Print This Post Print This Post

Mar

12

If Palin’s office says daughter is off-limits, you don’t have SarahPAC respond


This was my same gripe when Alaska Governor and then-vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin asked the media to respect their privacy regarding her daughter’s pregnancy and engagement, but then she brought them both in for the RNC convention and made a public showing of both her daughter and her daughter’s fiancé and father of her grandchild.

In the first AP report about the break-up between the daughter and fiancé, we read that Palin’s office says the matter is not state business and refuses to comment on it:

Gov. Sarah Palin’s office on Wednesday refused to comment on a report that Palin’s daughter Bristol Palin had broken off her engagement with fiancé Levi Johnston.

…

“That’s not state business,” Abbey Bulawa, an aide to Gov. Palin, told the Huffington Post. “We don’t comment on the governor’s children.”

That’s cool and appropriate.

But it isn’t the end.

In this AP wire story, SarahPAC decides that they can issue a comment:

“Unfortunately, my family has seen many people say and do many things to `cash in’ on the Palin name,” said the statement, which was issued through the governor’s political action committee. “Sometimes that greed clouds good judgment and the truth.”

SarahPAC spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton did not immediately respond to calls seeking further information. The governor’s spokesman, Bill McAllister, declined comment.

We don’t know who the “my” is in the graph – Sarah Palin or Bristol Palin? My assumption is since it’s Palin’s PAC, it’s Sarah not Bristol.

And don’t try the “well, it’s not state business, so the governor’s office shouldn’t talk about it, but the PAC is about Sarah Palin as a political candidate” or some other explanation.  Either Palin approves that the topic be discussed in whatever cursory or complete form she – or Bristol – wants, or it is in fact always off-limits. The same statements can come from both outlets, none of this good cop/bad cop stuff.

Frankly, I think the only one who should be asked questions and be allowed to say, “no comment” is Bristol herself.  She is 18, she is a single mother and it’s her life. Questions to Palin should go only to her existence as Bristol’s mother and either she is going to comment on that or not. I’m not even happy that she’s being asked about the subject at all – leave them all alone as far as I’m concerned. True, she kicked the door wide open during the campaign, but the Bristol-Greta interview demonstrated that Bristol is at least making some decisions, it seems.

Sigh.

I’d love to have an epistemological conversation with Sarah Palin about the word, “choice,” even knowing her whole thing about God opening doors, or not.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:51 am March 12th, 2009 in Politics, Sarah Palin, Social Issues 

Comments

7 Responses to “If Palin’s office says daughter is off-limits, you don’t have SarahPAC respond”

  1. 1 Cynthia Samuels on March 12th, 2009 8:27 am

    I know, I know. I’m totally with you on the comment/no comment stuff. Re “choice” I think it’s an existential undertaking – no common ground – not even enough for a dialogue, I suspect.
    I just keep thinking how sad it is for this young mother. I wonder what the family is like when they’re alone, if they are compassionate toward her etc. At least they didn’t make them get married; he sounds like the kind of trouble guys don’t grow out of.
    Think how many Bristols there are, too. Sigh.

  2. 2 Jill Miller Zimon on March 12th, 2009 8:31 am

    Thanks, Cynthia – I appreciate the commiseration. And I completely agree with you about the curiosity re: what it’s like when they’re alone. I’ll leave my suppositions for offline debate.

    Thanks – hope you’re well and had a good Purim.

  3. 3 Gloria Feldt on March 12th, 2009 9:50 am

    Jane Smiley said pregnancy is the most public of conditions.

    Thanks for this post, which I cited and linked to here: http://www.gloriafeldt.com/powered-women/2009/3/12/bristol-honey-this-is-just-the-beginning.html

  4. 4 Joel Libava on March 12th, 2009 11:10 am

    Jill,
    “No She Didn’t!”

    The Franchiuse King
    Joel Libava

    {There is some serious dysfunction going on in that family}

  5. 5 Joel Libava on March 12th, 2009 11:21 am

    Nice spelling on on “Franchise,” Joel.

    Thank You Joel

    Joel Libava
    The Franchise King

  6. 6 Ellen Brown on March 13th, 2009 10:05 pm

    Jill
    Thanks for following this story. Go abstinence!

  7. 7 cynematic on March 14th, 2009 12:19 am

    Whole lotta “having it both ways” in that family, imho.

    On pretty much everything, not just ‘choice,’ ‘feminism,’ ‘motherhood,’ or ‘all-Americanism.’

    Totally fungible ethical code where opportunism reigns.

    They can fade into obscurity now.

Leave a Reply




"));