Palin vs. Gore

From First Things, the following quote from Sarah Palin’s Going Rogue,

At its most basic level, conservatism is a respect for history and tradition, including traditional moral principles. I do not believe I am more moral, certainly no better, than anyone else, and conservatives who act “holier than thou” turn my stomach. So do some elite liberals. But I do believe in a few timeless and unchanging truths, and chief among those is that man is fallen. The world is not perfect, and politicians will never make it so. This, above all, is what informs my pragmatic approach to politics.

From The Telegraph, a poem by Al Gore,

One thin September soon
A floating continent disappears
In midnight sun

Vapors rise as
Fever settles on an acid sea
Neptune’s bones dissolve

Snow glides from the mountain
Ice fathers floods for a season
A hard rain comes quickly

Then dirt is parched
Kindling is placed in the forest
For the lightning’s celebration

Unknown creatures
Take their leave, unmourned
Horsemen ready their stirrups

Passion seeks heroes and friends
The bell of the city
On the hill is rung

The shepherd cries
The hour of choosing has arrived
Here are your tools

And to think that Al Gore almost became President of the United States.

The phrase, “dodging a bullet” quickly comes to mind.

Healthcare Reform Hypocrisy On End Of Life

Ever since former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin made her “death panel” remarks on Facebook, President Obama has repeated as often as he can that the government in the proposed health care reform plan would not “pull the plug on granny”.

However, there is one agency responsible for healthcare of a certain segment of the population  whose actions directly contradict the President’s rhetoric (Hat tip: The Corner):

If President Obama wants to better understand why America’s discomfort with end-of-life discussions threatens to derail his health-care reform, he might begin with his own Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). He will quickly discover how government bureaucrats are greasing the slippery slope that can start with cost containment but quickly become a systematic denial of care.

Last year, bureaucrats at the VA’s National Center for Ethics in Health Care advocated a 52-page end-of-life planning document, “Your Life, Your Choices.” It was first published in 1997 and later promoted as the VA’s preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes. After the Bush White House took a look at how this document was treating complex health and moral issues, the VA suspended its use. Unfortunately, under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated “Your Life, Your Choices.”

Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing.

“Your Life, Your Choices” presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political “push poll.” For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be “not worth living.”

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to “shake the blues.” There is a section which provocatively asks, “Have you ever heard anyone say, ‘If I’m a vegetable, pull the plug’?” There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as “I can no longer contribute to my family’s well being,” “I am a severe financial burden on my family” and that the vet’s situation “causes severe emotional burden for my family.”

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

This just goes to show in judging where the President stands on different aspects of health care reform that it might be better to pay more attention to his actions than his words.

We’re out of money, so… we need to spend more of it

From current Vice President Joe Biden,

“And folks look, AARP knows and the people with me here today know, the president knows, and I know, that the status quo is simply not acceptable,” Biden said at the event on Thursday in Alexandria, Va. “It’s totally unacceptable. And it’s completely unsustainable. Even if we wanted to keep it the way we have it now. It can’t do it financially.”

“We’re going to go bankrupt as a nation,” Biden said.

“Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’” Biden said. “The answer is yes, that’s what I’m telling you.”

Now, the essential liberal complaint against Sarah Palin is that she is simply too ignorantly stupid to be our Vice President, much less President.

Remind me again… how is Joe Biden a better choice?

Update: watch for yourself. I’m reminded of when Orange County, California went bankrupt, in 1990s, and the proposed “solution” was to levy a special tax. You see, this is the way liberal socialists think… government will solve the problem if they have enough money.

