NationStates Jolt Archive

I really don't know if laughing would be appropriate right now, I feel bad for the girl, but this is what they had in mind when they coined the phrase "political dynamite". The article basically says it all, but I do have to wonder how McCain will handle this, especially since he knew before he picked her.

source (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.daughter/index.html?eref=rss_topstories)

ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) -- Bristol Palin, the 17-year-old daughter of Sarah Palin, is pregnant and will keep the baby and marry the baby's father, the Republican vice presidential candidate said Monday.
Bristol Palin, second from right, holds infant brother Trig at Friday's announcement of their mother's candidacy.

Bristol Palin, second from right, holds infant brother Trig at Friday's announcement of their mother's candidacy.

John McCain was aware of Bristol Palin's pregnancy before he chose her mother for his running mate, a top adviser to the Republican presidential candidate said.

The adviser, Doug Holtz-Eakin, said Monday that Palin "was completely vetted by the campaign" before she was chosen.

"Sen. McCain knew this and felt in no way did it disqualify her from being vice president," said an aide who asked not to be named. "Families have difficulties sometimes and lucky for her she has a supportive family."

The McCain aide emphasized that Bristol decided to keep the baby, a decision "supported by her parents."

Senior McCain advisers said Palin told McCain about her daughter's pregnancy in one of their "private conversations" last week before he officially asked her to run with her.
Don't Miss


However, McCain aides said he already knew, having found out about it earlier in the vetting process.

"She was very upfront about it," one aide insisted.

Asked how the unmarried teenager's pregnancy would be received by the American people, another senior McCain adviser, Steve Schmidt, replied, "I don't know; I'm not a psychic."

Bristol Palin, a senior in high school, is about five months along, in her second trimester, according to the aide who asked not to be named.

The aide said the Palins and the McCain campaign decided to reveal the information now because of Internet rumors that Sarah Palin's 4-month-old baby, who has Down syndrome, was actually Bristol's.

"In the course of correcting that, we needed to get the truth out," the McCain aide said.

Sarah and her husband, Todd Palin, issued a statement saying they are "proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents."

"Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family," they said in a statement issued by McCain's campaign.

They also asked the media to respect their daughter's privacy, a request echoed by McCain adviser Schmidt.

"The one thing that all the candidates agree on is this: Leave the kids alone. Leave the kids alone. This is an election about the future of the country," he said.

McCain unveiled Sarah Palin, a 44-year-old first-term Alaska governor and former small-town mayor, as his running mate Friday. The choice was a surprise to many. Video Watch analysts discuss the choice »

Palin said when running for governor in 2006 that she would support funding for abstinence-only education in schools, according to Eagle Forum Alaska, a conservative group that sent a questionnaire asking gubernatorial candidates their views on a range of issues.
advertisement

Tony Perkins, president of the influential conservative Family Research Council, on Monday issued a statement supporting the Palin family.

"Fortunately, Bristol is following her mother and father's example of choosing life in the midst of a difficult situation. We are committed to praying for Bristol and her husband-to-be and the entire Palin family as they walk through a very private matter in the eyes of the public," Perkins said in a written statement.

So combine this with McCain's decision to basically behead his convention to focus on the mighty Category 1 Hurricane Gustav and you wonder if Biden was right that McCain has zero judgment.

I personally don't think it matters what Palin's daughter does, since parents really can't control every single thing about their kids' lives, but it certainly blows a sizable hole in the "family values" plank at what could only be the worst possible time. It will hurt no matter what kind of damage control they implement, if only because of the perceived hypocrisy.

What kind of a name is that? That's a city name, not a people name.

how does having a daughter going through teen pregnancy damage the McCain's world domination plans? I mean its like what they campaign for and stuff :confused:

"Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family," they said in a statement issued by McCain's campaign.

that boy should of run when Mr Palin went to get the shotgun :tongue:

I know that if I was 17 and pregnant, the first thing I'd want my mom to do is draw a national spotlight on my condition and use it to score political points.

while her daughter's pregancy is a family problem and irrelevant to her mother's run for the VP, it does make me wonder if the very people she was chosen to pander to might be turned off by a mother who "doesnt have control of her child"

its a difficult time for a 17 year old to be in the national spotlight.

Obama came out today and very forcefully said he will not make this a campaign issue, and that if someone in his campaign does they will be fired.


Part of me is very proud of him. Bravo, clean politics and all that.


On the other hand, Im infuriated. This election is very, very important for this country, and the Republicans would never, ever be this courtious. He is deliberitally handcapping himself. I can say safely that Obama is a better man then I, because I would go for the kill and annihilate them when they were down.

I know that if I was 17 and pregnant, the first thing I'd want my mom to do is draw a national spotlight on my condition and use it to score political points.

Would you rather the people who don't like your mom drew the national spotlight on your condition to score political points?

Would you rather the people who don't like your mom drew the national spotlight on your condition to score political points?

See above, I wouldnt be worried about that.

I personally don't think it matters what Palin's daughter does, since parents really can't control every single thing about their kids' lives, but it certainly blows a sizable hole in the "family values" plank at what could only be the worst possible time. It will hurt no matter what kind of damage control they implement, if only because of the perceived hypocrisy.

You're right, it shouldn't matter, but it will, especially since the GOP loves to push the "family values" angle. And no, a parent can't control their kid entirely, but you're going to have lots of people wondering if she should have spent more time at home, or discussed birth control with her.

Sorry, ignorant English person question, what is GOP? I've heard it mentioned but I dunno what it is.

Obama came out today and very forcefully said he will not make this a campaign issue, and that if someone in his campaign does they will be fired.


Part of me is very proud of him. Bravo, clean politics and all that.


On the other hand, Im infuriated. This election is very, very important for this country, and the Republicans would never, ever be this courtious. He is deliberitally handcapping himself. I can say safely that Obama is a better man then I, because I would go for the kill and annihilate them when they were down.
there is nothing to be gained by slamming a 17 year old girl.

IF It is a detriment, that detriment is obvious to everyone who hears the story. no need to make an issue of it.

Would you rather the people who don't like your mom drew the national spotlight on your condition to score political points?

I would rather she let me have a quiet abortion and pretend it didn't happen.

Or I would rather she did what my mom actually did, which was to discuss birth control before I even thought about having sex. Yes, it was awkward, but it's an important thing to discuss with one's children to keep things like this from happening.

...I sort of think this makes this woman a lousy parent, but that doesn't mean she can't do other jobs well.

Great, another goddamn teenage mother. Apparently Palin failed horribly when she tried to raise her daughter as a good little chaste girl.

Obama came out today and very forcefully said he will not make this a campaign issue, and that if someone in his campaign does they will be fired.


Part of me is very proud of him. Bravo, clean politics and all that.

I'm not so sure. First of all, Obama didn't let the story go, he made a point to bring it up (even if it was to say, "I'm not going to bring this up again"). Secondly, the Obama campaign has attacked McCain for other issues, his seven houses for example. But to attack him for his running mate's daughter having a child out of wedlock would probably only help McCain, because McCain could very easily (and correctly) point out Obama is running a smear campaign for something McCain has no control over, and that is irrelevant to the election.

So, it is clean politics, I guess, but it's also very good politics. It's nice when they intersect.

See above, I wouldnt be worried about that.

Obama doesn't control what every Democrat says.

I would rather she let me have a quiet abortion and pretend it didn't happen.

Or I would rather she did what my mom actually did, which was to discuss birth control before I even thought about having sex. Yes, it was awkward, but it's an important thing to discuss with one's children to keep things like this from happening.

That assumes that she wants an abortion or that she didn't discuss contraception, doesn't it?

Sorry, ignorant English person question, what is GOP? I've heard it mentioned but I dunno what it is.

Can I have my question answered please?

Can I have my question answered please?

Grand Old Party, which is the Republican Party. It's a bit of a misnomer, because the Democratic Party is actually older, but it's worked its way into the language. I suspect Republicans are somehow behind it.

Behind the curve, this is being discussed in like three different threads right now...

I'm not so sure. First of all, Obama didn't let the story go, he made a point to bring it up (even if it was to say, "I'm not going to bring this up again").

Maybe so he doesn't get hit with people asking him how he feels about this issue? If he has a prepared statement saying that he doesn't want to talk about this and won't address it in the future, then he can get all his thoughts on the matter out in a coherent manner instead of just having a reporter ask him about it and catching him off guard.

there is nothing to be gained by slamming a 17 year old girl.

IF It is a detriment, that detriment is obvious to everyone who hears the story. no need to make an issue of it.

In light of her mother's avowed dedication to abstinence-only 'education', it might be a bit of a discussion point.

I would rather she let me have a quiet abortion and pretend it didn't happen.

Or I would rather she did what my mom actually did, which was to discuss birth control before I even thought about having sex. Yes, it was awkward, but it's an important thing to discuss with one's children to keep things like this from happening.

...I sort of think this makes this woman a lousy parent, but that doesn't mean she can't do other jobs well.
it doesnt make her a bad mother.

teenagers have sex. some get pregnant. it happens to the children of good parents and bad parents, strict parents and lenient parents.

In light of her mother's avowed dedication to abstinence-only 'education', it might be a bit of a discussion point.
thats what the rabid press is for.

In light of her mother's avowed dedication to abstinence-only 'education', it might be a bit of a discussion point.

Exactly, if anything it is the ultimate proof positive that her mothers idiotic, victorian views on sex and sex education are 100% false, idiotic, and indicative of failure.

That assumes that she wants an abortion or that she didn't discuss contraception, doesn't it?

Well, if I was in a keeping the baby frame of mind, going on an extended European vacation with grandma would be nice.

And if she did discuss contraception, she did a lousy job at emphasizing the "use it every time" and "use it properly" parts.

That assumes that she wants an abortion or that she didn't discuss contraception, doesn't it?

Hell, the poor girl probably doesn't even know what contraception is, being the product of an evangelical upbringing. Total abstinence until marriage is the only way when you've got a friend in Jesus.

Maybe so he doesn't get hit with people asking him how he feels about this issue? If he has a prepared statement saying that he doesn't want to talk about this and won't address it in the future, then he can get all his thoughts on the matter out in a coherent manner instead of just having a reporter ask him about it and catching him off guard.
That's very possible; we don't have really any way of knowing why politicians say what they say.

Well, if I was in a keeping the baby frame of mind, going on an extended European vacation with grandma would be nice.

