fickle | Why I Hate Palin.

Current Mood: angry

Entry tags:

Why I Hate Palin.

Governor Palin has a Down's syndrome kid.

I know, I know, that doesn't seem like a reason for me to hate her. After all, I grew up with a handicapped sister, taught special ed kids, and am generally highly in favor of rights for disabled people.

But the thing is, Palin doesn't just have a Down's kid. She chose to have one. Early screening meant that she was warned that her baby had Down's syndrome but due to her stance on abortion, she decided to go ahead and have the child anyway.

STUPID. Stupid, stupid, stupid and selfish. So you're pro-life and refuse to abort this kid on principle? Congratulations, you've doomed him to a lifetime of suffering. A short lifetime, mind you, because most Down's kids have shorter lifespans and are highly susceptible to anything going around, but it's still pretty much a given that they're going to suffer for as long as they live. They won't be able to keep up with the other kids, they'll be developmentally stunted both physically and mentally and it's all your fault for having brought said kid into the world, knowing what he'd have to face.

In the class I taught, one girl called Sandy had Down's syndrome and about a month after I finished with her class, she died of pneumonia. Before that, she had to wear diapers all the time, and the aides had to take her into the bathroom to change her and wipe her ass, because she couldn't even manage that on her own. She couldn't talk normally, she was short and highly obese and even in the classroom full of special needs kids, she stuck out as even more hopeless than most. Sandy was 22 when she died, but she was about at the developmental stage of a 2-year-old, if that.

And this is the sort of child that Governor Palin thinks is a gift from God. This is the sort of life that she's going to cause the boy to lead, because she's too selfish to put aside her own views and think about what's honestly best for the child.

Apart from which, you know what? She has no business running for VP if she has a disabled kid.

Nobody with a disabled kid should be taking on a public office job that has a huge time commitment, because there's no way that they can do that and take care of their child at the same time. My parents both worked full-time, had a live-in nurse, a live-in maid and an older daughter who took care of herself (me), and even they worked themselves to the bone to take care of my sister. I refuse to believe that Palin can juggle four kids, a Down's syndrome kid, and the job of being VP all at once; there's no way she can manage it and still give her kids the attention they need, especially the disabled one.

Obama's choice of VP is 'meh', because for a guy who talks about CHANGE all the time, he went with a really traditional Old White Male choice.

McCain's choice? Thoroughly despicable. Even putting aside the anti-abortion, anti-contraception (wtf, has she never heard of AIDS?) issues, I have no respect for anyone who would deliberately bring a child into the world, knowing that child's life will be filled with nothing but suffering. No respect AT ALL.

Edit: If you want to know more about the political stances that Palin has, check out

ilyena_sylph's post here where she lays out on the line all the reasons why no liberal female should think that Palin's likely to be on their side.

Threaded | Flat

Apart from which, you know what? She has no business running for VP if she has a disabled kid.
That was my first thought.

But I disagree on judging her choice. If she firmly believes she's doing the right thing - I can respect that. I respect less the way she judges people who make another choice on what they believe is right.

Obama's choice of VP is 'meh', because for a guy who talks about CHANGE all the time, he went with a really traditional Old White Male choice.
I don't know who he chose, but if it's a person he trusts and respects and wants to work by his side, isn't it important to chose that over a possible lesser person just because they're not a white old man?

Thank you.

I fully agree. That woman is a fucking moron.

I agree with you so much about Palin! I absolutely think she made a selfish choice having that child and is making another horribly selfish choice taking this job in her circumstances and yet she wants to deny choice to other women.

I am so glad you brought this point up. Do you mind if I link to your entry?

Re: Biden -- I think that if Obama had chosen anyone other than an Old White Male, he'd have a lot of trouble getting elected and so he chose someone he respects and can work with. I don't have a problem with that and the more I find out about Joe Biden, the more I think he was the right choice for VP at this time. The day is going to come when gender and race don't matter at all in these elections and we've moved a giant leap towards that this year. I never thought I'd live to see this day.

Re: everything you said about Palin = motherfucking yes.

Re: Viden. I actually thought that was a bit of an edgy choice for Obama. Because it seemed like everyone was expecting him to ask Clinton, which seemed like a bad idea to me for a number of reasons -- first being that this isn't Government Camp, you don't get a ribbon and a prize just for competing, and second being that it sounded patronizing to me, like he should give her the spot because, you know, her feelings might be hurt. (I don't know what your feelings on an Obama/Clinton ticket are, I'm just venting here.)