What Sarah Should Do Next

Governor Sarah Palin hit a monumental home run with her debate performance tonight and put to rest all those pesky doubts about her abilities to serve as Vice-President. Of course, her supporters already knew she was up to the job. It was the media naysayers and Beltway pundits that had to be reminded of the innate talents this women possesses that haven’t been seen in another politician since Ronald Reagan.
Senator Joe Biden turned in a fair performance himself. No major gaffes but lots of false statements.
Still, this debate was all about Governor Palin. It served as a reminder as why voters like her so much. It also reminded us of when she is really at her best: when she can speak directly to the American people without any assistance (or is that interference?) from the media.
So, here is my advice to the McCain campaign: put Governor Palin on every talk radio show both national and local that you can get her on over the next four weeks and let her use her immense communication skills in speaking directly to voters. Have her sit down with the high traffic bloggers and let them record podcasts or video interviews that are completely unedited and, more importantly, unfiltered.
Don’t bother granting any more interviews to Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, or any of the other MSM dinosaurs. They don’t deserve the privilege of talking to her.
Governor Palin is at her best when she can speak from the heart directly to the people without having to worry about “gotcha” questions from a hostile media that is totally in the tank for Senator Barack Obama. Bypass all the traditional media outlets and take your message directly to the voters. It will have a far greater impact than you can possibly imagine.

Revisiting the experience question, with regards to population values

A recent commenter to my Comparing Alaska and New York City; Does size matter? post has taken issue with my extended comparison of infrastructure requirements between Illinois and Alaska, and how such requirements relate to experience in one who governs Alaska vs. in one who is a US senator for the state of Illinois.

Ansley stated,

…There’s not even 700,000 people in Alaska. The mayor of New York City has big fish to fry, my friend….each city has its own unique challenges, but the fact is, the more people you have in an area, the trickier things become.

My first reaction would be to wonder whether or not the critic has been to Alaska and seen, firsthand, how they deal with the logistics of managing such massive sea and air travel, in such extreme locations and weather conditions? Winter conditions that shut down most US airports are simply business as usual in Alaska. While working in Valdez, I was sent home only once, due to weather (and that was because the snowstorm had been dropping snow at the rate of 1 foot per hour for more about 4 hours). It’s not unusual for a typical Valdez snowstorm to drop 4 feet of snow. Once, when landing in Anchorage, the pilot informed us that the current temp was 0 degrees F. He also noted that the current ambient temp in Fairbanks, where the plane was headed, was -43 F. Did you catch that? It’s -43 F, yet they’re going to land and disembark because… it’s business as usual.

Simply put, you don’t manage that type of infrastructure, in that kind of weather, over that expanse of territory, unless you know exactly what you are doing.

But, to address the nonsensical population argument, let’s take a nonsensical look at it in terms of how it supposedly applies to the running of various countries, states, or cities. First, let’s use the following population values, from Wikipedia:

  • US = 305,312,000
  • China (PRC) = 1,321,851,888
  • India = 1,132,446,000
  • Russia = 142,008,838
  • Canada = 33,390,000
  • California = 36,553,215
  • Illinois = 12,852,548
  • NYC = 8,274,527
  • Alaska = 677,000
  • Illinois(2) = 642,627

Using the Deepak Chopra / Ansley argument, it appears that running the US is roughly 1/4 the job of running China or India (I’ll give you 4 US presidents for your 1 Chinese premier – and I’ll throw in an extra president for half a dozen Chinese gymnasts). Yet, we see that running the US is about 2 times the job of running Russia (that must explain why Putin has the time to go tiger hunting!), 9 times greater than running Canada (yet another reason for our friends up north to hate us), 8 times greater than California (so former / current actors shouldn’t have a problem running Cal-ee-for-nee-uh?), 24 times greater than Illinois, 37 times that of NYC, and a whopping 451 times more complex than running Alaska!

Case closed? End of story?

Not so fast, census breath.

Isn’t the point here to compare experience levels with regards to being in charge of – as in – managing and running something (i.e., executive experience)? While Palin is actually running Alaska, Senator (did you catch that? – “Senator”) Obama is not running Illinois. In fact, he is only one of two senators, along with around 18 congressmen. Surely we can’t take Illinois’ total population of 12.8 million when comparing Obama’s responsibilities with that of Palin’s, can we? So, let’s do an Obamadjustment to the population of Illinois. First off, since he’s one of two senators, we need to cut the 12.8 million in half, to 6.4 million. And, since he shares responsibility with all those congressmen, let’s half the 6.4 to 3.2 million. Finally, since Obama isn’t really running the state (that’s left for the… ahem, governor), let’s take only, say, 20% of the 3.2 million. Now we’re left with an adjusted population (Illinois(2)) of 642,627 that we could reasonably attribute to Obama’s non-executive responsibilities.

