she just doesn't support OTHER teens getting pregnant.

Sent by AV | 2:21 PM ET | 09-03-2008

AV - HA! Brilliant. Ditto.

Sent by Linda | 2:46 PM ET | 09-03-2008

This has already been debunked. If you review the document you will see that the line is specifically for EXPANSION of the house. She reduced the amount of money that they would have for EXPANSION. That doesn't exactly qualify as reduced funding. I suggest a timely correction is needed.

Sent by Brian | 2:57 PM ET | 09-03-2008

I believe a teen pregnancy is a private affair that a family should be permitted to address without public scrutiny. However, Governor Palin's vociferous support of abstinence-only sex education invites this perfectly reasonable question:
So Sarah. How's that working out for ya?

Sent by Greg Crawford | 3:02 PM ET | 09-03-2008

This is RICH.

I have yet to understand why this woman is lauded as a 'hero' for giving birth to a baby with Downs Syndrome (we will assume for the moment that the baby is indeed hers, not that of a family member or surrogate, since there is no shame in adoption). It happens every day, and there are plenty of families that are pro-choice but would never consider abortion if the screening for Downs came back positive.

And I love it that her daughter's pregnancy is being waved away as a 'family problem' when the social conservatives frequently point to unwed, teenage mothers as evidence of the moral decline of this nation. I guess when the teenage mothers-to-be are white and upper-middle-class, it's just not the same.

Sent by Wey | 3:03 PM ET | 09-03-2008

Hopefully the monumental pantsing about to be dealt the McCain campaign by this horrible blunder will teach future politicos a lesson about the perils of selecting flash and appearance over substance. Sarah Palin is going to go down as one of the most ill-thought-out running mates since Eagleton, though probably not as damaging in the long run.

Hmm... this is interesting. She's against pregnant teens, but surely now she'll have to be vocally supportive of them. She's against earmarks, except back when she used to love them. Is it just me, or could the Democrats finally turn the "flip-flopper" line of attack around on its inventors this year?

Sent by Kasreyn | 3:10 PM ET | 09-03-2008

Conservative Republicans have called unwed minority teen mothers irresponsible and immoral for years. I guess if you are white, middle-class and Christian its ok.

Sent by linda | 3:18 PM ET | 09-03-2008

Putting Palin's daughter out front should not be an issue. Why not focus on the family issue, it's what Republicans have made part of their platform for decades. What about all the moralist who scewered Jaimie Lynn Spears for being pregnant at an early age. They made a big hoo-haw over that. There were even comments about her mothers's parenting skills.
McCain picked Ms. Palen just to overshadow and one-up the Democratic choices. As for her being able to handle her motherly and wifely business while working, why not...Millions of women have been doing it for ages. Some successfully, others not so much. And some women single at that. I'm sure she has a nanny,most affluent people do, while millions of other's can't even get adequate day care If the Republicans didn't think they were so high and mighty, there would not be this much of a big deal. I truly think that if this were a problem of the Democratic party, there would be much made of it by the Republican party. Get off the horse

Sent by A. Washington | 3:39 PM ET | 09-03-2008

If it's her family it's "private and personal," yet she is willing to pass laws that will deprive others in the exact same situation of the finances, support and education they need! Baffling.

Sent by TMD | 3:42 PM ET | 09-03-2008

Not an issue.

Undermining of foreign democracies with our tax money: Issue

Economic inequity as a result of the stock market and incorporation: Issue

Police arresting journalists, and inciting violence amongst protesters: Issue

Wake Up People

Sent by Jody Sol | 4:10 PM ET | 09-03-2008

It is obvious to me that John McCain and his advisors think that American women are so gullible that they will vote for ANY woman, without regard to her positions or record. All the rest of it is irrelevant. The women that agree with Sarah Palin may be swayed to vote for John McCain, if they weren't already going to. However I sincerely doubt that any Democrats will vote for McCain based on his choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate. She is simply too conservative and too beholden to the religious right. I am sorry that her daughter is being made a spectacle of, but that is the choice that Ms. Palin made when she decided to accept the VP nomination. If she did not realize this would happen, than Alaska is more distant from the rest of the United States than I realized!

Sent by Judy | 4:20 PM ET | 09-03-2008

I agree with the majority of opinions expressed here. The hypocrisy of the right (and of Mrs. Palin) is evident in their wanting to have it both ways: the mothers of celebrities, or poor minorities, are taken to task, when their teenage daughters become pregnant. However, for the well-off, it's a private family matter!

Sent by Alice | 4:46 PM ET | 09-03-2008

it's possible that Palin's daughter would not have gotten pregnant if she had been provided sex education earlier on...maybe it wouldn't have helped, but Sarah Palin not supporting Sex Education sure did not keep her daughter from getting pregnant! How does Palin support abstinence but not provide sex education which discusses abstinence (at least when I was in high school it did)? She is a complete hypocrite any way you look at it, inside and outside of her "personal" life. Lastly, McCain using Palin to shake-up and overshadow the history Barak recently made is ridiculous! Sarah Palin is NOT the 1st women to ever be a VP nominee on a presidential ticket. She has not made any history! Geraldine Ferraro made history in 1984 under Mondale in a time when it was unbelievable that a woman was running as VP to a Presidential nominee.

Sent by MBV | 5:27 PM ET | 09-03-2008