Ok- so I’m just going to throw this out there because it’s the first thing I thought when I saw the Palin family photo: Sarah Palin doesn’t look pregnant- but her daughter kind of does.

I have absolutely no proof of this. None whatsoever. But I did do a little research and found out I’m not the first person to come up with this theory.

Let’s start with the basics of my theory:

1. Sarah is 44 years old- pretty unlikely that she’d just get pregnant naturally.

2. She announced her pregnancy at 7 MONTHS and the general consensus was that Palin “simply doesn’t look pregnant.”

3. After supposedly going into labor in Texas, Sarah stuck around for awhile to give a speech and eventually hopped on a plane back to Alaska to give birth. When asked why the airline employees actually let her on the plane, she said: “I wasn’t showing much so they didn’t know.”

Now I don’t know about you, but personally I think I’d know if a woman was seven months pregnant- and I’m certain I’d know it at nine months – especially someone as fit and trim as Sarah Palin.

Also – there is NO WAY IN HELL any doctor is going to ok air travel for a 44 year old pregnant woman- especially one carrying a baby with down syndrome.

Now let me be clear: I don’t care if she wants to raise her daughter’s son. It’s actually a pretty honorable thing to do.

However, if it turns out she lied about it being her kid, then she is done. McCain is going to need a new running mate.

 
  • Joseph – I’m begging you – be careful with this kind of stuff. Source it or something huh? It cannot be useful unless it’s substantiated – otherwise it’s smears like any other. Please. Just think about it. What if this were Michelle Obama you were writing about? There will be plenty of legit and able to be substantiated fodder. No pulling punches but no going sensational unnecessarily either. Jenna Bush wasn’t pregnant and people thought she was too.

  • I 100% agree Jill- and I’m trying to be careful. I spent the past two hours debating over whether to post this.

    But I think I linked to the appropriate sources (real, national, MSM sources) and I think I was clear that I have actually no hard evidence.

    Still, the smears against Obama are SO MUCH WORSE than this could ever be.

  • LB

    Ah yes, a woman candidate. First order of business: focus on her private parts.

    What we should be focusing on is the laws Sarah Palin and John McCain want to make that will affect MY reproductive choices and those of my daughter.

    Palin, like McCain, is a rabid anti-choicer. That matters to me. Tough choices Sarah Palin may or may not have made regarding her own body? Completely not my business.

    The other side is doing everything they can to take the “private” out of “private parts.” Let’s not help them with that agenda.

  • Sigh. I am almost sorry – I do not mean to influence you so much as say that IMO this stuff isn’t helpful to anyone.

    And, as always, I will tell you – there is no hierarchy of isms – do not fall into that – esp. with a POC and a woman in the race. That “it’s not as bad as” thing is going to take you away from pressing far more issue-based and relevant attacks, Joseph and should not be the basis on which you decide to publish.

    Again, substitute Michelle for Palin? Michelle’s sensitivities too – no way she would allow the Obama campaign to go for something like this, no way.

  • To go ahead and just concoct this, supposing this and supposing that, puts you in a league with my sainted mother, who in her sanctimonious opinionating may have shown herself to have the dirtiest mind and filthiest imagination on the planet, especially when it comes to attributing the worst to everybody first. She’s not at all unique in her generation, either. We’re supposed to be getting better. You are a latter-day boy biddy.

  • The problem with the “pretend it’s Michelle” argument is that Michelle actually SUPPORTS reproductive rights for women and Sarah doesn’t.

    And Michelle isn’t aligned with the crazy christian right- the people who have been trying to push abstinence-only sex ed on our children for year.

  • Joseph – you know exactly what I am saying – Michelle Obama, if someone came to her and said we have this info should we go with it would never say yes. Never. And if you think she would say sure! go for it! then I would hav a real problem with this ticket.

  • I misunderstood your comment, Jill. Sorry. I thought you were asking me to turn it around and imagine someone saying the same things about Michelle.

    But you are right- I too would hope that Michelle and Barack wouldn’t approve of their campaign running with rumors like this. And if either of them calls me and asks me to take down the post, then I gladly will.

    But I promise you, this ‘rumor’ is going to be everywhere in a next few days- possibly hours.