And if she did discuss contraception, she did a lousy job at emphasizing the "use it every time" and "use it properly" parts.

Considering she is a rabid supporter of abstinance only education, I doubt she discussed contraception. And if she did, that just blows another whole in her policies, because it means that she doesnt practice the policies she tries to puch, which ould make the GOP's religious nut base rather....displeased.

it doesnt make her a bad mother.

teenagers have sex. some get pregnant. it happens to the children of good parents and bad parents, strict parents and lenient parents.
I still think that if a parent educates their children about the risks and steps they can take to prevent this, the odds should be lower. Also, given that she seems to be all about the abstinence only stuff, I doubt birth control was discussed much, if at all and I think this makes her a bit irresponsible.

I'm not so sure. First of all, Obama didn't let the story go, he made a point to bring it up (even if it was to say, "I'm not going to bring this up again").

Is he the one who brought it up or was he responding to a question regarding it?

Is he the one who brought it up or was he responding to a question regarding it?

The latter.

thats what the rabid press is for.

The 'rabid press' won't be the only people to discuss this. If for no other reason that the whole 'abstinence only' thing being a current issue. Those who oppose 'abstinence only', for a start, will be talking about the issue, even if only in generality.

Considering she is a rabid supporter of abstinence only education, I doubt she discussed contraception. And if she did, that just blows another whole in her policies, because it means that she doesnt practice the policies she tries to push, which should make the GOP's religious nut base rather....displeased.


<FANFARE!!!!!>

Devils advocate to the rescue!

Just because she is opposed to schools teaching about birth control does not necessarily mean that she is against parents discussing birth control with their children.

I still think that if a parent educates their children about the risks and steps they can take to prevent this, the odds should be lower. Also, given that she seems to be all about the abstinence only stuff, I doubt birth control was discussed much, if at all and I think this makes her a bit irresponsible.
yes but thats an assumption.

sometimes when you are from one of those very religious families you (as a teenaged girl) deny to your parents (and to yourself) that you are ever going to have sex. so when the moment comes you are quite unprepared for birth control or reasonable decision making.

Exactly, if anything it is the ultimate proof positive that her mothers idiotic, victorian views on sex and sex education are 100% false, idiotic, and indicative of failure.

The 'boyfriend' is getting a bit of a free ride, too... which seems weird. They've released a name, but no surname. No discussion. The only thing mentioned is that they WILL get married (no discussion of if they were going to anyway, or if this is another of those BOUND-to-be-successful forced marriages), and otherwise, a clean getaway.

All the blame on the girl. Just like it should be. Or something.

The latter.

Well then that kinds kills New Limacon's point, doesn't it?

The 'boyfriend' is getting a bit of a free ride, too... which seems weird. They've released a name, but no surname. No discussion. The only thing mentioned is that they WILL get married (no discussion of if they were going to anyway, or if this is another of those BOUND-to-be-successful forced marriages), and otherwise, a clean getaway.

All the blame on the girl. Just like it should be. Or something.

Well, of course the boyfriend is getting a free ride. He's not the kid of a VP candidate. And, ya, this seems like a forced marriage, one of those, 'look, you're marrying my daughter, or the press gets everything, and seeing as I'm the governor', you get the picture. Also, I don't think all the blame is on the girl, it's more on Palin b/c of her status.

so when the moment comes you are quite unprepared for birth control or reasonable decision making.

A classic case of awkward teenage animal lust, so to speak.

Rolling squid;13975780']Well, of course the boyfriend is getting a free ride. He's not the kid of a VP candidate. And, ya, this seems like a forced marriage, one of those, 'look, you're marrying my daughter, or the press gets everything, and seeing as I'm the governor', you get the picture. Also, I don't think all the blame is on the girl, it's more on Palin b/c of her status.

Shes already shown that shes willing to fire people for divorcing her sister, Im sure shed do everything in her power to destroy this guys life if he didnt marry her daughter.


This just shows how willing she is to abuse her powers. I think the press should look into this, and politically kill this bitch.

The 'rabid press' won't be the only people to discuss this. If for no other reason that the whole 'abstinence only' thing being a current issue. Those who oppose 'abstinence only', for a start, will be talking about the issue, even if only in generality.

And I hope they dicsuss it ad nausium.

This is going to be an interesting development. With luck this will destroy what little religious base he has.

A classic case of awkward teenage animal lust, so to speak.
it happens in all sorts of families.

sometimes when you are from one of those very religious families you (as a teenaged girl) deny to your parents (and to yourself) that you are ever going to have sex. so when the moment comes you are quite unprepared for birth control or reasonable decision making.
The first words out of my mouth when my mom started the birth control speech were "I'm going to wait until I'm married anyways" (I was 12), but she still proceeded with the discussion and she was driving me somewhere so I couldn't escape. I still listened and I became aware that the only thing that could possibly be more awkward than discussing birth control with my mother would be discussing an unplanned pregnancy with my mother... so in effect, the speech worked (although the fact that I got more details about the actual methods of contraception at school also helped).

Also, while it isn't always useful to apply statistical trends to individual cases, teen pregnancy rates go up when teens are only given an abstinence only sex education: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8470845/ So if Palin did avoid discussing birth control with her daughter and only asked her to abstain, then her daughter was more likely to get pregnant than a girl who received comprehensive sexual education. This is an irresponsible parenting decision if you ask me.

Rather than hurting Palin's advocacy of abstinence-only education, this could help it. She could hold up her daughter as an example of what happens when teenagers get a more comprehensive education.

Which is bullshit, of course, but since when has that stopped any politician doing anything?

it doesnt make her a bad mother.

teenagers have sex. some get pregnant. it happens to the children of good parents and bad parents, strict parents and lenient parents.

My eldest son was born while I was in High School. I had good parents. The system also taught me all about contraception and all that good stuff. Well things happen and that is it. I ended up just fine and so did my son.

As for the Governer I don't fault her per se and think this whole issue is a non starter.

Rather than hurting Palin's advocacy of abstinence-only education, this could help it. She could hold up her daughter as an example of what happens when teenagers get a more comprehensive education.

Which is bullshit, of course, but since when has that stopped any politician doing anything?

That accusation will fall apart the minute they even probe the surface.

Rather than hurting Palin's advocacy of abstinence-only education, this could help it. She could hold up her daughter as an example of what happens when teenagers get a more comprehensive education.

If she did this, it would officially make her a terrible mother.

My eldest son was born while I was in High School. I had good parents. The system also taught me all about contraception and all that good stuff. Well things happen and that is it. I ended up just fine and so did my son.

As for the Governer I don't fault her per se and think this whole issue is a non starter.
me too.

if i liked the mccain/palin ticket this would not keep me from voting for them.

Obama came out today and very forcefully said he will not make this a campaign issue, and that if someone in his campaign does they will be fired.


Part of me is very proud of him. Bravo, clean politics and all that.


On the other hand, Im infuriated. This election is very, very important for this country, and the Republicans would never, ever be this courtious. He is deliberitally handcapping himself. I can say safely that Obama is a better man then I, because I would go for the kill and annihilate them when they were down.

He might be the better man, but the Democrats have never played dirty in presidential campaigns, and look where they got.

That accusation will fall apart the minute they even probe the surface.

If she did this, it would officially make her a terrible mother.

Which, of course, doesn't mean she won't do it. People are stupid sometimes.

So combine this with McCain's decision to basically behead his convention to focus on the mighty Category 1 Hurricane Gustav and you wonder if Biden was right that McCain has zero judgment.

I personally don't think it matters what Palin's daughter does, since parents really can't control every single thing about their kids' lives, but it certainly blows a sizable hole in the "family values" plank at what could only be the worst possible time. It will hurt no matter what kind of damage control they implement, if only because of the perceived hypocrisy.

This is the same Republican Party that pushed for a Defense of Marriage Amendment to shut gays out of weddings while Mark Foley was cybering with little boy pages and Larry Craig was tapdancing in an airport bog.

thats what the rabid press is for.

You mean The Liberal Media that's been giving Dear Leader a pass for 7 years and actually focused on "OMG Obama might b an ebil mozlem"?

You mean The Liberal Media that's been giving Dear Leader a pass for 7 years and actually focused on "OMG Obama might b an ebil mozlem"?
well

i was thinking of that

but its enough that it can be fodder for comedians like john stewart and tabloids like the enquirer.

Sorry, ignorant English person question, what is GOP? I've heard it mentioned but I dunno what it is.

I believe the Republicans say it stands for the Grand Old Party, but it actually is an acronym for Greedy Old Perverts.

You mean The Liberal Media that's been giving Dear Leader a pass for 7 years and actually focused on "OMG Obama might b an ebil mozlem"?

Well that's scarcely limited to the GOP. Hillary did it.

Well then that kinds kills New Limacon's point, doesn't it?
It sounded like he was making an official announcement, but if he answered a question, yes, that kills my point. Shame on me for not reading the article.

I think the second point still stands, though: not attacking McCain with this accusation is not making a political sacrifice, it's avoiding a potential catastrophe.

It sounded like he was making an official announcement, but if he answered a question, yes, that kills my point. Shame on me for not reading the article.

I think the second point still stands, though: not attacking McCain with this accusation is not making a political sacrifice, it's avoiding a potential catastrophe.

I do wonder if McCain's staff ever vetted the woman. Maybe McCain's logic was "crazy enough to work"? Somebody should tell him he's not Jack Sparrow.

Flipping through the cable news I've gotten to watch them flail about trying to get anyone other than their own analysts to touch this issue with a ten foot pole.

Are you fucking kidding? This is now a race to the bottom. The party that wants to lose the worst wins!

It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out, off the announcement that Sarah Palin was VP, $7M poured in from Evangelicals.

I'd say a good barometer of base voter support is donations, is there any way of getting an accurate picture of these?

On the subject itself, I mean...

To counter the rumour that Trig was not the child-born-out-of-wedlock of Palin's daughter they prove it's not true by showing that, ha ha, it couldn't be because she's pregnant NOW with a child-born-out-of-wedlock.

That'll shut 'em up.

?

Even James Carvelle won't touch it.

My eldest son was born while I was in High School. I had good parents. The system also taught me all about contraception and all that good stuff. Well things happen and that is it. I ended up just fine and so did my son.

As for the Governer I don't fault her per se and think this whole issue is a non starter.