And third, I think choosing a white guy as VP is going to piss a lot of people off. Just think of the visual -- a white man taking back seat to a black man? Following his orders? It's definitely going to screw with a lot of preconceptions, in ways much subtler than a female VP would.

I believe that if you're truly dedicated to giving said child the best life they can possibly have, it's not such a horrible thing. I'm by no means anti-abortion, but I do think that we shouldn't just start killing children because we know they'll be sick. Even if they only live a short life, I think it's worth it.

I agree though that taking a public office is probably not the best idea for someone who's trying to raise a kid with Down's syndrome.

As for Obama's choice, I at least respect him for trying to deal with things. People's big fear about him was that he lacked experience, so he went for someone who had that experience. I don't think he would have chosen someone who would make him compromise his own goals.

Who knows~

/.... So totally watching this from the sidelines, but this is the second (third) post I've seen in as many on my flist.

While I personally wouldn't trust a Republican enough to throw 'em, I'm just... a little concerned at this point at how much media attention she's gotten just because she's a woman and has kids.

Had she been a guy? I don't think the media focus (and therefore, our focus) would have been as much on "oh noes! She has teh childrens! Keep her away!" as it is.

I see where you're coming from -- and I don't think you're blasting her for being a woman who is ignoring her kids, but rather as a parent (and there is a differential there) -- but I just. Gah. It bothers me that as soon as a woman is in a position to be somewhere it's like "but wait! She has a Victorian need to educate her kids! If she does not then who. will."

Three. Days.

She went back to work Three days after she had this baby. I didn't even get out of the hospital after three days. It boggles the mind, it really does. Not to sound like an old-fashioned anti-women's rights..but she should have stayed and bonded with said child she wanted to bring into this world as an already challenged being. Not to mention the fact that having a baby puts an incredible strain on an already strained and exhausted body.

We won't mention the fact that this woman has done things and stood for things that I would want to slap the crap out of her for. Airborne slaughter of wolves in Alaska. I've already got the rant started for that one...and it's going to be a long one.

She scares me. She literally makes the hair on the back of my neck stand on end to know that McCain could very well die, she could become president, and the very thought of what she could do to this country terrifies me.

because she's too selfish to put aside her own views and think about what's honestly best for the child.

Put aside her views? Put aside her views? Honestly, when have you ever done that? You write that with such glib ease, as though one's views are just clothes we pick up, put on, then discard when we feel they're out of fashion (which can happen, but is thankfully not the leading rule). She has made a judgement call on the value of life and the quality of life the child is likely to live, and decided that living in pain is better than not living. (And given her religious views has additionally probably factored in that life is sacred and god-given and it isn't her choice to make. I don't know what went through her head - and neither do you). While you may not agree with this, many people do. Do NOT be so close-minded as to say that just because someone has a different opinion than you (and YES it's one that affects someone else) she is being 'selfish and stupid, stupid, stupid'.

Pro-choice are we? The women's right to choose what happens in her body is paramount? Yeah, great, how well that view has held fast, hm?

I happen to think that the pain the child would be in would be sufficient to say it shouldn't have been born, but I do not know. There is sufficient uncertainty about the life that anyone leads, the awareness they have, the enjoyment they get out of anything that I have doubts. On balance I would probably come up with the conclusion that quality of life would be too low and would probably abort, but it is not fucking black and white and someone who makes the 'wrong' choice isn't necessarily selfish!

The only thing about your post I agree with is that I don't like the sound of her neglecting the child, though again I DO NOT know the circumstances and neither do you - I imagine as a prominent political figure she is able to afford some pretty sweet help. Oh, and I also don't want her to be VP, but for other reasons.

I do love you, and it's great that you actually speak out about things you care about and raise awareness, but for fuck's sake think about the other side before you make extremely judgemental assumptions.

Um... you don't know me, someone who posted a link from a comm referred me, and I have to say that I completely agree with you in essence.

Although I don't blame her for NOT aborting the child, and probably wouldn't myself under the same circumstances (I'm the same age), I think it was reckless irresponsible for her to allow herself to become pregnant in the first place, and reflected even further by her decision to take on something like a VP slot with an infant.

