In keeping up with the "silly names" meme in the Palin household, new mother Bristol (named after the boards used in school projects) gave birth to her healthy baby boy today. Weighing in at 7lbs 4oz, please welcome Tripp to the family of mad names.

People magazine reports that Bristol Palin gave birth to Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston on Sunday. He weighed 7 pounds, 4 ounces.

Relative Colleen Jones tells the magazine the baby is fine and Bristol is "doing well." Jones is the sister of Bristol’s grandmother.

The father is Levi Johnston [so named after the jeans], a former hockey player at Alaska’s Wasilla High School. He has said he and Bristol plan to marry.

Little Tripp will have two uncles, Trig and Track; and an auntie, Piper. Am I missing anyone? Scooter? Mini? Elfin? Surely there must be a Bruiser or a Rocky?

While Kathleen Parker normally drives me insane with her "oogedy boogedy" columns, today she is less annoying than usual. She couldn’t resist a few Sarah Palin zingers ("her inability to articulate ideas or even simple thoughts all combined to create an impression of not-quite-there.") But, she does begin the column with this:

It is a legitimate question: Why is the resume-thin Caroline Kennedy being treated seriously as a prospective appointee to the U.S. Senate when the comparatively more-qualified Gov. Sarah Palin received such a harsh review?

Good question. Speaking with my politically savvy conservative journalist friend this morning, we concluded that New York Governor David Paterson wouldn’t really, actually, literally appoint a person with a nonexistent political resume to a U.S. Senate seat…would he? The possibility is so incredible, it’s laughable. Except that if it really happens it won’t be funny. It will confirm the existence of American political dynasties and plow through the American dream every politician so readily exploits.

Parker notes that Palin "worked hard to get from Wasilla High to the governor’s mansion" and was elected to her positions, which commanded an 80% approval rating. On the other hand, Caroline Kennedy "is a likely U.S. senator solely on the basis of having decided that she’d like that quite a lot."

Granted, Palin was vying for a much more critical spot and was chosen as John McCain’s runningmate for some of the wrong reasons. But here’s the thing — if Kennedy has any self-respect or wants anyone to genuinely respect her, she will attempt to get elected instead of appointed. For someone of her inexperience to even ask for this position is — dare I use this term in reference to a Kennedy — tacky.

Is it just me, or does Hillary Clinton actually look…cute, in this photo? Endearing, almost. I don’t want to repeatedly stab my eye with a spork after looking at this, which is my normal reaction to her mugshot. I mean, look at those dimples! That cute little toggle-clasp jacket. The golden halo headband, which — gulp — is maybe even a little angel-esque. True, the nutcracker mouth is still in place, waiting to masticate her next victim. But she looks refreshed! Like she’s spent some time in short-shorts lounging by the pool since her death race with Obamaman. She’s freed herself from the stiff clown suits and coordinating plastic jewelry, and, dare I say, has taken a cue from the Sarah Palin playbook? Well, I won’t go that far. But she’s adorable, here! Totally rocking out the cute older woman / mother image.

Okay, so I really hate to add to our Palin tag cloud, and I hope that someday it will shrink into obscurity, but to follow up on something ENB mentioned below, I’m kind of jazzed about the Palin short-shorts situation. Why? Because I have the exact same pair of shorts—actually two pairs, one black and one navy.  They’re awesome.  I got them at Target.

But still: since when are running shorts and an oversize t-shirt “sexy,” “slutty,” or “skimpy,” as celebuzz suggests? And since when is such an outfit even vaguely inappropriate for lounging poolside?

If schlubby running shorts from Target and a t-shirt are sexy and slutty, well, apparently I’ve been dressing really sexily and sluttily to sit on the couch with my dogs and watch TV. (What, you thought I wore them to jog or something?  Silly reader, I don’t run unless I’m being chased.)

Interesting note: the page title (which you can see up at the top of your browser) on this particular pic I’ve used (which is from celebuzz.com) is “Palin’s Slutty Shorts.”  The rest of the pics on celebuzz just say “Short-shorts pics.”  Weird.