It is interesting how everyone has so far construed this as negative--as if becoming pregnant as a teenager in and of itself was a bad thing. I know people who have had planned pregnancies at that age. I wouldn't see it as much of a reflection of Palin at all if she didn't advocate policies that called for abstinence-only sex ed, if she did not hold sex and birth out of wedlock to be immoral or unhealthy, and if she did not make any claims that safe sex education led to more teens having premarital sex.

Basically, it's an issue because Republicans have made it an issue.

It is interesting how everyone has so far construed this as negative--as if becoming pregnant as a teenager in and of itself was a bad thing. I know people who have had planned pregnancies at that age. I wouldn't see it as much of a reflection of Palin at all if she didn't advocate policies that called for abstinence-only sex ed, if she did not hold sex and birth out of wedlock to be immoral or unhealthy, and if she did not make any claims that safe sex education led to more teens having premarital sex.

Basically, it's an issue because Republicans have made it an issue.

It's interesting insofar as it shows that if she is incapable of keeping her family practicing what she preaches, it calls into question the viability of such policies.

In other words, if abstinence only education works, how come it didn't work?

PS for what it's worth, it's been shown that abstinence only education does somewhat reduce teen sex. The problem is, when those teens do engage in sex, they're less likely to use protection. Thus teenagers who have had abstinence only sex ed are less likely to have sex, but more likely to get pregnant or get an STD when the do engage in sex. These two statistics tend to roughly cancel each other out, and thus children who have abstinence only education have roughly the same rate of pregnancy and STDs as those who do not.

So, basically, promoting abstinence only education is gambling with your kids.

PS for what it's worth, it's been shown that abstinence only education does somewhat reduce teen sex. The problem is, when those teens do engage in sex, they're less likely to use protection. Thus teenagers who have had abstinence only sex ed are less likely to have sex, but more likely to get pregnant or get an STD when the do engage in sex. These two statistics tend to roughly cancel each other out, and thus children who have abstinence only education have roughly the same rate of pregnancy and STDs as those who do not.

So, basically, promoting abstinence only education is gambling with your kids.

It also shows they are more likely to engage in other forms of sex rather then vaginal. So it doesnt really do jack shit.

Seriously, this is almost the most fun I've had watching the news-Larry King prods Carvelle into commenting about it, and he holds up a picture of the city hall "It looks like a bait shop." King's every question has been about the pregnancy and Carvelle gives answers like "She didn't do this, things like this happen all the time...Did you know she just got a passport? This is the person you want a heartbeat from the presidency, she just got a passport?"

The only thing the Republican will say is, "Look, she's consistent, they're keeping the baby!" and then argue the experience thing with Carvelle, except for a non-sequitor about the bait shop comment being insulting to women rather than to small towns.

EDIT: Oh, there we go, a smart alecky radio host, she'll talk about it.

Attacking Palin's daughter for being a teen mother would be like attacking Obama's Mom for being a teen mother... Stupid. It will have the counter affect of making them regular people, people like our mothers and sisters and daughters.

How the families react to the pregnancies are far more important than the fact that they occurred. I think in the long run, this might actually help Sarah Palin's image, it continues to paint her picture as just another one of us non-elitists.

us non-elitists.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

:rolleyes::rolleyes::

Non-washington insiders.... sorry it went over your head :rolleyes:

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

You have to understand that the charge of elitism isn't about being born into privilege, because that's hard to pin on Barack Obama, especially given the current administration.

No, it means - someone who is intelligent.

Electing an intelligent person is clearly dangerous, who knows what they might be up to, probably communists or something.

This explains Ronnie Reagan, Dan Quayle - I'll grant the elder Bush some brains - and, of course, good old Dubya.

It also explains the hatred for a Rhodes scholar and his intelligent wife.

Intelligence is not a good attribute for a president.

You have to understand that the charge of elitism isn't about being born into privilege, because that's hard to pin on Barack Obama, especially given the current administration.

No, it means - someone who is intelligent.

Electing an intelligent person is clearly dangerous, who knows what they might be up to, probably communists or something.

This explains Ronnie Reagan, Dan Quayle - I'll grant the elder Bush some brains - and, of course, good old Dubya.

It also explains the hatred for a Rhodes scholar and his intelligent wife.

Intelligence is not a good attribute for a president.

I heard of, er, "egghead", was it?

While the pregnancy of Governor Sarah Palin's daughter is a private family matter off limits to politics.

I want to see a President John McCain, Vice President Sarah Palin attending the wedding of her daughter to the Dude at the White House Rose Garden. That would be an awesome wedding.

White House Rose Garden:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Rose_Garden

Attacking Palin's daughter for being a teen mother would be like attacking Obama's Mom for being a teen mother... Stupid. It will have the counter affect of making them regular people, people like our mothers and sisters and daughters.

Never mind the fact that the evangelicals are all like "omg sex out of wedlock with teenagers, immoral!"

Flipping through the cable news I've gotten to watch them flail about trying to get anyone other than their own analysts to touch this issue with a ten foot pole.
Haha, so the only people keeping this is the spotlight are a bunch of panicking Republicans? Outstanding. Let them do that for a while, and then we can have the media pundits "questioning" why they felt the need to hound the poor girl over a private matter like that.

I have nothing against this child-woman and I wish her all the best luck in the world -- the gods know she'll need it. But I do have a fantasy of how I personally would like to see this used every single time Sarah Palin talks about her "family values" stance and how parents know best and no sex-ed, etc. The response I'd love to hear would be something like:

"Mm, that's interesting. Hey, how's the grandkid? Aaawww, so sweeet. And your daughter looks so young to have a little one. What is she, 21? What? 17? ...Oh. You let her get married at 16? What's that? She's only getting married now? But wait, when did she get pregna-- oh...I see... Okay, anyway, what were you saying about family values and parental wisdom and teaching abstinence?"

How the families react to the pregnancies are far more important than the fact that they occurred. I think in the long run, this might actually help Sarah Palin's image, it continues to paint her picture as just another one of us non-elitists.

Not to most of the religious right.


Regardless, shes boned almost as much as her daughter (apperantly) was.

Folks, this thread has a defined topic. Please stick to it. The more general thread on the Republican VP candidate is here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=564472).

While the pregnancy of Governor Sarah Palin's daughter is a private family matter off limits to politics.

I want to see a President John McCain, Vice President Sarah Palin attending the wedding of her daughter to the Dude at the White House Rose Garden. That would be an awesome wedding.

White House Rose Garden:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Rose_Garden

Maybe if theyre real nice to Obama during the campaign, he'll even let them use it;)

Naming your child 'Bristol' should disqualify you from Presidential contention. *nod*

Naming your child 'Bristol' should disqualify you from Presidential contention. *nod*



Funny. My mom said the exact same thing.

On the news front; this makes me go "meh"

About the only thing that could be political would be if she was pregnant and Palin drove her to get an abortion.

If Palin uses her to yabber on about "family values" etc., then she could be open to debate I guess.

Not worth wasting news print.....

Never mind the fact that the evangelicals are all like "omg sex out of wedlock with teenagers, immoral!"

Not at all. They can yabber on about living the pro-life values!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.evangelicals/index.html

there is nothing to be gained by slamming a 17 year old girl.
I can think of quite a few things that could be gained from slamming a 17-yr old girl.

I hope it comes out that she was raised using the dopey-as-fuck strict abstintence program Bush and his right-wingbat religios have been pushing as the answer to preventing teen sex. Be hard for them, esp Palin, to defend the astintence program then.

I can think of quite a few things that could be gained from slamming a 17-yr old girl.



Like a kid (as they have just found out).

Like a kid (as they have just found out).
yup. that's one thing.
Another is finding out just how fast you can run when someone's with a loaded shotgun is chasing you.
A 3rd is finding out that condoms aren't just novelty balloons and regardless of what your sex-ed teacher says, putting them on bananas doesn't help one bit.

A 3rd is finding out that condoms aren't just novelty balloons and regardless of what your sex-ed teacher says, putting them on bananas doesn't help one bit.

Oh yeah? Do you see any unwanted banana babies? Well, do ya?

Oh yeah? Do you see any unwanted banana babies? Well, do ya?

Well, actually...

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/angiealan123/i-am-a-banana.gif

I can think of quite a few things that could be gained from slamming a 17-yr old girl.

I hope it comes out that she was raised using the dopey-as-fuck strict abstintence program Bush and his right-wingbat religios have been pushing as the answer to preventing teen sex. Be hard for them, esp Palin, to defend the astintence program then.
Actually, the point of abstinence only education is to prevent teen pregnancy and the spread of STD's. It was the religious right who embraced the "moral" idea of preventing out of wedlock sex period. But from the government's standpoint, it is a pragmatic program aimed at preventing pregnancy and disease, they just pander to the religious right with it.

In order to teach abstinence though, you must first teach what it is they are supposed to abstain from - i.e. you have to teach them what sex is before you teach them to "just say no." To say abstinence teaching is a failure is foolish since no educational program is 100% successful. They teach about saying no to drugs, yet teens use them, about drunk driving, yet teens do it anyway and they teach abstinence, but some teens have sex any way.

The problem with abstinence only education is, if it is truly abstinence only then pragmatic instruction about birth control is not discussed and so those who chose to ignore the instruction have to learn about birth control and the prevention of STD's from some where else.

Sadly, the average american teen is too stupid to do this and the average american parent is too stupid to teach it to their child.

I don't fault Palin for her daughter being pregnant and I don't think that the pregnancy is an indictment of abstinence education. I do, however, think abstinence only education is not a good idea due to the failings of the average american parent and the ignorance of the average american teen. Teaching abstinence as the only sure way is a good idea. Encouraging abstinence is a good idea. Ignoring everything else is a bad idea.

Finally, Bristol's pregancy does not make the entire GOP platform on family values hypocritical or stupid. The problem with the GOP platform on family values is they way it pander to the religious right. Merely promoting solid family structure, moral behavior, etc. is a good idea. Wrapping it in a cloak of religion is where the problem comes in. People should do it because it is good for society as a whole, whether or not their religious beliefs require it.

snip
Your first paragraph says it all: Abstintence was meant to prevent teen pregnancy.
Add in the whole "sex out of wedlock is evil' bs and we have a potentially hypocritical - and hilarious - situation.

My point is that assume Palin's kid was brought up on an strict abstintence program. This is a good assumption based on Palin's other rather extreme beliefs. Someone who is religious, believes in creationism and is total anti-abortion is highly likely to also believe and promote the abstintence program.

