.

Scenario A - Sarah Palin is the mother. Its a smear job.

Which is how it will be sold by the Republicans to distract from her actions prior to Trigs birth.

Scenario B - Bristol Palin is the mother

Absolutly, this will work more for her favour. Lying to protect your daughter might be acceptable and goes well for the pro-life people (option A is more pro-choice). Of course as long as she has the correct legal paperwork as well it won't be an issue. But I am sure she will if that is the case.

BenjAii

To be honest there are more seriously worrying things about her, like the fact that she is a supporter of teaching creationalism in schools.

That the Repulicans feel they have to pander to the wacko nutcases who believe in creationalism to get elected in the 21st century is a sad and pathetic state of affairs.

I would have serious doubts about anyones education or intellectual ability (which must both be pretty small) who would be prepared to believe in something as dumb as creationalism

Hobbes

BenjAii wrote: »

To be honest there are more seriously worrying things about her, like the fact that she is a supporter of teaching creationalism in schools.

Agreed!

Btw, people can stop dissing the story based on KOS. Yes as a news site it sucks but it appears that speculation of the daughter being the mother where first released by Alaskan media long before she was announced VP. Only reason it made news in Alaska was due to her strong stance on "abstinence only" form of contraception.

So based on that I am sure the vetting team would be aware of this and how to handle it if it came up.

Sand

Where are you getting faked birth cert from?

If the claim is that Bristol Palin is the mother, then the birth cert would have to be faked to disguise that. So who faked it?

5-8 months with a disease that normally doesn't last longer then 3 months. You also have other news sites reporting that they had spoken to children at the school who have said the saw the daughter pregnant.

Oh, theres a deadline on having this medical problem now is there? If it goes past three months....pregnant.

As for "seeing" the daughter pregnant...seeing as she appears to be carrying some flab [ as a 16 year old girl, she must be loving the attention on her stomach and its fat or lackthereof] Id be curious if these reports came before or after the rumours of her being pregnant were around? Its very likely they could simply have been commenting on her weight, having already heard some dodgy claims about her being pregnant.

Travelling on an airplane at 8 months pregnancy is putting the baby at risk. Not getting yourself physically checked out when your water leaks puts the baby at risk. She travelled home only after giving the speech. That is many hours before her water started leaking.

Sorry but you can't spin that as being responsible.

Palins doctor didnt see any significant risk to the child. Palin, already mother of 4 children, didnt see any significant risk to the child. No complications arose. Possibly, they were right in believing there was no significant risk to the child. Are you claiming you know more about Palins medical condition than her doctor or Palin herself?

Actually photos have been started to been taken down in the last few days since it started getting mentioned online. Also the anchorage site have since reposted the same picture to a different page claiming it is from 2006.

Which doesnt explain why Palin, whilst apparently "hiding" her daughters pregnancy from the world had that same daughter photographed by the newspapers.

Its a bit of a ****ing oversight wouldnt you think?

Which is how it will be sold by the Republicans to distract from her actions prior to Trigs birth.

Whereas the Dems will be arguing shes a bad mother because she made the mistake of checking in with her doctor for his advice on what to do as opposed to checking in with the Daily Kos. Again, a gender based attack. Dems are morons if they keep that up.

Absolutly, this will work more for her favour. Lying to protect your daughter might be acceptable and goes well for the pro-life people (option A is more pro-choice). Of course as long as she has the correct legal paperwork as well it won't be an issue. But I am sure she will if that is the case.

She cant have the correct legal paperwork if Trig is Bristols son. Any record that showed Bristol as the mother would invalidate the whole conspiracy. So it would have to be faked. Theres a 100 year confidentiality on Alaska birth cert records, but with the rumours floating around, there would be intense curiousity amongst the staff maintaining the record and very likely it would be [ and has been ] checked out by staff members.

I mean, with all the people whose silence would need to be bought for this story to hold up they could meet up every year for a charity 11 vs 11 football game.

Its ludicrous. The fact that the Dems are running with it shows just how bitter and hateful their attacks have become.

Hobbes

Sand wrote: »

If the claim is that Bristol Palin is the mother, then the birth cert would have to be faked to disguise that.

Why would it have to be faked? They could just of easily adopted the child. The only picture link I could of Palin with newborn child (and daughter standing beside her) has also been removed from the net.

Oh, theres a deadline on having this medical problem now is there?

Well mono normally only lasts for around 3 months*. It can last longer but is rare.

* this refers to symptoms of the person catching it. You can still spread mono 18 months after through saliva, but should be healthy again long before then.

seeing as she appears to be carrying some flab

Yes this is normal for a 16 year old child. It is not normal for a 16 year old child who is currently suffering from mono.

Palins doctor didnt see any significant risk to the child.

Like I said it was irresponsible of the doctor to not suggest she get checked out locally.

Are you claiming you know more about Palins medical condition than her doctor or Palin herself?

No I read up from the experts that are linked off from the stories I read on it. It says in the case of leakage you should get physically checked out due to risk of infection to the child. You certainly don't wait until well over 10 hours to get physically checked out.