If you’re on Facebook (or MySpace?), you’ve probably received one of those messages touting a “secret admirer” whose identity you can only suss out by signing up for some Web site or application. The idea that some actual unknown paramour over the age of 15 would be too shy to talk to you in person (or at least, you know, facebook poke you, or whatever it is the kids do these days) but totally comfortable signing up for a Web site that will then reveal his or her identity to you via text message kind of defies logic. Nonetheless, I always kind of assumed it was one of those things along the lines of the “Will you be my zombie jump rope partner ninja pirate bride?” messages that crop up from more annoying online friends—a cutesy meme/gimmick. Turns out it’s more sinister; it’s a hoax! Or at least one such brand of it is:

MyLuvCrush was one of a number of businesses to seek lonely hearts using the increasingly populous online communities. The new generation of Internet services has, some experts say, created new opportunities for fraud and identity crime.

Users of several social networking sites were shown advertisements made to look like incoming messages, said Paula Selis, senior counsel for the state Attorney General’s Office’s high-tech consumer protection unit. Users were told a “crush” in their area was looking for them, then routed through a series of prompts ending with a demand that they sign up for a mobile phone text messaging service to see their nonexistent “crush.”

In Seattle, the state where MyLuvCrush’s parent-company is based, the state has branded this activity deceptive advertising, and ordered MyLuvCrush to stop. Web 2.0: crueler than the Burn Book.

Too busy dreaming about all your secret admirers to read Salon’s 17-billion-part series on the future of conservatism? PunkAssBlog condenses nicely:

Douglas Kmiec, a professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University: Barack Obama is Ronald Reagan reborn. Also, could we stop obsessing on abortion?

Ross Douthat, author of Grand New Party and a blogger for the Atlantic: No.

Etc. [read the whole thing; if you’re used to traveling in conservative Interweb circles, it’s pretty funny to see an outsider’s take on the whole thing]

Or you could just read Wonkette’s Sara K. Smith on the future of the conservative intelligentsia. The saddest sentence ever written:

NR has now lost Buckley and Frum. The only scribes who remain are K-Lo, Starburst, and their fat Mexican secretary, Jonah Goldberg. Together this threesome will save American conservatism.

Speaking of Wonkette, why is everyone so uproarious about these pictures of Sarah Palin lounging poolside? Dude, the woman just lost the vice presidency; let her guzzle champagne in short shorts all she likes.

And while we’re on the Gawker Media family, Marianne beat me to blogging here about the Kay Hymowitz City Journal article about how it’s hard to be a mysoginist in the dating scene, but if you want more, Jezebel has a good analysis.

Oh, and let’s not get started on the whole bullshit “nice guys don’t get the girl” that all these guys re-hash. Well, yeah, sure, if The Girl is the head cheerleader (and she always is) — but were they ever asking out the girl who was President of Students Against Drunk Driving and the German club (i.e., dorky, awkward me)? Some of them were, sure, but I’ll be damned if most of them aren’t happily married to truly pleasant women who they adore.

And while we’re on girlie sites, Slate has announced the editors for its soon-to-be-launched women’s mag, Double X, which include the lady Chloe Sevigny played in Shattered Glass (Hanna Rosin) and the intimidatingly impressive Megan O’Rourke, who edits the poetry section of The Paris Review (which, in a fit of something, inspired me to decide I don’t read enough literary journals and subscribe to The Paris Review this morning, because I need more things piling up on my coffee table…).

But the pub I can have pile up on my coffee table no longer? Playgirl. After 35 years, the mag will lavish us with handle-bar mustaches and ample chest hair no longer. (Oh, okay, I’ve never even seen a copy of Playgirl, I just needed another bad segue).

Evening, folks.

Screenshot from today’s mag:

I gotta go with the original. Fey is cute, but she’s a Palin imitator — on screen, and in a beauty contest.

Stumbled upon this via Alarming News.

As I write this post Fox News is talking to Bill Kristol about Sarah Palin. They’re talking about disgruntled McCain staffers saying that she was “difficult.”

Each and every successful woman has had to be “difficult”, otherwise they would be trampled on by anyone.

Kristol adds that McCain campaign staffers have been calling reporters in the last week of the campaign badmouthing Palin. Kristol correctly pointed out that this is, to say the least, disrespectful to McCain.

One story that’s making the rounds is Carl Cameron’s, who said “We’re told by folks that she didn’t know what countries were in NAFTA… we’re told that she didn’t understand that Africa was a continent rather than a country just in itself.”

Then there’s the bathrobe story, which Carl Cameron is also duly conveying, because after all, he was told that she opened the door wearing a [hotel] bathrobe. Of course, if she was alone in the room and had stepped out of the shower, and didn’t open the door, Carl would be saying he was told she didn’t open the door.