We'll have the spectacle of watching Palin trying to defend and promote a program whose main aim is to stop teens having sex out of wedlock, yet her own daughter is living proof as to it's failure.

And that, Alanis Morissette, is ironic.

We'll have the spectacle of watching Palin trying to defend and promote a program whose main aim is to stop teens having sex out of wedlock, yet her own daughter is living proof as to it's failure.

And that, Alanis Morissette, is ironic.

That's not ironic, that's just unfortunate. :p

Already people are going on about her infant "Brother" not being a brother... Of course I think that's stupid but...

Already people are going on about her infant "Brother" not being a brother... Of course I think that's stupid but...

That was going on before, this announcement was actually meant to be a 'response' to those rumors. Though it could be argued that we were going to find out one way or another...

Naming your child 'Bristol' should disqualify you from Presidential contention. *nod*

You are concerned about Bristol? What about Track, Willow, Piper and Trig? Come on those are worse names than Bristol, but as I said in another thread having children with names like that might just appeal to the lower class'

I don't fault Palin for her daughter being pregnant and I don't think that the pregnancy is an indictment of abstinence education. I do, however, think abstinence only education is not a good idea due to the failings of the average american parent and the ignorance of the average american teen. Teaching abstinence as the only sure way is a good idea. Encouraging abstinence is a good idea. Ignoring everything else is a bad idea.

I suspect there are very few sex education programs that don't make clear that abstinence is the only 100% method of avoiding STDs or pregnancy. Or that sex should be put off until you are older and in a loving relationship and is a big decision to make etc... to make abstinance the be all and end all of sex education however will always be a bad idea because it makes sex even more of a "forbidden fruit" to teenagers and will not adquately prepare them from when they do have sex.

Finally, Bristol's pregancy does not make the entire GOP platform on family values hypocritical or stupid. The problem with the GOP platform on family values is they way it pander to the religious right. Merely promoting solid family structure, moral behavior, etc. is a good idea. Wrapping it in a cloak of religion is where the problem comes in. People should do it because it is good for society as a whole, whether or not their religious beliefs require it.

This is QFT. There have been countless studies indicating that unstable families, poor parental supervision and moral teaching are key risk factors in delinquency, antisocial behaviour etc... BUT these studies have also emphasised that the important aspects are that you have a stable family structure. The form this family structure takes is really not important, and it could be the conventional two parent family, it could be a particularly good single parent or it could be a family unit made up of an extended family, and adoptive family, gay parents. It's the quality of the support and affection given that is important.

Unfortunately, often once you bring religious dogma into it (and I know this is not universal across religions but it tends to be the case), people start getting so hung up on what form the family takes that they ignore the quality of it. A disruptive two parent family with constantly arguing or even abusive (to each other or to the child) parents will be significantly worse than a good single parent family.

...and so what?

While the pregnancy of Governor Sarah Palin's daughter is a private family matter off limits to politics.

The same way President Clinton's affair was a private matter, off limits to politics?

So combine this with McCain's decision to basically behead his convention to focus on the mighty Category 1 Hurricane Gustav and you wonder if Biden was right that McCain has zero judgment.

I personally don't think it matters what Palin's daughter does, since parents really can't control every single thing about their kids' lives, but it certainly blows a sizable hole in the "family values" plank at what could only be the worst possible time. It will hurt no matter what kind of damage control they implement, if only because of the perceived hypocrisy.

Meh, so politicians are also hit by real world events. Does it matter? Why does this blow a hole in 'family values'? Surly 'being there' for your pregnant teenager is a fine show of 'family values'?

The same way President Clinton's affair was a private matter, off limits to politics?

The impeachment of Bill Clinton was for perjury and obstruction of justice charges, stemming from the Paula Jones lawsuit. It's nowhere near the same thing.

Meh, so politicians are also hit by real world events. Does it matter? Why does this blow a hole in 'family values'? Surly 'being there' for your pregnant teenager is a fine show of 'family values'?It's the 'I intend to fill a major function in our Government (And quite probably become President when McCain bites it), but can't even successfully keep my family from doing the things my platform is nigh-fanatically opposed to' bit.

It's the 'I intend to fill a major function in our Government (And quite probably become President when McCain bites it), but can't even successfully keep my family from doing the things my platform is nigh-fanatically opposed to' bit.

So that would be seemingly hypocritcal of her parties stance I guess, sorta, but that still does not explain how having a pregnant non married teen some how blows a hole in family values?

Meh, so politicians are also hit by real world events. Does it matter? Why does this blow a hole in 'family values'? Surly 'being there' for your pregnant teenager is a fine show of 'family values'?
That would be the case, if "family values" actually referred to things like being there for your pregnant teenager.

Sadly, in America the term "family values" is simply a code for "punishing the little people for having sex."

The reason this situation is relevant, IMO, is because 1) it's proof that Palin's own platform about abstinence-only education is made of fail, and 2) it highlights the absolutely blinding hypocrisy on the part of the GOP when it comes to reproductive choice.

See, Palin and McCain and others have rushed to assure everybody that Bristol made the decision to keep her baby all by herself, and that she certainly wasn't forced to do so...yet their platform specifically and clearly states that IT SHOULDN'T BE A CHOICE. Their entire freaking platform regarding reproductive health care is about making sure women have only one choice when they get pregnant. Palin doesn't even think rape victims should be permitted to choose not to carry to term.

So why the fuck are they bragging about how Bristol made her very own choice in this case? Well, for the same reason McCain told reporters that it would be a "family decision" if his own daughter got pregnant: because THEIR children deserve choices, but other women don't. If their daughter gets pregnant then of course she should get to choose, but the rest of the stupid slutty women in America should be punished with forced pregnancy.

And people say Democrats are the "elitists." Republicans flat-out state, with their own mouths, that they think their own families get to play by different rules than everybody else in America.

I'm not surprised at the people here who seem unable or unwilling to see the irony or the political implications in Palin's situation. People who share Palin's beliefs are generally quite adept at holding two or more contradictory ideas at the same time, and hardcore republicans and rightwingers have shown us plenty of times how willing they are to flip-flop like beached mackerel to praise themselves and blame their opponents for the exact same things, often at the same time.

This poor girl's predicament (I mean being Palin's daughter, not a teen mother) is not, in and of itself, politically important nor an appropriate target for the media. But it is her misfortune that her mother has decided to cast her daughter in the role of Pearl from The Scarlet Letter -- in other words, a visual reminder of the hypocrisy of Sarah Palin, how she holds others to standards she doesn't apply to herself and her own family, how divorced from reality are the social policies she promotes, etc.

It won't make a bit of difference to those who would never have voted for Obama in the first place, but to those magical-mystical "swing voters," it just might, if played right.

The impeachment of Bill Clinton was for perjury and obstruction of justice charges, stemming from the Paula Jones lawsuit. It's nowhere near the same thing.
yeah it is. think ms palin will take her newly married pregnant teen daughter and husband to live with them in washington dc? or will she leave them in alaska to fend for themselves?

So that would be seemingly hypocritcal of her parties stance I guess, sorta, but that still does not explain how having a pregnant non married teen some how blows a hole in family values?Not really hypocritical. They're opposed to it, but shit happens. And I rather doubt that Sarah Palin approved of her daughter's actions.

However, the implication is incompetence, at least as far as it pertains the social platform.

The impeachment of Bill Clinton was for perjury and obstruction of justice charges, stemming from the Paula Jones lawsuit. It's nowhere near the same thing.

I wasn't talking about his impeachment, I was talking about his affair, or do you not remember Republicans at the time talking about how it was evidence of Mr. Clinton's immorality and unfitness to lead?

The affair was used politically quite independently of the impeachment proceedings.

That would be the case, if "family values" actually referred to things like being there for your pregnant teenager.

Sadly, in America the term "family values" is simply a code for "punishing the little people for having sex."

The reason this situation is relevant, IMO, is because 1) it's proof that Palin's own platform about abstinence-only education is made of fail, and 2) it highlights the absolutely blinding hypocrisy on the part of the GOP when it comes to reproductive choice.

See, Palin and McCain and others have rushed to assure everybody that Bristol made the decision to keep her baby all by herself, and that she certainly wasn't forced to do so...yet their platform specifically and clearly states that IT SHOULDN'T BE A CHOICE. Their entire freaking platform regarding reproductive health care is about making sure women have only one choice when they get pregnant. Palin doesn't even think rape victims should be permitted to choose not to carry to term.

So why the fuck are they bragging about how Bristol made her very own choice in this case? Well, for the same reason McCain told reporters that it would be a "family decision" if his own daughter got pregnant: because THEIR children deserve choices, but other women don't. If their daughter gets pregnant then of course she should get to choose, but the rest of the stupid slutty women in America should be punished with forced pregnancy.

And people say Democrats are the "elitists." Republicans flat-out state, with their own mouths, that they think their own families get to play by different rules than everybody else in America.

Ahhhh well, I guess 'family values' means differant things to differant people. To me it means doing your job as a parent in bringing up your kis to be productive members of society. Wether that be lone parent familes, or 'traditional' male/female, or gay polygimous hardly matters, a family is a family is a family.

So yes I can the hypocrisy(I'm not supprised to see such from a politician) but an assult on family values, hardly.

Not really hypocritical. They're opposed to it, but shit happens. And I rather doubt that Sarah Palin approved of her daughter's actions.

However, the implication is incompetence, at least as far as it pertains the social platform.

Incompetant for being unable to watch what her teenage daughter is up to 24/7? Heh then with that as a measurement, mark me down as incompetant also.

yeah it is. think ms palin will take her newly married pregnant teen daughter and husband to live with them in washington dc? or will she leave them in alaska to fend for themselves?
I think she may abandon them, forcing them to live with a colony of ants. Or possibly coercing them into becoming community organizers...

I'm rapidly becoming a Bob Barr fan... At least he seems serious and not determined to lose at all costs.

Incompetant for being unable to watch what her teenage daughter is up to 24/7? Heh then with that as a measurement, mark me down as incompetant also.

Are you suggesting that sometimes your kids don't do what you tell them to?

Someone get me the number for child services.

Are you suggesting that sometimes your kids don't do what you tell them to?

Someone get me the number for child services.