Also not recommended to fly after 6 months without doctors approval and most airlines will not allow a woman to fly at 8 months due to risk to the child and chance of labor in flight.

Its a bit of a ****ing oversight wouldnt you think?

More then one oversight tbh.

She cant have the correct legal paperwork if Trig is Bristols son.

If she was adopted she would.

Theres a 100 year confidentiality on Alaska birth cert records,

And the hospital that Trig was born in lists the babys born on certain those days. You can still see it, although any reference to Trig on that particular day seems to have vanished as well.

The fact that the Dems are running with it

Where are you going "Dems" running with it? If you report it, your suddenly a democrat? o_O

GuanYin

Hobbes wrote: »

Well mono normally only lasts for around 3 months*. It can last longer but is rare.

* this refers to symptoms of the person catching it. You can still spread mono 18 months after through saliva, but should be healthy again long before then.

Incorrect.
You can present with Chronic EBV which can last longer than 6 months. It is unusual in that there is usually an underlying reason but it isn't rare by any medical definition.

Often chronic fatigue syndrome is blamed for presentation of cases of what would be chronic EBV but as many doctors don't recognize CFS we have the term chronic EPV.

Yes this is normal for a 16 year old child. It is not normal for a 16 year old child who is currently suffering from mono.

Incorrect.

While EPV *can* and often does cause weight loss but it isn't a given, it very much differs from person to person.

Like I said it was irresponsible of the doctor to not suggest she get checked out locally.

Would depend on when her last check up was. Doctors are busy, if there is no risk factor there would be no reason.

No I read up from the experts that are linked off from the stories I read on it. It says in the case of leakage you should get physically checked out due to risk of infection to the child. You certainly don't wait until well over 10 hours to get physically checked out.

Probably irresponsible, definitely uncomfortable. I'm surprised. Is this factual or speculative?

Also not recommended to fly after 6 months without doctors approval and most airlines will not allow a woman to fly at 8 months due to risk to the child and chance of labor in flight.

I imagibe state govs differ in this respect.

Who did she fly with?

Manic Moran

So if I understand this correctly, Palins' family says "I've got an idea, we'll pretend my daughter's not pregnant, and I am" (for whatever motivation there happens to be), covers all the bases including making official announcements and finding an excuse to pull the daughter out of school, but nobody who has to be in the know, be it the medical staff or the security-minded State Troopers (All of whom are, so far, keeping admirably mum on the matter) thinks to say "Hey, if we're going to conduct this charade, maybe we should add a bit of padding to the Governor, and make sure that the daughter hides well out of view, otherwise someone might notice that Palin isn't as preggers as she claims to be?"

And while they were at it, they also managed to get the kid to be born with a disease which is far more associated with older mothers than younger ones.

NTM

toiletduck

There seems to be as much evidence for this as there is for Obama being a Muslim.

Seems pretty desperate tbh.

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote: »

So if I understand this correctly...

Well I am more curious as to why at 8 months pregnant she took over 22 and half hours* from when she was leaking amniotic fluid before actually getting to a point where should could be physically checked up by a doctor. Also going from one of the best states for hospitals to a small medical center in a town of less then 6,000 people. Even Seattle or Anchorage would of been a better choice to even get checked up in then waiting for the final destination.

Shows a serious lack of understanding of protecting your child.

Anyway, has been interesting reading around. Learnt more about her in the last few hours then before. For example she supported the bridge to nowhere and spending 15 million for a sports complex where a yearly budget for the town of <6000 was 5 million. Then had to pay 1.7 million to build on the land (which is worth 125K). Then to top it off she raised taxes just as she was leaving office to pay for it.

This whole daughter thing tbh seems more like a distraction from all the other messes she has done.


* I verified the times. 4am from first report Dallas time to approx 11:30pm Anchorage time to arrive at hospital.

Traumadoc

Especially if it was a known DS ,

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote: »

Well I am more curious as to why at 8 months pregnant she took over 22 and half hours* from when she was leaking amniotic fluid before actually getting to a point where should could be physically checked up by a doctor.

Given that she is the Governor, and as such probably has a doctor on staff, is there any reason that he could not have checked her out first, decided she was good for the next twelve hours or so, then let her get on the airplane? Not being a parental type, I am unaware as to just how portable any required equipment may happen to be for such a preliminary examination.

Anyway, has been interesting reading around. Learnt more about her in the last few hours then before. For example she supported the bridge to nowhere and spending 15 million for a sports complex where a yearly budget for the town of <6000 was 5 million. Then had to pay 1.7 million to build on the land (which is worth 125K). Then to top it off she raised taxes just as she was leaving office to pay for it.

Any infrastructure built for a low-density region is more than likely not going to be particularly cost-effective per se. Just look at how many miles of road you need to get from one end of Alaksa to the other vs how many people will be served by it. Is fifteen million too much for a sports complex? If one were not to be built for this town of 6,000, how far would they need to travel to actually play their sports?