Told by whom?

Where are their names?

Were they at the RNC? Because I was at the Republican National Convention, and I assure you, the convention was dead on the water until the moment that Sarah Palin came in and totally electrified the people gathered there. If it weren’t for her, the Convention would have been a wake.

Palin has put a refreshing and invigorating face on Republican politics, and has also touched thousands of families with special needs children. Her sincerity and example standing up for her beliefs in the sanctity of life, and her respect for the Constitution resonate among conservatives.

The McCain campaign staffers who are spreading this should come forward. I mean, if their allegations are true, they owe the American public, John McCain, and Sarah Palin herself the full force of their testimony.

By doing so, we will also find out what their agenda may be.

Dear reader, which is it? Sexism, blaming game, or hidden agenda?

I have to interrupt our regularly scheduled blogging to bring you some Friday afternoon joy, in the form of Sarah Palin’s youngest two children:

Piper is a snow princess and Trig is an elephant. And I’m jealous of how adorable Sarah’s kids are.

… Kevin Burke at National Review Online suggests that people who criticize Palin are really just upset and guilt-ridden because they’ve had abortions:

Some of the very personal and often uncharitable criticism of vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her family may have a relationship to the collective grief, shame, and guilt from personal involvement in the abortion of an unborn child.

Conor, Peter, is there something you’re not telling us? [Eye. Roll.]

(Actually, this fits in well the logic behind the Palin pick in the first place, I guess. Women don’t vote for logical reasons; let’s throw a woman at ‘em and we’ll get the Clinton vote! … Wait, that didn’t work? … Hmm, maybe women don’t find Palin experienced enough? Or don’t agree with her stances on the issues? Or …. Crazy talk! That’d be like they actually had reason and intellect! It must just be that beholding the fruit of Palin’s loins makes ‘em all emotional about all those abortions they’ve been having! … Dear god, that’s genius! I should write an article about it!)

In the New Yorker, Margaret Talbot has a fascinating essay on Red and Blue America’s contradictory approaches to teen sexuality and teen pregnancy:

During the campaign, the media has largely respected calls to treat Bristol Palin’s pregnancy as a private matter. But the reactions to it have exposed a cultural rift that mirrors America’s dominant political divide. Social liberals in the country’s “blue states” tend to support sex education and are not particularly troubled by the idea that many teen-agers have sex before marriage, but would regard a teen-age daughter’s pregnancy as devastating news. And the social conservatives in “red states” generally advocate abstinence-only education and denounce sex before marriage, but are relatively unruffled if a teen-ager becomes pregnant, as long as she doesn’t choose to have an abortion.

[snip]

Evangelicals are very good at articulating their sexual ideals, but they have little practical advice for their young followers. Social liberals, meanwhile, are not very good at articulating values on marriage and teen sexuality—indeed, they may feel that it’s unseemly or judgmental to do so. But in fact the new middle-class morality is squarely pro-family. Maybe these choices weren’t originally about values—maybe they were about maximizing education and careers—yet the result is a more stable family system.

Read the whole thing.

Joanne McNeil asks, why don’t women write “big idea” books? Virginia Postrel says, they don’t?

Betsy Fisher, owner of one of my favorite DC boutiques, thinks the Palin makeover was worth it! Judge for yourself with before and after pics. I report, you decide.

Should women rule the world? Sandra Tsing-Loh says no.

Most hideous piece of furniture ever. And it’s sold out.

Katherine Mangu-Ward reports that coffee can reduce breast size. But don’t despair: “In 1991, the average bra size in the U.S. was 34B. Today, it’s 36C.” (via Michael Blowhard. I promise it’s SFW.)

And to help you get started with that “recessionary dating“: The joys of cheapskate cuisine and cooking on a budget.

In its endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama for president, Sarah Palin’s hometown paper, the Alaska Daily News, is highly skeptical of her ability to effectively lead the country through our current crises:

For the first time ever, an Alaskan is making a serious bid for national office, and in doing so she brings broad attention and recognition not only to herself, but also to the state she leads.
[…]
Gov. Palin has shown the country why she has been so successful in her young political career. Passionate, charismatic and indefatigable, she draws huge crowds and sows excitement in her wake. She has made it clear she’s a force to be reckoned with, and you can be sure politicians and political professionals across the country have taken note. Her future, in Alaska and on the national stage, seems certain to be played out in the limelight.
[…]
Yet despite her formidable gifts, few who have worked closely with the governor would argue she is truly ready to assume command of the most important, powerful nation on earth. To step in and juggle the demands of an economic meltdown, two deadly wars and a deteriorating climate crisis would stretch the governor beyond her range. Like picking Sen. McCain for president, putting her one 72-year-old heartbeat from the leadership of the free world is just too risky at this time.