    Just remember: you saw it here first.

    🙂

  • oh how i wish there is something to this.

  • J-Dog

    I can’t wait for “South Park” and “Family Guy” to lampoon this stuff!

  • LB

    So the “you saw it here first” mentality trumps decency, consistency with our side’s principles of reproductive privacy, or even strategy for winning voters?
    Right wing extremists who don’t like McCain are already having a field day with all things Palin. Why pile on, thus blurring the difference between the right and the left, dragging our party down into the gutter, and driving away women voters?
    Particularly when we have no shortage of substantive issues with which to attack Palin?
    The McCain campaign is going to be pulling out all the stops to present Palin as an intelligent, accomplished woman who personifies Alaska’s rugged individualism and so on and so forth, and pushing her anti-choice credentials among conservative voters (many of whom, until Palin joined the ticket, weren’t sold on McCain).
    If the allegedly-progressive male blogosphere continues to focus on what may or may not have gone on in Palin’s daughter’s uterus, and other tabloid-level nonsense, we’ll be essentially sitting on the sidelines while the McCain campaign owns the message.
    Oh, but we saw it FIRST on Plunderbund! THAT’s what matters!

  • I understand where you are coming from, LB, but I think you are missing the point.

    This has absolutely nothing to do with anyone’s uterus- it has everything to do with John McCain’s complete lack of judgement in picking this running mate.

    Sarah Palin is whoring out her family for political gain. In every speech she mentions her unaborted, down sydrome son as proof of her moral superiority and never fails to mention her older, soldier son as proof of her patriotism.

    Sarah brought her family into this. And she is using them as her qualifications for potentially being the next president.

    We have every right to question her qualifications.

    And I was obviously joking about the ‘you heard it here first’ thing- which is why I included the smiley face.

  • LB

    Is there some kind of dyslexia going on this weekend regarding the words “qualifications” and “uterus”?

    When did I ever say don’t question Palin’s qualifications? That’s my whole point: She’s unqualified. Why didn’t you say that in your post?

    If this “has absolutely nothing to do with anyone’s uterus,” then why is your post entirely about Palin’s uterus?

    If this “has everything to do with John McCain’s complete lack of judgement in picking this running mate,” then why is your post entirely about Dr. Joseph’s obstetric diagnosis via photos found on the interwebs?

    Your post contained absolutely no mention, let alone illustrations, of Palin being unqualified for office. Only when Jill and I took you to task on it did you venture into anything but uterus-prodding.

  • Fair enough, Lorraine/Jill.

    Maybe I did focus too much on the pregnancy part and not enough on the potential impact her huge, ridiculous and completely unnecessary lie might have on the race if it actually turns out to be true.

    But I still stand by my decision to post this and reserve the right to research and report on this topic as long as Sarah keeps using her kids as political tools.

  • Picking up steam…

    Kos

    Spartacus

  • This story is obviously unpleasant, but I have to agree with Joe that it does deserve to be looked into given Sarah Palin’s use of her kids – and specifically of her righteous decision to carry her child with Down Syndrome to term. And because of her support of abstinence-only sex education. I’m sure the National Enquirer already has reporters in Alaska trying to verify the story (and as John Edwards can tell you, they don’t give up if there is any hit of truth there).

  • TPM has a good overview of everything that has been revealed in the past day. LOT’S of info.

    Also Sullivan at Atlantic.com is running with it too.

  • Amber

    Kind of reminds me of Frankie Coleman’s DUI when everyone was begging everyone else to let it be a personal issue that they should be allowed to deal with in private.

    Even Obama said the his children shouldn’t be “punished” with a baby if they make a mistake.

    Covering up to save herself is one thing, covering up to save her 16 y/o daughter is another.

  • So, turns our Bristol was indeed having premarital sex and is about to become a teen mom. May be a good opportunity for the Republicans to talk about some real strategies to prevent teenagers from becoming parents (instead of just pretending that they won’t have sex). I feel sorry for Bristol.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090100710.html?hpid=topnews

  • ANYway… you heard it here first.

    🙂

  • Pingback: NixGuy.com | Contrast and Compare()

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!