Having said that, I am deeply troubled by Sarah Palin. Being a social conservative that advocates for abstinence-only programs in the schools, and simply as a parent, I would think that she would have more concern for her daughter and her family than to run for vice-president at this time given the all but certain likelihood — now real — that the news would become public. If it were me, I would want to spend more time with my family and help my daughter get through this difficult situation rather than disappear on the campign trail for the next two months and have my daughter become the poster child for the anti-abstinence crowd.

But I am even more intrigued by John McCain’s decision to put her on the ticket in the first place. He claims to have known about the pregnant daughter situation before asking Palin to join the ticket. I am sure he could see that this might drive a stake through the heart of the conservative cause. No doubt he knew that making the announcement several days after putting Palin on the ticket in the midst of the GOP convention and a hurricane would look like an attempt to bury the story. The announcement states that Bristol and the “young man” will be getting married and I am sure he knew the fact that they are not already married five months into the pregnancy (what are they waiting for, a Thanksgiving Day parade to go with it?) will seem contrived.

And so, I have to wonder, is Sarah Palin that special, or was John McCain that desparate? 

UPDATE (September 1, 2008, 6:45 pm): Grover Norquist is quoted on CNN as follows:

Before, they were excited about her, with the Down syndrome baby. But now with this, they are over the moon. It reinforces the fact that this family lives its pro-life values.

So let’s see if I get this: Teenage daughter literally refutes mother’s abstinence platform and is led into a shotgun marriage while mom goes off and campaigns all over the country (in between consulting with the lawyer she retained to defend her against ethics violations), and all of this is a good thing? These are pro-life values?

Note also that six of the seven justices are Republicans and that Governor Schwarzenegger has come out against the proposed ballot initiative currently being certified for the November ballot. Some pundits have attributed Bush’s 2004 re-election to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s directive to issue seme-sex marriage licenses (which is what prompted this litigation in the first place). All of this will make for an interesting time come November, and may once again put California in play for the Republicans, or at the very least make the Democrats spend more money and resources in California protecting what would otherwise be a safely blue state. 

“In my zeal to oppose anti-Semitism and bigotry in all its ugly forms, I have often emphasized the darkest chapters in the history of Catholics and Protestant relations with the Jews. In the process, I may have contributed to the mistaken impression that the anti-Jewish violence of the Crusades and the Inquisition defines the Catholic Church. It most certainly does not.”

It was John McCain’s seeking and acceptance of Hagee’s endorsement and McCain’s at least initial refusal to reject Hagee’s controversial statements that prompted increased media scrutiny, especially in light of the problems Barack Obama has faced with his pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

I haven’t been able to find the actual text of the letter, so it is not clear whether Hagee repudiated any of the other controversial positions he has taken over the years, and, other than for political purposes, one has to wonder why he wrote this letter. Hagee has often made references to the Roman Catholic Chruch as ”the apostate church” and the “great whore.” Hagee now says he better understands that his use of those descriptions, taken from the New Testament book of Revelation, are “a rhetorical device long employed in anti-Catholic literature and commentary.” He just figured this out now?

And there is no word on whether he still believes some of his other wacky statements: about Israel, his belief that Katrina was the result of God being angry at a gay pride parade in New Orleans, that the Koran teaches that all Muslims want to kill Jews and Christians, and, well, I could go on.

UPDATE (May 22, 2008): John McCain has just repudiated Hagee’s endorsement after audio has surfaced where Hagee claims Hitler was sent by God to help Jews reach the promised land. In a variant on the old you-can’t-fire-me-I-quit routine, Hagee has released a statement saying he is tired of “baseless attacks” and is removing himself from any active role in the 2008 campaign.

It’s worth a look. Enjoy …

There is one thing that will bring the Democrats together (and I have never believed that the prolonged primary struggle between the two has been a fatal or even a seriously damaging one to the party) and it is more apparent now than ever: Obama and Clinton need to be on the same ticket, Obama as president and Clinton as vice-president. I know Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have said it won’t happen, but it should happen. The true test of leadership and of the gravitas it takes for a first-term senator to deserve the nomination and the presidency is to make sure it happens.

Of course, Democrats have long been famous for screwing up elections and eating their own, so it probably won’t happen. But it should. Now.

Greenwald goes on to say that “John McCain’s entire worldview on foreign policy, cheered on excitedly by Lopez — not only with regard to endless war in Iraq but also Iran and beyond — is nothing but a vehement violation and rejection of “the Church’s teaching on innocent human life.”

On this Greenwald is correct, but right-wing Catholics, of course, are not the only ones who hijack theology in order to pick and choose.

UPDATE: In the meantime, Frank Rich has more details on another preacher to be watched in this election year, Reverend John Hagee and his candidate of choice, John McCain. Be sure to watch the video. Scary stuff …