Now certainly an endorsement—or lack of same—from the Alaska Daily News is not particularly likely to affect, well, anything (although I guess it may have some sway with the much coveted demographic of “undecided Eskimos”).  But I think it’s interesting to note that despite the kind words the paper has for Gov. Palin, when it comes down to the question of whether she can successfully lead the nation, the answer is an unqualified no.

First you mock her, then you want to make money off her:
Sarah Palin: future media star?
Hollywood looking to capitalize on candidate’s fame

As campaign managers for Sarah Palin plot last-minute tactics to get her elected, Hollywood bigwigs are convening strategy sessions of their own. Their goal: finding the ideal on-air vehicle for the vp candidate if and when she exits politics.

Nothing like bringing the near-defunct Saturday Night Live its best ratings in years to make Hollywood pay attention, isn’t it?

They’re discussing talk shows, cable TV news, court room judge, and who knows what else.

Of course, there’s a small difficulty: If Sarah Palin is not the next Vice-President of the USA, she’s still the current governor of Alaska, with a couple of years left to serve in her current term IF she doesn’t run for re-election.

No matter what, Sarah is here to stay.

Palin talks up the double-standard:

Still, much of the media attention Palin has received–on the issue of the clothes, for example–has decidedly not been about public policy issues. She points to that as evidence of a bias against women candidates.

“I think Hillary Clinton was held to a different standard in her primary race,” Palin said. “Do you remember the conversations that took place about her, say superficial things that they don’t talk about with men, her wardrobe and her hairstyles, all of that? That’s a bit of that double standard.”

Okay fine — double standard. But, you can’t expect people to view men and women in the same way. Fashion talk is part of being womanly and if that’s something people want to talk about, I have no problem with it as long as we talk about the important stuff too.

“I’m not going to complain about it, I’m not going to whine about it, I’m going to plow through that, because we are embarking on something greater than that, than allowing that double standard to adversely affect us,” she said.

Isn’t she complaining about it though?

h/t: Jonathon Martin, Politico

The revelation that a certain V.P. nominee and her family are going around in $150,000 worth of duds can be looked at from a sympathetic perspective. 1) She’s being filmed all the time and needs to look good. 2) Men’s suits are also expensive. 3) It’s not as if she personally chose Saks over combing the mess that is Filene’s, the way a grad student with a more flexible schedule might do.

Problem is, these arguments don’t hold up. Or, they explain some, but not how the sum got so high. For one, as I was not alone in pointing out, it is exceedingly difficult to rack up $150,000 on personal adornments alone. One could go wild at an upscale chain like J.Crew and outfit even the most natalist family for a fraction of that amount. Men’s suits may cost tons, but how many men change suit mid-day? And as for the argument that she probably was not personally responsible for choosing the clothes, the precedent set that it’s acceptable for a politician to claim ‘who, me?’ unawareness of money spent on her behalf is, let’s just say, unsettling.

Much has been made of the fact that the massive sum came from public funds and not from the family bank account. Whatever the ethical implications of this, it seems the more important question is why, as Sadie at Jezebel put it, Palin chose to (or was advised to) “undercut her sole selling point.” Sarah Palin’s entire purpose is to appeal to those who think of the Gap as ‘fancy.’ How much of Palin’s realness is put on, how much merely played up, is impossible to determine. But her failure to stay in costume is poor form indeed.

(In a sense, the spending could make her even more ‘real,’ as in, what ‘real’ woman wouldn’t go nuts with $150,000 at Nieman Marcus if given the chance–only coastal elites would think of all the books the sum could buy–but this is not the kind of ‘real’ even populist lovers of authenticity want in their politicians.)

Ladies: Check out this Chicago Sun-Times photo gallery of what Palin’s been wearing on the campaign trail.

H/T: Mark Steyn, who admits to enjoying the shoe gallery but denies having a foot fetish (sure Mark!)

Steyn’s take-away line: “…it’s far easier photographing Joe Biden’s footwear because it’s generally in his mouth.”