Heh nope my kids always do what they are asked to do.(whilst in the house and under my direction). What they get up to outside, when they are with their mates, well as I don't spend the day spying on them, I guess I'll never know.

Heh nope my kids always do what they are asked to do.(whilst in the house and under my direction). What they get up to outside, when they are with their mates, well as I don't spend the day spying on them, I guess I'll never know.
All kids will take liberties away from home. It's part of growing up. There is the thought, though, that by properly parenting the children as they grow, they might not take risks that will leave them affected by the consequences for the rest of their lives.

Ahhhh well, I guess 'family values' means differant things to differant people. To me it means doing your job as a parent in bringing up your kis to be productive members of society. Wether that be lone parent familes, or 'traditional' male/female, or gay polygimous hardly matters, a family is a family is a family.

So yes I can the hypocrisy(I'm not supprised to see such from a politician) but an assult on family values, hardly.
Let me see if I understand you:

You have a personal definition of what "family values" means to you. Well and good.

Does this mean that, any time anyone uses the term "family values," you just assume that they mean it the same way you do?

When the Republican Party and the US religious-rightwing apply the term "family values" to a specific set of social policies referring to sex education, reproductive rights, marriage rights, religion in school, etc., which clearly DO NOT match up with your personal definition of "family values," do you just ignore that and still assume they are meaning it the same way you do?

If yes, how do you account for that?

If not, then why can you not see that when we criticize Palin on her "family values" hypocrisy, we are talking about her support for that political concept of the term, not your personal definition of it?

And if you can see how people like Palin are using and defining the words "family values," then why can you not see the disconnect between that political platform and how Ms. Palin is managing her family (which would be perfectly okay by your standards, but not by her own standards)?

EDIT: To be clear, it is because of Palin's political stance that we say her daughter's pregnancy has political implications as undermining her "family values" position.

All kids will take liberties away from home. It's part of growing up. There is the thought, though, that by properly parenting the children as they grow, they might not take risks that will leave them affected by the consequences for the rest of their lives.

Yes of course, it is called life huh.:tongue:

Not to most of the religious right.


Regardless, shes boned almost as much as her daughter (apperantly) was.

Clearly you don't understand the 'religious right.' They've already accepted this and moved on, even Dobson is praising Palin for it...

Focus on the Family founder James Dobson is praising the way Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her husband are supporting their pregnant teenage daughter.

Dobson issued the statement Monday after Sarah and Todd Palin announced that her 17-year-old unmarried daughter is five months pregnant.

Dobson said the Palins should be commended for living out their "pro-life and pro-family values" even in trying circumstances.

He said no one should paint Palin as a hypocrite because of her daughter's pregnancy. He says being a Christian doesn't mean you or your children are perfect but that there is "forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord."

http://cbs4denver.com/politics/mccain.palin.dobson.2.807829.html

All the rest of you trying to redefine "family values" for the conservatives pretend like you are seeing the issue through their eyes, but it's not true, you're the hypocrites for pretending like it would be okay for a Democrat to have this problem but it's not okay for a Republican to have this problem because the Republicans talk about family values in a bad way :rolleyes:

Let me see if I understand you:

You have a personal definition of what "family values" means to you. Well and good.

Does this mean that, any time anyone uses the term "family values," you just assume that they mean it the same way you do?

When the Republican Party and the US religious-rightwing apply the term "family values" to a specific set of social policies referring to sex education, reproductive rights, marriage rights, religion in school, etc., which clearly DO NOT match up with your personal definition of "family values," do you just ignore that and still assume they are meaning it the same way you do?

If yes, how do you account for that?

If not, then why can you not see that when we criticize Palin on her "family values" hypocrisy, we are talking about her support for that political concept of the term, not your personal definition of it?

And if you can see how people like Palin are using and defining the words "family values," then why can you not see the disconnect between that political platform and how Ms. Palin is managing her family (which would be perfectly okay by your standards, but not by her own standards)?

EDIT: To be clear, it is because of Palin's political stance that we say her daughter's pregnancy has political implications as undermining her "family values" position.

What I'm saying is that I regonise the hypocrisy between her families doings and her political platform, but by the definition of family values that I hold and others of my culture, her daughters pregnacy has nowt to do with family values, unless of course the mother is being un-supportive towards her daughter.

If that was the case, then I would add my voice to the general clamour.

In short I disagree that what she may call family values(or more probaly what her opponantes are saying she means by the term) is actualy family values.

Adunbar, GOP stands for "Grand Old Party" - a synonym for the US Republican Party. Its symbol/avatar is the elephant.

I think that Obama handled the "pregnant 17 year old daughter of his Republican rival" issue very well. He told everyone to back off and that muckracking about candidates' family members was off limits.

It would have been better to point out Governor Palin's hypocrisy when she parades her "Right to Life credentials" while posing with the deer that she has just shot.

An old joke but a goodie:
Q. How can you tell when a politician is lying?
A. You can see their lips move.

What I'm saying is that I regonise the hypocrisy between her families doings and her political platform, but by the definition of family values that I hold and others of my culture, her daughters pregnacy has nowt to do with family values, unless of course the mother is being un-supportive towards her daughter.

If that was the case, then I would add my voice to the general clamour.

In short I disagree that what she may call family values(or more probaly what her opponantes are saying she means by the term) is actualy family values.
That's great, but it skirts the issue I was getting at, which is this: If Palin uses the term "family values" to mean that particular set of rightwing policies and philosophies, and her actions in regard to her own family violate those very policies/philosophies, and we criticize her for undermining her own stance and her party on "family values," why can you not see that we are talking about HER usage of the term, not yours?

I agree that her notion of "family values" is not actually good for families, but that is not the point. We are talking about US politics, and in US politics "family values" carries Ms Palin's meaning, not yours or mine.

So, using "family values" in the way that Ms. Palin uses it, this situation is a blow to her credibility on "family values" and it is also a blow to the credibility of "family values" policies (like teaching abstinence-only) and it is perfectly legitimate to phrase it that way, because we are using Ms. Palin's own terms.

yeah it is. think ms palin will take her newly married pregnant teen daughter and husband to live with them in washington dc? or will she leave them in alaska to fend for themselves?

The Clinton impeachment was on criminal charges (there were allegations he lied under oath during a civil trial, about having sex with Monica Lewinski). There is no criminal act with Palin's daughter getting pregnant (unless there's something I missed).

BTW, just a small point. Sarah Palin is married. It's Mrs, not Ms.

It would have been better to point out Governor Palin's hypocrisy when she parades her "Right to Life credentials" while posing with the deer that she has just shot.
To be realistic, the folks who care about the 'Right to Life' won't be the ones pissed off about hunting nonhuman animals for sport.

The whole Aristotelian-Christian 'hierarchy' of life business gets in the way.

...
It would have been better to point out Governor Palin's hypocrisy when she parades her "Right to Life credentials" while posing with the deer that she has just shot.

FYI: when they talk about the "Right to Life," you can apply it the same way as the "Right to Vote" or our "Constitutional Rights" etc., these things are to be applied to Humans, not Animals.

...An old joke but a goodie:
Q. How can you tell when a politician is lying?
A. You can see their lips move.

No argument from me there :)

That's great, but it skirts the issue I was getting at, which is this: If Palin uses the term "family values" to mean that particular set of rightwing policies and philosophies, and her actions in regard to her own family violate those very policies/philosophies, and we criticize her for undermining her own stance and her party on "family values," why can you not see that we are talking about HER usage of the term, not yours?

I agree that her notion of "family values" is not actually good for families, but that is not the point. We are talking about US politics, and in US politics "family values" carries Ms Palin's meaning, not yours or mine.

So, using "family values" in the way that Ms. Palin uses it, this situation is a blow to her credibility on "family values" and it is also a blow to the credibility of "family values" policies (like teaching abstinence-only) and it is perfectly legitimate to phrase it that way, because we are using Ms. Palin's own terms.

Yes yes I get all of that. What I am now unclear of is why you think I cannot see? Afterall, all I have really said is 'p'tah that aint family values she is talking about'

I wasn't talking about his impeachment, I was talking about his affair, or do you not remember Republicans at the time talking about how it was evidence of Mr. Clinton's immorality and unfitness to lead?

The affair was used politically quite independently of the impeachment proceedings.

I remember that a lot of people (not just Republicans) were talking about how he was immoral and unfit to lead, because he allegedly lied under oath. Yes, there were some that held that opinion JUST because he allegedly had an affair, but you can't deny that lying under oath is immoral and due to the fact that it's illegal, shows a willingness to subvert the legal process (thereby making a person unfit to lead a country).

and hardcore republicans and rightwingers have shown us plenty of times how willing they are to flip-flop like beached mackerel to praise themselves and blame their opponents for the exact same things, often at the same time.

I am sure you would find that both parties flip flop and accuse one party of doing something but when in power themselves do the exact same thing.

Of course the fact that her daughter is pregnant has little to do with Palin and what she believes, if Palin had become pregnant outside of marriage or had and abortion after she publicly said it shouldn't be allowed would be a different matter.

I remember that a lot of people (not just Republicans) were talking about how he was immoral and unfit to lead, because he allegedly lied under oath. Yes, there were some that held that opinion JUST because he allegedly had an affair, but you can't deny that lying under oath is immoral and due to the fact that it's illegal, shows a willingness to subvert the legal process (thereby making a person unfit to lead a country).

Yeah, if only he had made signing statements against having to tell the truth in court, or better yet, redefined the law so as to not be required to tell the truth in court. Maybe mix in a bit of noise about it being patriotic duty. Then he would have gotten a free pass.

Hey Gun Manufacturers,
Bill Clinton was a better President than George W because good old George went to war and killed lots of people but poor old Bill Clinton only hunted beaver.
And they tried to impeach him for it!

To be realistic, the folks who care about the 'Right to Life' won't be the ones pissed off about hunting nonhuman animals for sport.

The whole Aristotelian-Christian 'hierarchy' of life business gets in the way.
FYI: when they talk about the "Right to Life,"... these things are to be applied to Humans, not Animals.
I rest my case, m'lud.

Yes yes I get all of that. What I am now unclear of is why you think I cannot see? Afterall, all I have really said is 'p'tah that aint family values she is talking about'
I guess the reason I'm confused is that I don't understand why you felt the need to say that at all in this particular context. EDIT: And I think what you actually said was that you didn't see how this was an attack on family values, or am I confusing you with someone else?

