Friends of mine who know the Palins says Todd is a totally absent father. Sarah is raising the kids by herself. The kids refused to move to Juneau so she's commuting back and forth between Juneau and Wasilla.

That said, VP or Prez is a 24/7 job that involves being away from home for extended periods of time, children take second place to national concerns. So you're going to tell a 7 year old and an infant to buzz off while you're off on a week long trip to foreign capitals, while your hubby is off on the North Slope or racing his snowmobiles. The equivalence between a 9-5 job and a 24/7 job doesn't hold true, especially with small children, with one effective parent.

Very well said Sargent. I am definitely not voting for Sarah Palin, for many of the reasons you have noted, but I will gladly vote for YOU anytime, should the opportunity arise...

McCain announced today that he would name Levi Johnston, the future son in law of Sarah Palin, Energy Secretary in his administration. When asked about appointing a high schooler with no experience, McCain said” This guy is perfect for me, not only is he not afraid to drill offshore, he is also comfortable drilling onshore in unprotected areas.”

— Andrew [Posted on the NY Times]

Jennifer, why did you feel compelled to assert parenting experience is a plus, not a minus, on her resume.? Is this a strawman argument? I have heard very few out thee, if anyone, frankly, who are actually are claiming parenting per se is an issue? Isn't the real issue how competent somebody is? Quality of parenting could be relevant there. Do you make that crucial distinction?

Beyond that though, do you have the personal depth of perspective to see how each of the points you raise, can easily be the root of bad leadership just as much as good leadership? One of the things that comes through in your comment is that you don't distinguish well between the fact in parenting you have control over a child's life, and in a democracy, the most important quality in a leader is for him or her to respect they don't have control over other adults, only their consent.

There is no doubt that being a mother is a tough job. However, personally her having children is not a measure of whether or not she can be VP or President... her character is. She opposes abortion in all cases, believes in abstinence only and is against programs that limit teen pregnancy. Yet, her own daughter is now pregnant!

So, these things ARE, in fact, valid concerns on her character and judgment.

I don't think there is any dispute from this crowd that there are, in fact, good reasons to question Palin's character and judgement. I believe Jennifer is pointing out simply that someone being a mother isn't a reason for us to questions their ability to be a dedicated leader.
As Bill's comment demonstrates, people do seem to be assuming that she doesn't (or shouldn't) have the time to be a good leader, because it will take her away from her parenting responsibilities. I think it is unfair to make that judgement, and frankly none of our business. Let's not go there, unless you think that a woman's place is in the home...

One would think that after 7 years of the most disastrous Administration in the contemporary era, that we'd at least PRETEND to focus on the policy positions advocated by the respective candidates and their parties.

Whether someone is a parent or not, has nothing to do with whom they'll appoint to the Courts; what environmental policy they'll have; whether they'll foment wars; etc.....

Looking forward to the debate questions:

What's your favorite color? What music do you like? What's your astrological sign? Pepsi or Coke?

I need a drink.....

We will be better of having a Mother in leadership positions because of her parenting experience?

George W. Bush is a parent. Dick Cheney is a parent.

Even good parents could make disastrous leaders.

As much as I think Sarah Palin represents a poor VP choice, I agree that those out there who question Palin's ability to be VP because she has young kids are asking questions of a woman candidate that are never asked of a man. As a working mother of two young kids myself, I don't know how she's managed to juggle governing a state and parenting, but I do know it's her choice to make and making it doesn't automatically make her a bad mother or a poor leader. (However, the list of other reasons why she's a poor leader is long...)

Motherhood doesn't replace work experience, but it does augment it. And frankly, as more and more actively involved dads are finding out, so does fatherhood.

It's a given that Sarah Palin is bat-sh*t crazy and simply wrong on every issue I hold dear. And even though I'm a working mom, I personally think it's inappropriate for a mom or a dad to take on a job like VP with a special needs INFANT at home. But I agree with Jennifer that it's totally sexist that the issue of "who will take care of her kids" gets raised with Palin and not with Obama, Edwards, or other men who had young children at home when they sought higher office.

As a parent Sarah Palin fired the Chief of Police because he wanted to move bar closing time from five am to two am. A town of nine thousand with forty-two meth labs; children were sleeping in pails. If you get this pal in at the white house you will have full support for the end-time agenda. Jews will have hope if they convert to her version of Christianity before the bombs begin to fall.

So, guess she is what men and women of good conscience want a heartbeat away from ordering a first strike.

The benefit of parenting is the corresponding selflessness it instills in the parent. While non-parents can practice and hone this skill, it is part and parcel of parenthood. I agree, selflessness is a good trait for a leader. Nannies make the time commitment a non-issue. She will need to vet them on their attitudes on abstinence and fire any who might provide the kids with birth control, God forbid. Based upon past experience she would probably pressure her Chief of Staff to fire the nanny, and if met with refusal, fire the Chief of Staff. Top notch selection John McLame.

For starters, because she's flat-out crazy Kari, please back that one up too. I assume you're not saying her policy stands make her crazy because they differ from yours.
She didn't say McCain was a good candidate because he's articulate, bright, clean and nice looking. So it must be something else. She didn't say you couldn't go into a 7-11 without a slight Indian accent. And she doesn't envy Northern slave states for their appeal to Southern voters. So it must be something else that makes her crazy. Or maybe it really is just her stand on the issues.

As a mother-of-two, I've taken offense to the comments floating around about whether she should take on the role of a candidate for VP as the mother of 5 kids - two with special needs (one 4-months and the other 17).

I think that even if we disagree, it's good that we're are having a discussion about this because it smacks of problems with work/family balance and gender inequality not often discussed. However, at its core, this is really just a political issue. Sarah Palin was selected, in part, because there was an assumption that, by virtue of her very anatomy, she would appeal to disaffected Clinton voters. Her selection was endorsed by the religious right; a group who (over the past 8 years) has become accustomed to having power of the “executive” variety. It was assumed that her positions would appeal to them and her ovaries to women like me.

And as much as I’d like to see a woman in executive office, I would not vote for someone with positions and values so divergent from my own. Mother or not. Whether this represents feminist progress is another question entirely. The reality is that Sarah Palin is ardently anti-choice (even in the case of rape or incest), favors abstinence-only education and the teaching of creationism in schools. That alone would send me running to Obama, even without all the discussion of her inexperience, Troopergate, and her support of questionable projects (like the Bridge to Nowhere, which she supported before she was against it).

But of course, these are not the issues we’re discussing, instead the narrative has focused on whether she should be subjecting her family to this scrutiny and who will care for her baby. This represents a problem that I believe reflects entrenched (and sometimes internalized) sexism.

To read more check out: http://www.activistas.us/activistas/2008/09/sarah-palin-and.html#comments

Thank you Jennifer for bringing up this topic. It stands as a great opportunity for us to clear parenting from the political table.

While I would love to see the myriad of politicians exposed for being such awful parents as a means of recognizing how they will provide leadership to the larger scope of family, it is in fact personal.

Parents are constantly being judged in their personal lives and it's distracting to the actual act of parenting, just as it's distracting the American public currently.

<h2>Oh how I hope that our hopefuls are consistent in bringing attention to these real facts discussed in this post about the team of McCain/Palin. I hope I hope I hope!</h2>