Well, using our adjusted number, we see that running the US is 475 times greater than Obama’s current non-executive role. That puts him behind the governor of Alaska, in terms of population comparisons.

The thing is, Obama isn’t running for VP.

Sarah Palin, Supreme Court decisions, and Pay Grades

So, Sarah Palin is taking some heat for not answering Katie Couric’s question regarding which Supreme Court decisions she disagrees with.

Well, I suppose she could have stated that answering that question, with any degree of specificity, is above her pay grade.

But, then again, she’s not running for president.

The Veep Debate

For ninety minutes tonight, Governor Sarah Palin and Senator Joe Biden will square off in the one and only vice-presidential debate of this campaign season. While there’s been lots of hangwringing over how Governor Palin will do in the debate, I think the worry is unnecessary. In fact, the debate may actually work in Governor Palin’s (and ultimately Senator John McCain’s) favor.
Here’s how I got there: the debate will allow the voters to see both candidates completely unfiltered. There’s no spin, no helpful media covering up one candidate’s gaffes, no exploitative media blowing the other candidate’s gaffes way out of proportion. People will get to see them both as they really are and be able to make up their minds about which one they like better.
In the end, I don’t think that who wins the debate will matter all that much. As Rich Galen points out, Dan Quayle had a horrible debate in 1988 and it didn’t stop George H. W. Bush from being elected.
Just as an aside, I think his over-under of three and a half is on the low side.
Back to my original point: voters will get to see the candidates as they really are without the influence of any media spin (positive or negative). That’s the real value in having a debate.
Governor Palin, when she is relaxed, comes across as very real. For many voters that’s incredibly appealing.
Senator Biden, while being very intelligent and experienced, has one major flaw: he talks too much.
Governor Palin has to have the same kind of performance she did during her acceptance speech at the Republican convention.
Senator Biden has to tread carefully so that he doesn’t (a) say something really stupid and ultimately damaging to the campaign and (b) doesn’t come across as condescending towards Governor Palin.
On balance, I think Senator Biden is the one who is under more pressure going into this debate.
There’s also the issue of moderator Gwen Ifill. I don’t watch PBS as a rule so I can’t speak with any confidence as to how well she’s going to do. The consensus of opinion I have heard is that she will do a fine job.
But I don’t think she should have ever accepted the job in the first place. Her book deal has what lawyers like to refer to as the “appearance of impropriety”. It’s not that you can say with certainty that it’s wrong for her to moderate the debate but it certainly looks bad. Her credibility will no doubt be damaged. However, this little controversy is likely to drive up ratings for the debate even further as viewers will be curious to see how she handles the questioning of the two candidates.
Regardless of the actual outcome of the debate, the media will declare Joe Biden the winner as they are making no secret of the fact they are in the tank for Senator Barack Obama. They did their best to declare Senator Obama the winner of the first debate even though it was clear to just about anyone who watched the entire thing that Senator McCain had the better night.
While I don’t expect the debate tonight to make that much of a difference in the outcome of the election the two candidates’ performance will say something about the men who selected them as their running mates. As it should.

Comparing Alaska and New York City; Does size matter?

In Obama and the Palin Effect, Deepak Chopra states,

…On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City…

Now, that was an interesting comparison, wasn’t it? Chopra is arguing that because the number of Alaska’s 683,478 residents is about one-tenth the number of New York City’s 8,274,527 residents, the task of governing Alaska must also be about one-tenth the job of governing NYC.

But let’s take a look at this graphically. Below is a bar-chart histogram which compares both New York City (NYC) and Alaska (AK) with regards to their population levels.


Clearly, the population of NYC dwarfs that of AK.

However, what if we were to look at the size of NYC as compared to that of AK? The chart below illustrates this for us.


So, in terms of area (square miles), Alaska’s size (656,424 sq. mi.) so overwhelms that of New York City’s (469 sq. mi.), that NYC doesn’t even register on the chart. Simply put, Alaska is 1,400 times the size of New York City.