NTM

LolaLuv

It seems that everyone is taking this a bit too seriously. Right now it's just a rumor. (A juicy, delicious rumor.:rolleyes:) Nobody on boards knows for sure what the hell happened. What's the point of speculating and e-debating about it? Just let it unfold and we'll all find out in good time.

Overheal

Someone had to say it.

LolaLuv

Overheal wrote: »

Someone had to say it.

Thank you! I was expecting many wonderful lolz and funsies over it, and everyone's arguing! The disappointment!

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote: »

Given that she is the Governor, and as such probably has a doctor on staff,

If she did have she didn't use them.


I see NY Times are reporting that McCain didn't want her, he wanted Lieberman. She was picked to placate the far right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/us/politics/31reconstruct.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1220248873-xb3HzAj3VHtjVHtdjHqNTQ

amacachi

Hobbes wrote:

I see NY Times are reporting that McCain didn't want her, he wanted Lieberman. She was picked to placate the far right.

Duh.

Hobbes

amacachi wrote: »

Duh.

Thank you for that insightful comment.

Also found that Palin is claiming she didn't support the bridge to nowhere, but she did. Actually it was her part of her main platform for getting elected. Not only that she diverted the funds gotten from the bridge to her own projects.

She didn't start disagreeing with it until Congress drop kicked it.

http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html

So will the republican party be releasing Palin flp-flops to match the Obama ones?

is_that_so

Hobbes wrote: »

If she did have she didn't use them.


I see NY Times are reporting that McCain didn't want her, he wanted Lieberman. She was picked to placate the far right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/us/politics/31reconstruct.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1220248873-xb3HzAj3VHtjVHtdjHqNTQ

There's a ineluctable logic to choosing a running mate like Palin who appeals to the conservative right which really makes reading that piece a bit pointless. This is the reality McCain was faced with in as much as Obama needed some experience on the ticket.

Kennedy didn't want Johnson and loathed him but he chose him to deliver Texas, which he did. This is what VPs are for, to get at those bits the main candidate can't.

Not sure why you're chasing this story so much tbh as there's as much to be said about the equally dubious reasoning behind the selection of Biden to shore up the candidate on the other side.

But that's why they choose running mates.

nhughes100

There's one thing people haven't mentioned here in the choice of both potential VP's and that's electoral college votes. Alaska will get McCain 3 and Delaware(Biden) also gets 3 which in the grand scheme of things in whats expected to be a very close run race may not be the swing that either candidate needs to get his head over the finish line.

I would have thought that if practicable VP candidates would have been from the bigger states with the bigger college votes(Texas, California, New York & Florida) to try and swing the state with homefield advantage. I have to say Biden looks the better choice on paper, he has the experience Obama doesn't have and McCain has shot himself in the foot as he can't play his experience card on Obama now that he's picked someone with very little experience as his running mate.

The best comment I heard about what the Vp's job entails is to wake up in the morning and make sure the president is alive, Governer Palin could be on the cover of more magazines sooner then she thinks.

is_that_so

Another thing I am looking forward to are the VP debates. While some will argue that Biden will wipe the floor with Palin, it 's a throwback to the Dem campaign. If he does he needs to do it without coming across as condescending.

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote: »

Also found that Palin is claiming she didn't support the bridge to nowhere, but she did. Actually it was her part of her main platform for getting elected. Not only that she diverted the funds gotten from the bridge to her own projects.

She didn't start disagreeing with it until Congress drop kicked it.

http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html

OK. Tell me the logic flow problem here.

Alaskan government decides that the second busiest airport in SouthEastern Alaska could do with a bridge (it also opens up the rest of Gravina Island to easy development) and they estimate costs to be just under $200m, which they think is a fair deal. They go to Congress and get federal funding on the order of $223m, which pretty much makes not much of a dent in Alaska's budget.
After a while, projected costs soar to somewhere just under $400m. Congress is not about to give them more money, making Alaska's bill some $170m. (Yes, I know what Wiki says for the figures, but they don't match with the newspaper reports). At this point, the Alaskans begin to think that the cost/benefit analysis is going the other way and decide that a $400m bridge (Or $170m, if you're the Alaskan treasurer) isn't such a good deal.

Not only that she diverted the funds gotten from the bridge to her own projects

She was supposed to. Congress removed the earmark, meaning that she was no longer legally obligated to spend the money on the Gravina bridge. The money basically just went into the General Pool. Would you have preferred the money just sat in the bank collecting interest and she did nothing with it?

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=7113272

In the end, the state received the money, but Congress stripped the earmark, which meant the state could use the funds for any project.

Now, if you want fiscal stupidity, the road going from the airport to the proposed bridge site is still being built. When Congress stripped the bridge earmark, they failed to strip the road earmark of its $30m. So they had no choice in redistributing those funds.

NTM

LolaLuv

Now her daughter really is pregnant:

www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/republican_race/2008/09/01/2008-09-01_john_mccain_running_mate_sarah_palin_say.html

Manic Moran

Let's see... five months along. Subtract five from now.... nope. I don't think it's possible that the original kid was hers.

NTM