BartBlog

September 2, 2008

Did Palin try to “Abort” “Retarded” Child?

Filed under: Uncategorized — daveb @ 9:50 pm

So it seems Sarah Palin did EVERYTHING wrong once she learned her amniotic fluid was leaking during the pregnancy of her fifth child. That child, of course, had already been diagnosed with Down Syndrome and she knew it. So I don’t believe the story is that she hid the pregnancy of her teen-aged daughter. Instead, it is my opinion she tried her best to abort the handicapped child she was going to have. But only in a way she could claim was God’s decision for her child.

Sarah Palin’s special needs child would weigh her and her career ambitions down like an anchor. We already see that’s true because of the many women questioning her choice of politics over her children and family. Should she be running for VP of a party that believes woman’s role is a home-maker, and mother? Should she, or any other mother, be running for a public office – especially a mother of a special needs child?

So what might a “smart” woman in her situation do to minimize her family obligations? Well, aborting a special-needs child that will take time, money, time, effort, time and effort would be something she could do. Certainly, ignoring that child for one’s own personal ambitions might become an issue for the “FAMILY values” party.

But, of course, as the new governor of her state and a political pro-life advocate she couldn’t consider aborting the mentally-disabled child. Word might get out now or later in her political career. She couldn’t chance it. Obviously hoping that she’d miscarry the burdensome child long before she delivered; Sarah Palin never told her close personal staff she was pregnant. Finally, at seven months, when her hopes she’d lose the baby to natural causes evaporated, she told everyone.

At 36 weeks into her pregnancy (a point at which the baby was still considered premature but viable) Palin’s amniotic fluid began leaking during a conference in Texas. Since I’m not a doctor I went to the WebMD site to see if this was really a problem or not. What the site says is: “Call your health professional now or go to your
hospital’s labor and delivery unit immediately
if you…Have a sudden release of fluid from your vagina. It is possible to mistake a leak of amniotic fluid for a problem with bladder control.” Apparently after delivering 4 other children Palin didn’t know her leaking of amniotic fluid meant anything – REALLY?

My opinion is that she knew exactly what she was doing. She knew she was about to deliver a child that would be a burden to her and her political ambitions. She knew that as a pro-family, pro-life, family-values politician she could never escape the questions about her loyalty to politics over family. Not surprisingly, those questions are being asked now – as they should be.

Given her political creed and ambitions she couldn’t abort the burdensome child and risk people finding out. So my opinion is she made a calculated decision to stay in Dallas to give her 30-minute speech as her fluid leaked (What could she have to say that was more important than her child?) This was her first hope that her leaking amniotic fluid might mean the child would die in-utero.

After she delivered her speech she chose not to go to a hospital in Dallas and deliver the child (keep in mind that when she got back to Alaska they induced labor for a premature birth – an obvious sign of a problem), instead, in Dallas, she got on a plane for a flight back to Alaska. I checked the flight schedule from Dallas to Anchorage. The shortest flight is 9 hours. For a fifth child is it really a good idea to assume you have nine hours to wait?

She didn’t tell the airline she was in labor. That would be a LIE of omission for those of us who pay marginal attention to religion. Not to mention the fact she could have delivered on an airplane. A place that is completely unsanitary and unfit for delivering a child. Rather than put her disabled child first, a child she knew was a Down Syndrome child, she decided to risk it and fly back to Alaska. How could that possibly be a good decision? You know you have a special needs child to deliver but you decide to get on a plane and risk it for at least nine hours?

Can any sane mother comitted to raising a special needs child believe they would do what Sarah Palin did in the same circumstances? No, that’s just not possible. And it gets better

This was her fifth child. As we all know women deliver faster after their first and subsequent children. By deciding to avoid hospitals with neo-natal intensive care units and flying back to Alaska Sarah Palin, in my opinion, made the decision to abort her Down Syndrome child in favor of her political ambitions.

She chose to bypass Dallas, the major-metropolitan city she was in, when she started to leak fluid and then she chose to bypass Seattle and Anchorage on the way to a back-woods, tundra-town so she could deliver her child. A child that was already diagnosed with issues.

If there were justice in this country we would take that child from her. She has already displayed disregard and neglect for that child.

Why? Because she had the hope God would see her as a servant for other causes and would let that child die. How shameful, how disgusting. Is this the type of person we want a heartbeat away from our nation’s leader? I know we don’t.

3 Comments »

  1. None of this really matters, though it could be very interesting to puzzle over in a John Edwards/Rielle Hunter sort of way, if you want to spend time on that.

    I’ve been mulling on this all day and I have a theory.

    Sarah Palin is likely a Trojan Horse. McCain really wanted Lieberman, but the party wouldn’t stand for it and he’d be broke in a month. Palin is pulling in major contributions from the far right grass roots. By October 1st, McCain’s campaign coffers will be bulging with all the kind of small contributions Obama brags about all the time. Then Palin will exit the race, explaining that she has overwhelming family obligations. The tear-jerking speech will mirror Hillary’s endorsement of Obama – and it’s a simple fact that when people have made a tangible (cash) investment in a candidate, they tend to go and vote for them because the cognitive dissonance would just be too great otherwise. So, out goes Palin and in comes Lieberman. Tons of evangelicals will now vote, maybe holding their noses but voting nevertheless, for McCain rather than stay home. Lieberman will be presented as the ultimate act of reaching across the aisle, McCain will be hailed as the real change agent, and it will be game, set and match for the Republicans.

    Comment by Joanne from WI — September 2, 2008 @ 10:17 pm

  2. This was top news on Raw Story this morning. Rove loves to brag, loves being the kingmaker. See my comment above and tell me if the hair is standing up on the back of your neck like mine. Democrats, beware. This is a trap with no exit, so Democrats better be able to fight and win in this arena.

    “Karl Rove, the former White House fixer who’s made a living in politics for his entire adult life, praised John McCain’s “brilliant” pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate even while acknowledging that the pick was motivated solely by politics rather than her ability to step in and become commander in chief.”

    Comment by Joanne from WI — September 3, 2008 @ 6:34 am

  3. Joanne, You aren’t the only one with this thought, see the article below.

    Intrade market sees 14.6 pct chance Palin withdrawn
    Wed Sep 3, 2008 7:11am EDT
    By Daniel Trotta

    NEW YORK (Reuters) – The online prediction market Intrade sees a 14.6 percent chance Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will be withdrawn as the Republican vice presidential nominee before the U.S. presidential election on November 4.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0240046620080903

    Comment by kerry — September 3, 2008 @ 2:35 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Powered by WordPress