I remember that a lot of people (not just Republicans) were talking about how he was immoral and unfit to lead, because he allegedly lied under oath. Yes, there were some that held that opinion JUST because he allegedly had an affair, but you can't deny that lying under oath is immoral and due to the fact that it's illegal, shows a willingness to subvert the legal process (thereby making a person unfit to lead a country).
Good thing, then, that he hasn't been running a country for 8 years, huh? Good thing he's extremely unlikely ever to run for public office of any kind every again, either, and is, thus, completely irrelevant to just about anything that matters, eh?

Dear Chumblywumbly,
My family is Scottish and I was conceived in Glasgow.

Here's a good Irish joke to cast light on that Aristotelian thing about humans and animals.

An Irishman goes to his local priest carrying his poor dead dog in his arms:
"Father, I want you to hold a Mass for poor little Fido here who has gone to meet his maker."
"Paddy, I'm sorry but I can't hold a Mass for your dog. The Church forbids it! Why don't you see if the Methodist Church down the roads will do it for you."

"All right then father. I'll be going off there then and I'll be given me five thousand pounds to them for the service then?"

"Stop right there Paddy! Bring little Fido back here. Jeezus! Why didn't you tell me that Fido was a Catholic?"

Hey Gun Manufacturers,
Bill Clinton was a better President than George W because good old George went to war and killed lots of people but poor old Bill Clinton only hunted beaver.
And they tried to impeach him for it!

I've NEVER said that W was a better president (I didn't vote for him either time). I AM saying that perjury and obstruction of justice charges are a hell of a lot different than having a pregnant 17 year old daughter (which is something New Wallonochia was trying to compare as equal).

And they tried to impeach him because he allegedly lied about it under oath, during a civil trial (which is illegal).

Yeah, if only he had made signing statements against having to tell the truth in court, or better yet, redefined the law so as to not be required to tell the truth in court. Maybe mix in a bit of noise about it being patriotic duty. Then he would have gotten a free pass.

What does that have to do with comparing Bill Clinton's alleged illegal conduct against Sarah Palin's 17 year old daughter's pregnancy?

*snip*

Typical Scot.

I am sure you would find that both parties flip flop and accuse one party of doing something but when in power themselves do the exact same thing.
Not what I was talking about, but nice attempt. Missed, though.

Of course the fact that her daughter is pregnant has little to do with Palin and what she believes, if Palin had become pregnant outside of marriage or had and abortion after she publicly said it shouldn't be allowed would be a different matter.
Actually, her 17-year-old daughter's behavior has a hell of a lot to do with Palin and what she believes, insofar as it reflects upon her adherence to her own family values stances and the effectiveness of policies she supports as part of that stance.

Of course, I realize that I'm just repeating this point for the sake of other readers. You have had this explained to you by several posters several times. You seem to be one of those people I mentioned earlier who simply will not see the connection, no matter how it is explained.

Good thing, then, that he hasn't been running a country for 8 years, huh? Good thing he's extremely unlikely ever to run for public office of any kind every again, either, and is, thus, completely irrelevant to just about anything that matters, eh?

Don't blame me for bringing Bill Clinton into this discussion. Blame New Wallonochia for that.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13977053&postcount=94

Not what I was talking about, but nice attempt. Missed, though.

Maybe, maybe.

Actually, her 17-year-old daughter's behavior has a hell of a lot to do with Palin and what she believes, insofar as it reflects upon her adherence to her own family values stances and the effectiveness of policies she supports as part of that stance.

Of course, I realize that I'm just repeating this point for the sake of other readers. You have had this explained to you by several posters several times. You seem to be one of those people I mentioned earlier who simply will not see the connection, no matter how it is explained.

No I see the connection that you are making but I fail to see why it all of a sudden means that her beliefs are untrue. Now is there abstinence only programs in Alaskan schools in particular this girls one?

I guess the reason I'm confused is that I don't understand why you felt the need to say that at all in this particular context. EDIT: And I think what you actually said was that you didn't see how this was an attack on family values, or am I confusing you with someone else?

We have here on this little board of ours all sorts of people from all over the world and coming from all sorts of backgrounds. The mods do (as far as I can see) a standup job, and the freedoms we have here are many.

It hardly matters (to me) if you understand or not my reasons for posting as I do, surfice to say that I have issues with the term 'family values' as the context here applies and felt I had to voice it.

Anything wrong with that?

And yes you are correct, I do not feel that a pregnant teen (even of a politcian) has anything to do with 'family values' unless of course the mother is not standing by her daughter.

Bill Clinton should never have been put on trial for consensual sex acts between him and Monica Lewinski. Monica didn't complain. She indiscretely told Linda Tripp who relayed the gossip to the Republicans who were desperate to find filth to throw at Clinton (who was a good President as far as Presidents go)
True, Clinton shouldn't have lied (he must have been the only politician who has!). What Clinton should have said in the immortal lines of Woody Allen's character in "The Front" was "Why don't you all go f*** yourselves>"

Look at it this way. Even if Obama officially clamps down opening fire on it, you know the unofficial groups are gonna use this as ammunition.

True, Clinton shouldn't have lied (he must have been the only politician who has!)

How many of politicians have lied under oath in a court of law?

How many of politicians have lied under oath in a court of law?

I'd say President Nixon was when the idea that American presidents deserve undue respect died a death, hence, who knows how many lied, it took one to be caught without question.

From there, I mean, "I do not recall that period of my administration" is a lie run by presidents to the point of ridiculousness. He's not president but Gonzales used it a farcical amount of times over the attorney generals.

Saying 'I don't remember' is as much a lie' as 'I did not have sexual relations with that girl' and it's forgotten that Bill was looking at the clerk of court when he said that, not Monica Lewinsky so....

...technically :)

I'd bet every president has lied to the nation whether in court or not.

Well, I sure the ones at the Hague for serious crimes like genocide might have. But it was shameful even to go there for the Republicans. They began a dirty little impeachment and dragged a good man and his family through the gutter.
The "Moral" majority? I don't think so.
As for Bill Clinton - he should have said "Mind your own beeswax, boys. My private life has nothing to do with you." "I did not have sex with that woman!" was not one of his better speeches.

But wht are Americans so uptight about good old family values that they would allow such an ugly travesty to occur?
The Pilgrim Fathers have a lot to answer for!

Bill Clinton should never have been put on trial for consensual sex acts between him and Monica Lewinski. Monica didn't complain. She indiscretely told Linda Tripp who relayed the gossip to the Republicans who were desperate to find filth to throw at Clinton (who was a good President as far as Presidents go)
True, Clinton shouldn't have lied (he must have been the only politician who has!). What Clinton should have said in the immortal lines of Woody Allen's character in "The Front" was "Why don't you all go f*** yourselves>"

Since it seems that you're completely unfamiliar with WHY Bill Clinton was testifying (and allegedly lying) under oath, please read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

I remember that a lot of people (not just Republicans) were talking about how he was immoral and unfit to lead, because he allegedly lied under oath. Yes, there were some that held that opinion JUST because he allegedly had an affair, but you can't deny that lying under oath is immoral and due to the fact that it's illegal, shows a willingness to subvert the legal process (thereby making a person unfit to lead a country).

Even prior to the lying under oath there were those who considered his extramarital indiscretions to be valid political targets.

And of course I wouldn't deny any such thing? Perhaps you have me mistaken for a fervent Clinton lover?

I've NEVER said that W was a better president (I didn't vote for him either time). I AM saying that perjury and obstruction of justice charges are a hell of a lot different than having a pregnant 17 year old daughter (which is something New Wallonochia was trying to compare as equal).

When did I say that perjury and lying under oath were equal to having a pregnant 17 year old daughter? I said that having an affair and having a pregnant 17 year old daughter were equally private issues. You were the one who went off on a rant about perjury and such.

I'd bet every president has lied to the nation whether in court or not.

I am not going to debate that at all. In fact the odds on that bet are 1-1.

But that doesn't make it right just because everybody else has done it.

We have here on this little board of ours all sorts of people from all over the world and coming from all sorts of backgrounds. The mods do (as far as I can see) a standup job, and the freedoms we have here are many.

It hardly matters (to me) if you understand or not my reasons for posting as I do, surfice to say that I have issues with the term 'family values' as the context here applies and felt I had to voice it.

Anything wrong with that?

And yes you are correct, I do not feel that a pregnant teen (even of a politcian) has anything to do with 'family values' unless of course the mother is not standing by her daughter.
Oh I see. What you're saying is that you were just telling us all what you think "family values" means, without trying to make your comments at all relevant to what we are discussing. Just a little "Well I think..." interjection about yourself. Well, that explains it then.

Maybe, maybe.



No I see the connection that you are making but I fail to see why it all of a sudden means that her beliefs are untrue. Now is there abstinence only programs in Alaskan schools in particular this girls one?
That is not the only one of Ms. Palin's "family values" beliefs I cited. And it doesn't have to be in the school, if Ms. Palin is the kind of parent she says she is.

I'd say President Nixon was when the idea that American presidents deserve undue respect died a death, hence, who knows how many lied, it took one to be caught without question.

From there, I mean, "I do not recall that period of my administration" is a lie run by presidents to the point of ridiculousness. He's not president but Gonzales used it a farcical amount of times over the attorney generals.

True, very true

Saying 'I don't remember' is as much a lie' as 'I did not have sexual relations with that girl' and it's forgotten that Bill was looking at the clerk of court when he said that, not Monica Lewinsky so....

...technically :)

:) I will have to remember that one.

Even prior to the lying under oath there were those who considered his extramarital indiscretions to be valid political targets.

And of course I wouldn't deny any such thing? Perhaps you have me mistaken for a fervent Clinton lover?



When did I say that perjury and lying under oath were equal to having a pregnant 17 year old daughter? I said that having an affair and having a pregnant 17 year old daughter were equally private issues. You were the one who went off on a rant about perjury and such.

Well, most of my family and friends didn't have a problem with it until he allegedly lied under oath. And I acknowledged that there were people that made an issue of it just because of the affair. My apologies as to thinking you were a "fervent Clinton lover", though.

As to the other issue, your post on the subject (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13977053&postcount=94) made it sound (to me, anyways) like you were saying that the Bristol Palin pregnancy WASN'T a private matter. My apologies again.

That is not the only one of Ms. Palin's "family values" beliefs I cited. And it doesn't have to be in the school, if Ms. Palin is the kind of parent she says she is.