Using Chopra’s reasoning, this must mean that, in terms of area to govern, the job of running Alaska is expanded to the scale of running 1,400 New York Cities!

I wondered how these resource-based comparisons played out when comparing Obama’s state of Illinois to that of Palin’s Alaska. So I did a little bit of research. I found the results interesting.

Read the rest of this entry

Ed Brayton, normally quite accurate in his reporting, titles a post of his, Another Palin Lie. Ed states,

Remember that airplane she sold on E-Bay to make a tidy profit for the state of Alaska because she was just such a regular Jane she didn’t want to travel the state in luxury the way her predecessor had? Let me refresh your memory:
“You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor, and sold it on eBay — and made a profit!” McCain declared in Wisconsin at a campaign stop Friday.

And Stephen Foley, at The Independent, has an article titled, Sale of Alaska’s state jet on eBay revealed as a lie. From Foley’s article,

Sarah Palin bolstered her reputation as a reformer – and got one of her biggest cheers in her Republican convention speech last week – when she said she had sold the governor’s official jet on eBay as her first act on taking office in Alaska.

What she didn’t say was that the aircraft had failed to sell over the internet and was eventually sold off at a loss


…Inquiries by the journalists and Democratic party operatives who have descended on Alaska have turned up quite different facts: namely, that the jet was hauled off eBay after failing to attract decent bids.

Yet, here are the lines from Sarah Palin’s speech, at the RNC, in which she references said plane:

I came to office promising major ethics reform to end the culture of self-dealing, and today that ethics reform is the law. While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the Governor’s Office that I didn’t believe our citizens should have to pay for.That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay.

That’s it. No other references to the sale of the jet was made in her speech. Astute observers will note that she does not state that the plane was sold on eBay, nor does she state that it was sold for a profit.

It ain’t there, fellas.

Do you think, just a thought here, that her intentions (at that point in the speech) were to emphasize her attitude towards wasteful spending, and not to give a detailed accounting report of how Alaska unloaded it’s luxury jet?

Did she imply, in her RNC speech, that she had actually sold the plane on eBay? Could be. Yet, did any intrepid journalists or Democratic party operatives, armed with the not-so-secret data of the plane’s actual sale, trap Palin by asking her for specific data on how the plane was sold? Are you kidding? That would mean actually trying to get to the truth of the matter.

Truth be told, we must rewrite Foley’s paragraph, from above, as follows:

Sarah Palin bolstered her reputation as a reformer – and got one of her biggest cheers in her Republican convention speech last week – when she said she had sold put the governor’s official jet on eBay as her first act on taking office in Alaska.

Words… just words.

Note: However, John McCain’s statement, referenced above, seems to be a different matter entirely. Maybe he should just let Sarah speak for herself.

Feminists and McCain

One of the big questions in this election is what was going to be the combined effect of Senator Barack Obama’s snub of Hillary Clinton (18 million plus votes, remember?) and Senator John McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin would be on female voters who, incidentally, make up a majority of registered voters. Based on this article by Tammy Bruce, it appears that there may be a huge swing of voters that previously would have voted for the Democratic ticket to the Republican ticket:

In the shadow of the blatant and truly stunning sexism launched against the Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, and as a pro-choice feminist, I wasn’t the only one thrilled to hear Republican John McCain announce Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. For the GOP, she bridges for conservatives and independents what I term “the enthusiasm gap” for the ticket. For Democrats, she offers something even more compelling – a chance to vote for a someone who is her own woman, and who represents a party that, while we don’t agree on all the issues, at least respects women enough to take them seriously.

Whether we have a D, R or an “i for independent” after our names, women share a different life experience from men, and we bring that difference to the choices we make and the decisions we come to. Having a woman in the White House, and not as The Spouse, is a change whose time has come, despite the fact that some Democratic Party leaders have decided otherwise. But with the Palin nomination, maybe they’ll realize it’s not up to them any longer.
Read the rest of this entry

Just when you think that the mainstream media can’t sink any lower comes this breathless dispatch from the Associated Press: Palin Church Promotes Converting Gays.

