I can't stand Palin's politics, but this potential Babygate smacks of swift-boating to me, with even fewer supporting facts. That 40-something women don't often get pregnant can't even be considered circumstantial evidence.
Here's another picture of Palin, supposedly taken in February, that seems to contradict the one you linked to earlier in the comments.
In the end, though, is this what Democrats should be attacking, a possible pregnancy cover-up? Jesus, who cares? It should bother them more that the governor of a state where marijuana is decriminalized supports the drug war, supports the war on terror (and the assaults on liberty which it entails), wants creationism taught in science classrooms, is rigidly anti-abortion, etc. And there are other issues which I have a less of a problem with but would certainly bother the left, such as her position on global warming, oil drilling in ANWR and elsewhere, and so on.
The good news (for Democrats anyway) is I don't think Obama will be stupid enough to broach Babygate, and only partisan bloggers will waste their time with this.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 06:34 am (UTC)Here's another picture of Palin, supposedly taken in February, that seems to contradict the one you linked to earlier in the comments.
In the end, though, is this what Democrats should be attacking, a possible pregnancy cover-up? Jesus, who cares? It should bother them more that the governor of a state where marijuana is decriminalized supports the drug war, supports the war on terror (and the assaults on liberty which it entails), wants creationism taught in science classrooms, is rigidly anti-abortion, etc. And there are other issues which I have a less of a problem with but would certainly bother the left, such as her position on global warming, oil drilling in ANWR and elsewhere, and so on.
The good news (for Democrats anyway) is I don't think Obama will be stupid enough to broach Babygate, and only partisan bloggers will waste their time with this.