What that she doesn't think that people should have sex before marriage? Again this was her daughter and not her doing the deed, she may not agree with her daughters decision but that doesn't mean that because a member of her family believes in something else that she is wrong.

Well, I see the old Republican stand-by "blame Bill" tactic still works. If the topic is a glaring inconsistency in the Republican VP candidate's "family values" beliefs, just overwhelm the conversation with arguments about Bill Clinton, and the Palin problem will soon be forgotten. :rolleyes:

What that she doesn't think that people should have sex before marriage? Again this was her daughter and not her doing the deed, she may not agree with her daughters decision but that doesn't mean that because a member of her family believes in something else that she is wrong.
I have already answered this several times.

I said before that I know you are not going to waver from your position on this. Please understand that I think you are being intellectually dishonest in order to support her, and I will not waver from that position. I suggest we stop this back-and-forth now, because there is nowhere for it to go.

It gets better.

Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence party (AIP) before becoming an elected Republican official, and recorded a video message for the AIP convention this year. The party's chief goal is securing Alaska a vote on seceding from the US, a goal that AIP leaders believe the state was denied before it became part of the US almost 50 years ago.

Link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/02/uselections2008.republicans20085)

Again, it's not so much about what she does so much as, really John McCain, you might have checked a little.

Yet it is the AIP's motto, "Alaska First, Alaska Always", that may cause the most trouble for McCain. The Republican's campaign slogan this year is "Country First".

At the convention where Palin's video was played, the AIP vice-chairman, George Clark, told the audience that she was an AIP member before getting her first political post as mayor of the small town of Wasilla, Alaska.

"But you get along to go along — she eventually joined the Republican party, where she had all kinds of problems with their ethics, and well, I won't go into that," Clark said. "She also had about an 80% approval rating, and is pretty well sympathetic to her former membership."

What does that have to do with comparing Bill Clinton's alleged illegal conduct against Sarah Palin's 17 year old daughter's pregnancy?

Nothing really. Since Clinton got pulled out to beat the drum on, even if it was on the defense side, I figured I might as well add to it a bit. It's not like anything I can do would put it back on track or derail it further. I don't quite have that much influence on NSG.

That being said, it does go to show just where American politics like to focus on, and crucify, even if the violations of law are the same.

I still don't get your point Gun Manufacturers,
I went to the wikipedia and my understanding of the Republican hounding of Clinton over Monica Lewinsky stands. (However, the Paula Jones case was a compaint - but it still looked like the Republicans were dredging for dirt on Clinton. They couldn't nail him on Whitewater, so they aimed a low kick at his genitals)
I suggest that you are being very prickly on this issue. Is this a case of "OMG, the President lied under oath!" In which case you are being excessively naive. Or are you just an angry Republican looking for a cause to get moralistic about? If so, I suggest you look no further than Haliburton and Blackwater's role in that nasty little military operation in Iraq that is killing off Americans and Iraqis by the thousand.
But I guess we all have our priorities, don't we?

Well, most of my family and friends didn't have a problem with it until he allegedly lied under oath. And I acknowledged that there were people that made an issue of it just because of the affair. My apologies as to thinking you were a "fervent Clinton lover", though.

As to the other issue, your post on the subject (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13977053&postcount=94) made it sound (to me, anyways) like you were saying that the Bristol Palin pregnancy WASN'T a private matter. My apologies again.

No worries, such misunderstandings happen, especially here.

Well, I see the old Republican stand-by "blame Bill" tactic still works. If the topic is a glaring inconsistency in the Republican VP candidate's "family values" beliefs, just overwhelm the conversation with arguments about Bill Clinton, and the Palin problem will soon be forgotten. :rolleyes:

Actually, that one was my fault, I'd forgotten that mentioning Clinton was like hitting a hornet nest with a stick.

*snip AIP stuff*

Actually, that just won her points in my eyes. I'm a socialist and thus am generally forced to support the Democrats as the least worst of two evils but I'm also a strong antifederalist. Of course, this doesn't mean I'd think about supporting McCain/Palin but it does make me dislike Palin herself just a bit less.

Actually, that just won her points in my eyes. I'm a socialist and thus am generally forced to support the Democrats as the least worst of two evils but I'm also a strong antifederalist. Of course, this doesn't mean I'd think about supporting McCain/Palin but it does make me dislike Palin herself just a bit less.

As I said, it's not so much a comment on her in my eyes as John McCain, when a man running on the 'Country First' ticket selects a secessionist, well it just makes him look as though he didn't really bother thinking much about this.

What decisions will he make on the spur of the moment when president?

How many of politicians have lied under oath in a court of law (about a blowjob)?

How many politicians have lied to get A COUNTRY INTO A WAR UNDER FALSE PRETENSES, KILLING NEARLY A MILLION PEOPLE IN THE PROCESS, GONE ON TO CHANGE THE LAW TO AVOID INQUIRY, AND WHOSE PARTY IS STILL COMPLAINING ABOUT THE FACT THAT ANOTHER ONE LIED ABOUT A GODDAMN BLOWJOB?!!

I have already answered this several times.

I said before that I know you are not going to waver from your position on this. Please understand that I think you are being intellectually dishonest in order to support her, and I will not waver from that position. I suggest we stop this back-and-forth now, because there is nowhere for it to go.

Excuse me, but where did I say that I support her? All I said was that I fail to see why this is such a big deal and a reason why we shouldn't vote for her.

Excuse me, but where did I say that I support her? All I said was that I fail to see why this is such a big deal and a reason why we shouldn't vote for her.
^^ This is a statement supportive of Palin. Though I suppose it would have been more precise to say "defend" rather than "support," so I will rephrase:

It is my belief that you are being intellectually dishonest in order to defend her, and I will not waver from that position.

I think we're done now.

Palin herself is a caricature. Beauty Queen, great white hunter, Right to Life mother of five. Why do Americans get fooled by these Rednecks? Surely the Jimmy Swaggart case should have damned the "Moral Majority" to Hell for all eternity?

But hey, here in Australia, we've got plenty of Rednecks too! And we vote ours into high office too. The comforting thing was that our last Prime Minister lost not only the last election but his own parliamentary seat as well. We had to use a crowbar to dig his nose out of Bush's butt.

^^ This is a statement supportive of Palin. Though I suppose it would have been more precise to say "defend" rather than "support," so I will rephrase:

It is my belief that you are being intellectually dishonest in order to defend her, and I will not waver from that position.

I think we're done now.

We are only done because you wish to be close minded about it.

Palin herself is a caricature. Beauty Queen, great white hunter, Right to Life mother of five. Why do Americans get fooled by these Rednecks? Surely the Jimmy Swaggart case should have damned the "Moral Majority" to Hell for all eternity?

But hey, here in Australia, we've got plenty of Rednecks too! And we vote ours into high office too. The comforting thing was that our last Prime Minister lost not only the last election but his own parliamentary seat as well. We had to use a crowbar to dig his nose out of Bush's butt.

You sir, are proving that you will be a source of entertainment for me, please continue to post these ridiculous and amusing observations of yours.

We are only done because you wish to be close minded about it.

this coming from you?

Oh I see. What you're saying is that you were just telling us all what you think "family values" means, without trying to make your comments at all relevant to what we are discussing. Just a little "Well I think..." interjection about yourself. Well, that explains it then.

Well I guess if that's how you read it. But can I see your badge, you know the one that shows you are the topic law around these parts.

this coming from you?

Yes Neo, but please tell me why, if Mur gives me gives me some good reasons why I shouldn't support (not that I do) Palin purely because her daughter is pregnant than I will change my mind and join in the crusade. Now you have done it before Neo, which is why I'm a bit surprised of you mentioning this but whatever.

Yes Neo, but please tell me why, if Mur gives me gives me some good reasons why I shouldn't support (not that I do) Palin purely because her daughter is pregnant than I will change my mind and join in the crusade.

because it calls into question the validity of her own supported policies, obviously.

We are only done because you wish to be close minded about it.
:D HA! Oh that's rich!

http://home.mindspring.com/~samrc/sounds/laugh.wav
(audio)

You sir, are proving that you will be a source of entertainment for me, please continue to post these ridiculous and amusing observations of yours.
The hell with him! You're the one who keeps me snorting my coffee. Jokes instead of responses. Brilliant!

Well I guess if that's how you read it. But can I see your badge, you know the one that shows you are the topic law around these parts.
Oh, I'm not saying you're not allowed to focus only on yourself. I'm just confirming that I can ignore such comments from now on and not lose the thread of the conversation, that's all.

because it calls into question the validity of her own supported policies, obviously.

Exactly what polices and how.

Keep being provocative yourself Bloumann! I'm going to bed now - it's 1.30 a.m. over here in Melbourne, Australia.

But seriosly, I hope Palin's daughter and her kid have happy lives and that the glare of media exposure doesn't burn her too much.

I was in the US 9 months ago. I loved it and I found the Yanks easy to love.

Yes Neo, but please tell me why, if Mur gives me gives me some good reasons why I shouldn't support (not that I do) Palin purely because her daughter is pregnant than I will change my mind and join in the crusade. Now you have done it before Neo, which is why I'm a bit surprised of you mentioning this but whatever.
I have done so. Several times. Another of your amusing tricks is pretending that arguments you don't like or can't counter don't exist. But I'm not going to keep dancing with you. (Man, my ignore list is getting a work-out this summer.)

because it calls into question the validity of her own supported policies, obviously.
Good luck, Neo, but I've been chasing him around this bush for a while now. I'm done with him.

The Clinton impeachment was on criminal charges (there were allegations he lied under oath during a civil trial, about having sex with Monica Lewinski). There is no criminal act with Palin's daughter getting pregnant (unless there's something I missed).

I think you missed the fact that all the hype back then wasn't exactly about the legal prceedings but mostly about a stained dress and a cigar.


BTW, just a small point. Sarah Palin is married. It's Mrs, not Ms.

It's Ms. It makes no difference if she's married or not.

Exactly what polices and how.

Palin supports a series of policies (abstinence only education, "focus on family" initiatives and others) that she believes will stop teenagers from having sex.

Yet she, herself, was unable to stop her 17 year old (possibly 16 at the time) highschool daughter from having sex. She presumes to think that these policies will help control other people's children, yet she seems unable to control her own.

If she can't stop her own highschool age children from having sex, why should I believe her when she states that her proposed policies will stop mine?