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin’s church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

“You’ll be encouraged by the power of God’s love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality,” according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed since she was a child.
Palin’s conservative Christian views have energized that part of the GOP electorate, which was lukewarm to John McCain’s candidacy before he named her as his vice presidential choice. She is staunchly anti-abortion, opposing exceptions for rape and incest, and opposes gay marriage and spousal rights for gay couples. 

Focus on the Family, a national Christian fundamentalist organization, has scheduled the “Love Won Out” Conference for Sept. 13 in Anchorage, about 30 miles from Wasilla.

Palin, campaigning with McCain in the Midwest on Friday, has not publicly expressed a view on the so-called “pray away the gay” movement. Larry Kroon, senior pastor at Palin’s church, was not available to discuss the matter Friday, said a church worker who declined to give her name.

As usual, facts don’t seem to matter to the media. For one thing, Governor Palin and her family have only been part of the church since 2002.
For another, the AP seems shocked, shocked that Governor Palin’s church would actually be teaching what the Bible says.
Also, they totally mischaracterize the nature of the conference. According to the questions page on the conference website they don’t “cure” gays.

Are you here to “cure” gays?
Absolutely not. The only time you’ll ever hear the word “cure” used in relation to our event is by those who oppose Love Won Out.  They also like to claim we want to “fix” or “convert” gays and lesbians and that we believe people can “pray away the gay.” Such glib characterizations ignore the complex series of factors that can lead to same-sex attractions; they also mischaracterize our mission. We exist to help men and women dissatisfied with living homosexually understand that same-sex attractions can be overcome. It is not easy, but it is possible, as evidenced by the thousands of men and women who have walked this difficult road successfully.

In typical fashion, the AP distorts not only the role of the church in promoting the conference but also the nature of the conference itself. It also describes Focus on the Family as a “fundamentalist” organization. And it’s kind of ironic that the “pray away the gay” talking point cited on the website ended up in the text of the AP story.
But the bigger question is why this is even a story? How is it that Governor Palin’s church gets raked over the coals for including a promotional insert in a church bulletin while, say, Senator Obama’s church escapes any real scrunity when his pastor of twenty years has been caught on video preaching hate from the pulpit? If candidates’ churches are now fair game to media scrutiny then why not subject each candidate’s church to the same level of scrutiny?
I’m not holding my breath waiting for it to happen.

Why does Palin confuse them?

Sarah Palin is confusing the Left and the mainstream media.

And should we be surprised? In their myopic view of the world, they lack the ability to focus in on anything but that which surrounds them – anything but that which they are already engaged with. Within the realm of their understanding it seems to be nothing short of ludicrous that John McCain would seriously present the likes of Sarah Palin as candidate for Vice President of the United States. Their refined rationalism recoils at the thought of a right-wing, former small-town mayor, gun-lovin’, pro-life, Bible-believing woman being second in command – a mere heartbeat away from becoming POTUS. Indeed, the vile attacks levied against Palin, since her addition to the ticket, are all too telling.

John Podhoertz links to a NY Times article (HT: Crunchy Con) which illustrates the myopia of the media. From the NY Times article,

In the address at the Assembly of God Church here, Ms. Palin’s ease in talking about the intersection of faith and public life was clear. Among other things, she encouraged the group of young church leaders to pray that “God’s will” be done in bringing about the construction of a big pipeline in the state, and suggested her work as governor would be hampered “if the people of Alaska’s heart isn’t right with God.”
She also told the group that her eldest child, Track, would soon be deployed by the Army to Iraq, and that they should pray “that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God, that’s what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan, and that plan is God’s plan.”

You mean that, as a Christian, she believes that the sovereign God (of the Bible) has… a will? That said God also has… a plan? And that we are to pray to said God for his will to be done through… his plan?


Perhaps the reporters for the NY Times piece, in their zest for research, should do a bit of it on what constitutes the Christian faith, not to mention finding out what the Bible says on the subject.

