For the last weekend disgusting rumors related to Governor Sarah Palin’s youngest child have been circulating around the left-of-center new media. I will not repeat them here for the same reason I would not repeat sick and unfounded rumors about Senator Obama (which also exist).
Sadly, these rumors about Governor Palin gained some “credibility” when they were pushed by an increasingly disreputable writer on the Atlantic Monthly site (normally a sound source apart from this one writer).
Today the McCain camp apparently dumped all the “bad news” they had been able to find on Palin (disposing of the ludicrous notion she had not been vetted). This includes the “news” that her husband (who is not running for office) had a DUI twenty-two years ago. This “info dump” included the news that Palin is soon to be a grandmother. One of her daughters is pregnant (out of wedlock), is keeping the baby, and is getting married to the father. Part of the reason they had to release this information about a non-candidate was the more salacious rumor about the governor.
Governor Palin’s daughter is not running for any office. She made a bad choice and now is making two very good choices. She is getting married and she is keeping her baby. I don’t know anybody in the church whose response will not be compassion for her and hopes for her future happiness.
None of this should matter much to the campaign, but the Republican writer at Politico, Jonathan Martin, insulted social conservatives when he wrote:
Social conservatives, who are extraordinarly enthused by the selection of Palin, won’t be happy about the news. But their unease will likely be mitigated by the word that the teenager will give birth and marry the father.
I suppose this is true in the sense that nobody is happy about bad news in the families of people we admire. What does Mr. Martin mean by “unease?” I suspect he thinks an appreciable number of us will “judge” Governor Palin for her daughter’s bad behavior, but let her off the hook because Palin’s daughter “did the right thing.”
This is insulting and pretty stupid. Any group with millions of members has bad actors, but in forty-five years of church attendance and work inside the “social conservative” movement, I have personally known nobody I think would feel “unease” about the governor as a vice-presidential candidate based on this “news” about her daughter.
Why would they? What did the governor do?
Bluntly, this “news” is not politically relevant. What Christian thinks having the truth means we live it out perfectly? What parent believes they have total control over their nearly-grown up children?
This kind of writing by Mr. Martin represents either ignorance of the demographic he is writing about (which given their percentage of the party is inexcusable), the soft bigotry of much of mainstream culture against social conservatives (we are judgmental blue noses), or a major blunder in phrasing.
I assume the more charitable of the three, but it would be helpful if Mr. Martin clarified.
We pray for Governor Palin who has been faced with scurrilous and ugly false accusations about her family. She also has been facing a difficult situation in her private life (related to becoming a grandmother) and has handled it well. Let’s let the family go on with their private lives!
Here is hoping Martin learns a bit more about social conservatives before writing about them.
(Compare the treatment of Palin with the obvious cover up of the Edwards situation by the mainstream media. I urged charity to Edwards here so you know how I would react to misdeeds by Democratic candidate. )