This wasn't a "last chance" scenario - she has four other children. This was not a late in life marriage. This was just irresponsible and stupid. When my husband and I married five years ago, knowing that he was too old to raise another child to adulthood and knowing that my chances of having a healthy baby were slim, we took care of things permanently.

My husband has worked with disabled children for years and his opinion is that children with Down's syndrome are delightful people and I trust his judgment on that. But we were not about to inflict this on any child when we already had children from previous marriages.

And this may sound a bit old-fashioned, but I don't think she should be taking on a VP slot with even a healthy, normal infant that young. I've not had a special needs child myself, but I've had a couple of healthy ones. It's a physically and emotionally taxing process and you don't recover properly until at least 12-18 months. And that's when your young. When you're "old", it's even more taxing. The reason they let us get off sinking ship first is because we have the ability to bring forth and nurture new life. That's important work. One does not take on a brand new job, especially stressful, high pressure, demanding jobs while trying to nurture a small infant and recover from childbirth.

She's irresponsible however you look at it. She's a bad parent, even if the baby was fine and healthy. It was irresponsible for her to allow herself to get pregnant, it is irresponsible for her to take on a high-pressure job while she has a small infant at home.

Oh - and Joe Biden - yeah, he's an old white guy, but he's a very cool old white guy. I'd party with him anytime. He's a firecracker and sharp as razors and with a sterling sense of honor. Joe's good people. He looks like a used car salesman, but he's good people. I'd trust him with my life savings and my firstborn.

I totally agree with you - got your link from another lj and I'm blanking on names now. IN my elementary school they tried to bring in mentally disabled kids in our class so they could learn how to work with other kids. It didn't work. They screamed in class and needed more attention so the rest of us got screwed. In a way I understand why they did it, and it was the early 80s soo they were trying new things, but they need to understand that they're called special needs kids for a reason they NEED special attention and more of it. It's deplorable to have a newborn baby with down syndrome and say HEY I want to be a heartbeat away from president, cuz I don't know what the VP does anyway.

oy

PS: I didn't comment before because my experience with people with Down's Syndrome is reduced to Corky from Life Goes On. So I have no idea of the range, given that the actor; Chris Burke, could memorize lines, interact with colleagues and make varied distinctions necessary to portray a character.

However, if Palin had decided to give birth to a child after early detection of cystic fibrosis and then went ahead into a political career and jumped at the chance to be VP of the US? I'd probably be feeling the same kind of revulsion you are - because I'm aware of the pain of cystic fibrosis and I'm aware of living a life of pain and the thought of doing that to a child and then abandoning that child to neutral and paid caretakers for one's career...

No words.

I posted here because I didn't know it was on dj - I generally check lj first these days, and didn't think to go check if the same post was on dj. I thought it would be a little excessive to post my rant a second time there just for Numa! Do you have a preference to where I comment?

Right, on to the debate!

There are a number of different issues here, all getting tangled up.
a) Should she have had the baby knowing it had Down's Syndrome?
b) Would the answer to a) depend on her reasons for doing it?
c) Is she neglecting her child?

a) Right, so the bit I was mainly objecting to was your assertion that she should have aborted. I simply do not believe that this is a clear-cut case. Let's ignore COMPLETELY her reasons for it, for now, and let's ignore the pro-life/pro-choice stances. What you're talking about is eugenics. Regardless of its applicability (or not) with Down's Syndrome, to a certain extent it's a little bit dangerous as we really shouldn't get too gung-ho about getting rid of those who we feel couldn't possibly enjoy living. But I won't dwell too much on that - I tend not to go for slippery-slope arguments.

About whether the quality of life is too low - as I said before, I really don't know. I don't know much about Down's Syndrome, but the internet (ah the glorious internet) seems to be telling me that they can form relationships, that they can get joy out of life, and not that they live a life of constant pain and suffering. Interesting. I've only worked with one man with Down's Syndrome before - and he was quite old, so obviously they can live longer lives - and he was very sweet and mild-mannered. Don't know any further details though.

So essentially I think I disagree with the stance that they would be better off not being born. I'm definitely disagreeing with your assertion that it is black and white - regardless of what experiences you've had, there's enough doubt to sway some people. I can't stress enough that I wouldn't want to be too care-free in my decisions about who should live and who should die - it is a VERY tricky and morally ambiguous case (one which is still being debated heatedly), and I don't think that you should take her decision as indication of close-mindedness.