Better yet, how about they take Melinda’s suggestion, and listen to some of the sermons from the pastor at the church which Palin attends (sort of an end-around on the whole Jeremiah-Wright thing).

Or, maybe, listen to the excitement of the people

When Will Palin Do Meet the Press?

Now that the presidential campaign is in full swing, the big question in media circles is when Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin will be available to them to answer their questions. This is to be expected since they spent the last week since McCain’s announcement acting like a petulant child because McCain dared to nominate someone they hadn’t vetted.

The main problem the media faces is that they are no longer the gatekeepers of information. Ever since the collapse of the monopoly controlled by CBS, NBC, and ABC they’ve struggled to keep themselves relevant. And while they do serve a purpose, it is not as great as it used to be.

My guess is that Governor Palin will make media appearances in the coming weeks but will be careful to select outlets that are willing to treat her with the respect that she deserves rather than trying to assault her with smears and “gotcha” questions. She doesn’t need to bother sitting down with media outlets that have shown themselves to be hypocrites. They don’t deserve the privilege of being able to ask her any questions.

The Appeal of Sarah Palin

As I was watching Alaska Governor Sarah Palin accept the Republican vice-presidential nomination last night, I kept asking myself what it is about her that makes her so appealing? Yes, she’s attractive. But there is more to it than that.
She’s authentic.
She tells you exactly what she thinks and you don’t have to guess.
You don’t have to read and re-read her speeches to try to figure out the meaning of her words.
Even if you disagree with her politically, you can’t help but like her. I mean, really like her.
She’s the kind of person that many people will be able to identify with. Her family has many of the same ups and downs that the average family experiences.
The Left, with an assist from their enablers in the mainstream media have done everything they can in the days leading up to this speech to try to demonize her.
Sarah Palin showed last night why those attacks won’t work on her.
Democrats are afraid this morning. They should be.
John McCain took a huge risk in selecting Sarah Palin. Last night, Sarah Palin showed America exactly why she was selected and demonstrated he made the right choice.
If the Republicans go on to win the election this November, it will be because it was won last night with Governor Palin’s speech.

When hypocrisy is not hypocrisy

It seems that some liberals are having a difficult time understanding what constitutes hypocrisy.

Consider the saga of Sarah Palin’s teenage daughter, and this blog post at ABC News,

ABC News’ Andy Fies reports: Although Barack Obama has said the pregnancy of Gov Sarah Palin’s unwed teenaged daughter is “off-limits” and has “no relevance”, not all of his supporters agree.

Clinton Wray and his family sat among the 14,000 who gathered to hear Obama speak in Milwaukee this evening. While he supported Obama’s decision to, in Wray’s words, “take the higher ground”, he was not convinced the pregnancy is irrelevant. “Republicans will say that they are the party of family values and that everybody else doesn’t have any values. So when you’ve used that, I think the public and the media have the right to use whatever you’ve put out to come back to you.”Wray added that this applied to Palin too. “This young lady is saying that she’s a strong conservative with Christian values. That’s great. But the Republican party has consistently used the religious right to say ‘we’re Christians,’ to say ‘we don’t believe in this and we don’t believe in that.’ And so I think they have to be held accountable…. She has to be held accountable.”

To begin with, I’m not aware of any prominent Republicans stating that “everybody else doesn’t have any values.” To be sure, persons with alternative political affiliations hold values of some sort.

Yet I wonder exactly what type of accountability Mr. Wray would hold Sarah Palin to? It seems to me that, in her public statement on the issue, she made it clear that her daughter was choosing life for her unborn baby, that her daughter was going to get married to the child’s father, that her daughter would have the full support of her and her husband, and that their full support was needed now that her daughter would learn about the reality of having made choices that fell outside the realm of “family values”. It further seems to me that, rather than displaying hypocrisy, Palin is being fully consistent with the family values she claims to have. Honesty, love, commitment, and responsibility.

If Sarah Palin wished to be a hypocrite, she would have counseled her daughter to have a secret abortion, in order to preserve the family image, thereby allowing her to attend college (if she so desired) without the punishment of having to take care of a child at the same time.

 Page 1 of 2  1  2 »