UPDATE: Lisa Schiffren writes about the criticism the GOP has received for dropping a cool $150,000 on new wardrobes for the Palin family.

The lovely Myrna Blythe writing at National Review:

Palin, unlike other female politicians, manages to look both attractive and appropriate all the time….Heavens knows Hillary tried and tried to get it right, but no matter how many stylists advised her, she always looked dowdy. Remember those blocky pantsuits, jackets made out of upholstery fabric, and contrasting beads?…Nancy Pelosi, who favors Armani suits and marble-sized South Sea pearls bought by her personal shopper (a.k.a. husband), tries hard, too. She wears rich-ladies’ fashions, which create a pricey look, but not a particularly flattering one for her. Often, her $2,000 suits wear her.

Then, we get a play-by-play of Palin’s fashion choices from head to toe, with tons of juicy details. I’ve wanted to read this for a long time.

“FoldUsCandidate” by Adi Marom

Hat tip: Nerdette

Talk about your biased journalism. In the transcript from Tuesday’s Talking Fashion chat brought to you by the Washington Post, we get this commentary:

Silver Spring, Md.: I noticed that Sarah Palin often does not wear nylons/hose, including when she accepted her nomination for vice president. I didn’t notice whether she wore hose for the debate. I also do not wear hose often, even in a professional setting (I’m an attorney). If you don’t have to wear nylons with skirts when you are accepting the nomination for vice president of the United States, when do you?
Janet Bennett Kelly: I’m not sure I would hold up Sarah Palin as someone whose fashion judgment I’d follow.

Yeah, I know, Palin is a total fashion disaster, with those trim skirt-suits and adorable shoes.

Speaking of Sarah, I want to point out that while I disagree with the Feministing ladies on, well, just about everything, they are doing a Sarah Palin Sexism Watch, to call out the kinds of people who voice their disagreements by calling the Governor a cunt. It’s admirable that they are sticking up for equal treatment of even those women with whom they vehemently disagree.

Marginally related to the first item, and not at all to the second, wouldn’t this vintage Dior suit be perfect for when you want to feel a little bit powerful and a lot feminine?

Some (not Rush, the other guys) see this election as an intellectual exercise. I don’t. Formerly a Republican stronghold, the Chicago north shore suburb of Winnetka has been trending nanny-state for some time. Yes, it’s prime upscale Obama territory, but there are a few of us conservatives still fighting the good fight. Sneed in the Chicago Sun Times:

Maybe I saw it; but, then again, maybe I didn’t.

But I could have sworn I saw a rather large sign that read: “Go Sarah Go” or “You Go Girl” on Sheridan Road in Winnetka, a traditional Republican bastion, which disappeared in a matter of days last week.

I must have imagined things, but “signs can be removed if they are a visual road hazard,” said a Winnetka police source. I guess somebody must have complained.

But strange things are happening in what was once viewed as a very conservative North Shore town: There seem to be more Obama signs than McCain placards.

(Next door in my suburb of Wilmette is the gracious home of Barack Obama’s now convicted and jailed money man Tony Rezko.) A too large sign may have just been considered in bad taste, but just as likely it was a victim of a bad attitude. A bad liberal nanny no-no attitude. A couple of years ago Winnetka banned handheld cell phones while driving. But that was so 2006. We’re now in iPhone territory and this is a serious infraction:

WINNETKA, IL—This normally peaceful suburban town is still reeling following the news Monday that a local resident, whose name is being withheld by police pending a full investigation, left an iPhone unattended for more than three hours in a car parked in the hot sun.

“Responding to calls from concerned passersby, who observed the iPhone sitting in a vehicle in the parking lot of the Westfield Shopping Center, police arrived on the scene at approximately 4 p.m. and immediately intervened to save the device,” said Winnetka police chief Douglas Blaine. “Security cameras have shown that the iPhone had been in the car—with the doors locked and the windows rolled up—since 1 p.m. Due to the tragic and highly emotional nature of this case, we cannot say any more at this time.”

Well, yeah it’s The Onion, but read to the end for the final zinger. What are these nanny-staters nannying? You may well ask. No more protecting even innocent life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, it’s a ban on phones, a hit to free speech and hot pursuit (even punishment) of people minding their own business. Reason wondered this summer–what’s the matter with Chicago, describing Obama’s town as the biggest wet nurse in the country. Not a great image, not an endorsement, but it may not matter. So what’s next?