April 13, 2012
"My general view is those of us who are in the public life, we’re fair game. Our families are civilians."

President Obama.  No.  As a blanket rule, this is 100% wrong.  Families of politicians can be and often do become relevant to public discussion of a political candidate’s policies.  Not always, but often.

For example: when Sarah Palin was running for Vice President, she advocated abstinence-only policies as a solution to unwanted or unplanned pregnancies.  Soon after her candidacy was announced, it was discovered that her daughter, Bristol Palin, had become pregnant when she was 17.  That is absolutely relevant and fair to bring up in a national debate about Sarah Palin’s policy proposals.  If the policies you’re running on don’t even work for your family, why would you ever try to force them on mine?  That abstinence education clearly failed the Palin family is absolutely relevant to the national discussion about abstinence, especially when she is the one suggesting it.  She’s essentially recommending a product that she knows doesn’t work; but we’re being asked to ignore the evidence because it’s impolite.

Mind you I am not advocating unrestrained and completely unscrupulous scrutiny of politicians’ family members.  But when a politician makes a policy proposal that affects my family, and that policy has clearly failed within their own household, that failure is relevant to determining the veracity of that politician’s claims.  It’s fair to make that observation; even more-so when the observation is true. 

  1. methazineee reblogged this from letterstomycountry
  2. genderdragon reblogged this from letterstomycountry
  3. zachvaughn said: As a paid political hack, I completely and wholeheartedly endorse this post.
  4. laliberty said: He doesn’t mean it when he says it. Just playing politics, trying to look like he’s above it all. Everybody’s fair game, and people face the ire of public opinion when they cross a line the public finds offensive.
  5. letterstomycountry posted this