:D HA! Oh that's rich!

http://home.mindspring.com/~samrc/sounds/laugh.wav
(audio)

Damn, I thought your response was going to be better, but do you mind if I take that laugh I quite like it.

The hell with him! You're the one who keeps me snorting my coffee. Jokes instead of responses. Brilliant!

I am asking a few questions here and then you say I am being dishonest and supporting her, when I do not support her at all.

I have done so. Several times. Another of your amusing tricks is pretending that arguments you don't like or can't counter don't exist. But I'm not going to keep dancing with you. (Man, my ignore list is getting a work-out this summer.).

Come now, Muravyets, we were just starting to have some fun, your not really going to ignore me are you? But I don't know about these tricks I don't remember doing them before

Good luck, Neo, but I've been chasing him around this bush for a while now. I'm done with him.

Well it was nice while it lasted come on Neo you have beaten me before.

Palin supports a series of policies (abstinence only education, "focus on family" initiatives and others) that she believes will stop teenagers from having sex.

Yet she, herself, was unable to stop her 17 year old (possibly 16 at the time) highschool daughter from having sex. She presumes to think that these policies will help control other people's children, yet she seems unable to control her own.

If she can't stop her own highschool age children from having sex, why should I believe her when she states that her proposed policies will stop mine?

Question: Was the abstinence only program in place at her daughters school?
and
What does the "focus on family" initiative entail.

BTW, just a small point. Sarah Palin is married. It's Mrs, not Ms.

Incorrect. Mrs. is a title you give to a woman who is married, and who has taken her husband's last name. Miss is a title used to address an unmarried woman or a married one who has not taken her husband's name.

On the other hand Ms. is a general title that can be used for any woman, regardless of marital status. If she had been refered to as "Miss Palin" you might have been technically correct (though remarkably sexist in presuming how she would have called herself) but "Ms. Palin" merely refers to a woman with the last name of Palin, without any connotations as to her marital status.

You should really look something up before trying to correct someone.

Question: Was the abstinence only program in place at her daughters school?

Seems kind of irrelevant does it not? If she truly thought such values important, and found that the school didn't teach them, she would have taught them herself.

So either the program was in place, and it failed, calling into question the validity of such teachings, or the program was not in place, but she taught it personally, and it failed, calling into question the validity of such teachings, or it was not taught in school and she failed to teach it herself, calling into question the sincerity of her belief in such programs.

So it either makes her a hypocrite, or a supporter of highly questionable policies. Feel free to take your pick.

Seems kind of irrelevant does it not? If she truly thought such values important, and found that the school didn't teach them, she would have taught them herself.

So either the program was in place, and it failed, calling into question the validity of such teachings, or the program was not in place, but she taught it personally, and it failed, calling into question the validity of such teachings, or it was not taught in school and she failed to teach it herself, calling into question the sincerity of her belief in such programs.

So it either makes her a hypocrite, or a supporter of highly questionable policies. Feel free to take your pick.

If the school was teaching it then by all means yes the program does not have a 100% success rate. Now if she taught them at home, that is a different manner after all a child is not only influenced by their parents especially if the parent hasn't got the necessary tools, and when they are in their teen years which does give more credibility to your point.

There's always a third option Neo, but I think I will pick a supporter of questionable policies if the school did have an abstinence only program in place. I was going to go on Neo, but I find myself going around in a circle and maybe I'm starting to lose the beer buzz and I am thinking about the warm bed behind me too. But I was not trying to support her nor was I trying to defend her as some people on here thought I was, what I was doing was wanting to know why people felt the need to attack a women because of something a member of her family did, and how that makes her a hypocrite. I hope you get paid well for what you do Neo.

Seems kind of irrelevant does it not? If she truly thought such values important, and found that the school didn't teach them, she would have taught them herself.

And to forestall the obvious counter argument, if she felt that abstinence only was all her daughter should be taught then she would have opted her out of the schools comprehensive sex ed class (if it had one),

Obama came out today and very forcefully said he will not make this a campaign issue, and that if someone in his campaign does they will be fired.


Part of me is very proud of him. Bravo, clean politics and all that.


On the other hand, Im infuriated. This election is very, very important for this country, and the Republicans would never, ever be this courtious. He is deliberitally handcapping himself. I can say safely that Obama is a better man then I, because I would go for the kill and annihilate them when they were down.

You have your history backwards. The democrats always may hay of this sort of thing and will, with or without obama's public support. Privately it is all obama has. The clinton's are masters at mudslinging and have kept it alive and well in the party for many years.

Obama is a zero on foreign affairs, a zero on domestics, a zero on economics, and a total empty suit. He would have no clue what to do if he actually won. He thought by picking a VP with actual experience it would help him. I guess he wants a mentor. Being president requires experience in these matters, not on the job training. Perhaps he could try to be an actual senator first. I guess he should next run for emperor.

The problem here is that the two campaigns are not only opposite ideologically, but they are inverse on experience. Obama, being the least experienced of all of them somehow happened to make it to the top of the democratic ticket. The inexperience on the republican ticket is where it should be, at the bottom.

I keep wondering however about yet another problem obama has. Hillary may know of it which would explain her reluctance to leave the nominantion primaries. It seems clear the birth certificate for obama may not be accurate. He quite possibly may have been born abroad. That being the case, he is still a citizen, just not natural born. Which may be why Hillary keeps her tits out for this possibility.

So in the end, it may actually be a Hillary ticket, but it seems the democrats have not only lost their marbles, they forgot where they put them.

Is mccain a better choice? Well probably but not the best candidate. I will vote for mccain so we dont end up a grease spot on a historical document as clinton has wanted us to become. We just need to run smoothly over the next election cycle until we can find a better candidate. Either way, we cannot do any worse than our current choices. If we vote in obama, guess we would hit rock bottom. Only way to go is up.

And to forestall the obvious counter argument, if she felt that abstinence only was all her daughter should be taught then she would have opted her out of the schools comprehensive sex ed class (if it had one),

That's not the counter argument. The counter argument is the simple fact that even if Sarah Palin endorsed a contraceptive endorsing sexual education program there is no reason to assume that her daughter wouldn't have gotten pregnant now. It's a silly mockery of a non-issue really. Is it surprising that the people objecting the loudest here are the ones that were least likely to support Sarah Palin to begin with? No, it's not surprising at all.

BTW, just a small point. Sarah Palin is married. It's Mrs, not Ms.
Ms can be applied to married women as well. I suspect you're confusing Ms for Miss.

What are you talking about?
You have your history backwards. The democrats always may hay of this sort of thing and will, with or without obama's public support.
Okay, granted...

Privately it is all obama has.
Do you mean "personally," as in "personally, you think" that it's all Obama has? Because you're entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is -- your opinion.

The clinton's are masters at mudslinging and have kept it alive and well in the party for many years.
This is not a Clinton campaign.

Obama is a zero on foreign affairs, a zero on domestics, a zero on economics, and a total empty suit. He would have no clue what to do if he actually won. He thought by picking a VP with actual experience it would help him. I guess he wants a mentor. Being president requires experience in these matters, not on the job training. Perhaps he could try to be an actual senator first. I guess he should next run for emperor.
Again, you are entitled to your opinion, but as to the bolded parts:

1) What is not legitimate about signing on a teammate with experience? I mean, how does it make Obama look worse?

2) Obama is an actual senator. Just ask the voters in Illinois.

The problem here is that the two campaigns are not only opposite ideologically, but they are inverse on experience. Obama, being the least experienced of all of them somehow happened to make it to the top of the democratic ticket. The inexperience on the republican ticket is where it should be, at the bottom.
Again, you are entitled to your opinion, but Vice-President is hardly "on the bottom." It's next in command in the event of loss of the president. I would have expected someone with McCain's experience to pick a more experienced person for that job -- you know, like Obama did.

I keep wondering however about yet another problem obama has. Hillary may know of it which would explain her reluctance to leave the nominantion primaries. It seems clear the birth certificate for obama may not be accurate. He quite possibly may have been born abroad. That being the case, he is still a citizen, just not natural born. Which may be why Hillary keeps her tits out for this possibility.
Interesting.

You're clinging to a debunked myth.

And you're still expecting... someone?... to ...what? disqualify Obama at the last minute?

And that would do what for you...let you make this be all about a Clinton?

(Oh, and nice dismissive sexual reference on Hillary. I mean I hate that woman, but still, really -- would you also say that the male candidates are keeping their balls out for the presidency?)

So in the end, it may actually be a Hillary ticket, but it seems the democrats have not only lost their marbles, they forgot where they put them.
Yeah, um...I wouldn't hold my breath for another Clinton to bash. You should try to find better anti-Obama material instead.

Oh, and how is losing their marbles different from forgettinng where they put them?

Is mccain a better choice? Well probably but not the best candidate. I will vote for mccain so we dont end up a grease spot on a historical document as clinton has wanted us to become. We just need to run smoothly over the next election cycle until we can find a better candidate. Either way, we cannot do any worse than our current choices. If we vote in obama, guess we would hit rock bottom. Only way to go is up.
The hell--? Oh, I need that laugh wav again. :D

Incorrect. Mrs. is a title you give to a woman who is married, and who has taken her husband's last name. Miss is a title used to address an unmarried woman or a married one who has not taken her husband's name.

On the other hand Ms. is a general title that can be used for any woman, regardless of marital status. If she had been refered to as "Miss Palin" you might have been technically correct (though remarkably sexist in presuming how she would have called herself) but "Ms. Palin" merely refers to a woman with the last name of Palin, without any connotations as to her marital status.

You should really look something up before trying to correct someone.

She is married, and her maiden name (according to Wiki) is Heath. She took her husband's name name, so Mrs is correct. I did happen to miss where a married woman can be called Ms, though (it's also not what I was always taught to call a married woman).

My apologies.

What are you talking about?
...

A double post and unaddressed? Damn I hate it when that happens to me...
:confused:

edit, you fixed :)

She is married, and her maiden name (according to Wiki) is Heath. She took her husband's name name, so Mrs is correct. I did happen to miss where a married woman can be called Ms, though (it's also not what I was always taught to call a married woman).

My apologies.
You're not the first. My mother is a Ms. who has been married for over 30 years, and she still has people get confused about it. 'Course, she generally solves it by just saying, "Look, if you can't handle the Miz then you can just call me Doctor." