Monday, October 20, 2008

Andrew Sullivan wades back into the Sarah Palin "babygate" controversy.

After the release of the article from the New York Times today, Sullivan could not resist going back and adding it to what we know about the birth of Trig Palin, and what we can surmise once we examine it all together.

In the end he sort of throws up his hands in defeat.

It's a remarkable story and worth laying out in full. What you make of it is up to you. Personally, I just don't know what to make of it any more, but feel a responsibility to lay out the facts as they exist in the public domain. For the record.

I know how he feels, but of course I am not as shy about expressing my conclusions. And as far as I can tell from the people who visit here, and the other blogs who are also obsessed with this story, I am in pretty good company.


  1. A clear commentary on her lack of judgment, was she was hoping that the child would die?

  2. Maria you are not the first person to bring that possibility up.

    But for myself I would much prefer to beleive that she was faking a pregnancy to cover for her teenage daughter then entertain the idea that she would try to allow her child to die in utero.

  3. I think she was covering up for Bristol - and if not, it was a total lack of responsible thinking on her part. I wouldn't go as far as saying she hoped that the child would't survive -- but it was more likely her arrogance that she is right no matter what, and she wanted to be in Alaska so she went and just didn't think anything of it.

    Either way it is not the kind of thinking I want a vice president to have - total lack of responsibility, or one that lies about a pregnancy (but then turns around and throws her daughter under the bus any way).


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.