Whereas previously, a Down’s child could be born without the prior knowledge of the mother, going forward, a parent with a Down’s child will likely have made a conscious choice to have that child. As prenatal testing for trisomy 21 becomes ubiquitous, Down’s children (and eventually those with other genetic disorders) will increasingly become symbols of faith – a freak show meant to communicate the “family values” of their parents. The children will become public sacrifices made by their parents for their faith. They will be a symbol of religious reverence in the same way as the scarred backs of Catholics who flagellate themselves, or Buddhist monks who set themselves on fire, or Sunni Muslims who mutilate their girl’s genitals or Shiites who bloody their children’s heads with swords.

Genuine moral virtues – such as integrity, honesty, and productivity are not useful as evidence of religious virtue. To the extent that their practical benefit is visible to everyone, they do not represent the special domain of religion. To demonstrate religious virtue, it is necessary to sacrifice authentic moral values in favor of “religious” values. The particular object of the sacrifice is not important – there is nothing particularly “biblical” about being prolife (the Christian bible just as easily supports the opposite position.) If Christian fundamentalists decided that cutting of one’s hand sufficed as proof of moral virtue, they would be wrong to do so, but not much more so than the numerous other ways that people find to be self-destructive.

What is really vicious about fundamentalists in America is that the prey on the most vulnerable –poor pregnant young girls and women, those dying from painful terminal illnesses, the loved ones of brain-dead patients, — and children afflicted with terrible genetic illnesses. One can at least grasp the moral indifference with which a fundamentalist can force a single young mother to abandon her goals and dreams and condemn her and her child to poverty. But what can we say about a parent that chooses a life of suffering upon their child? If we are morally outraged by child rapists, how should we judge a parent who chooses a lifetime of suffering on their own child?

Darling? Any response to my comments above?

your a retard

"No one, regardless of circumstances, can pass divine judgment. No one knows what goes on in the minds of the mentally ill. No one knows how much wisdom can come from suffering. Every life is precious."
---sophie scholl, in response to the gestapo interrogator defending the Nazi's gassing of retarded children. (Sophie Scholl: the final days, Zeitgeist films 2005)

Basicaly a paperdoll book that makes fun of Palin---Pure Awesome. http://www.booksonboard.com/index.php?BODY=viewbook&BOOK=335600

First of all, Obama got elected - Yaye.
Secondly, I also disliked Palin - A Lot.
Thirdly, and finally, I do not agree with you on the stance that if a person tests positive for a down syndrome baby that they should have an abortion. The tests are not absolute. You could test positive, and then have a healthy baby. Also, I have a friend who had a baby, Landon, who has Down Syndrome. He has a very mild case of it, and will actually live a pretty productive life. There is no test to determine how badly the child will be affected while in the womb of the mother. Only time and birth will tell. I would have thought that perhaps you would have known this with your history with down syndrome, but perhaps not. I believe it is every woman's right to choose what they are going to do with their body, and I think that if they decide that they want to terminate, or keep a baby that has a disease, it is their decision to do, but if they do decide to have the baby, they have to be prepared to deal with all that comes with it. A woman at the age of 44 (cough, PALIN) shouldn't be worried about having babies anyways... she should be focused on parenting her teenager(who is pregnant), so she doesn't get pregnant! (This coming from a girl who got pregnant in high school)

Thankfully, Palin can now head back to Alaska to take care of her baby. Which is where she can stay, and where she needs to be regardless.

Why do you think she waited 6 months to tell her parents and children she was even pregnant? I think she couldn't figure out how to get an abortion anonymously. Since everyone knew her ignorant anti-choice stance -> as gov. she pushed it upon everyone w/ears, she couldn't survive politically if the truth of the abortion ever came out.

My husband wanted his first girlfriend (who became his wife) to abort. She wouldn't, they got married. They were miseraable, they got divorced & he got snipped. Now he's a hypocritical anti-choice catholic again (since he no longer has to worry about it). But he can't tell his family of 7 brothers and sisters (none of whom have more than 2 kids) that he got snipped cz it's anti-catholic.

Yeah, she spends all this time and money running around buying fancy clothes for herself and everyone else in the family. We never hear what she's actually doing to improve her youngest son's quality of life.
http://tothecenter.com/index.php?readmore=7572

Threaded | Flat

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

reply part 1

no subject

no subject

jerk

There lives were not worthy?

Sarah Palin Paperdolls

Down Syndrome

I think she wanted to abort but...

Palin is selfish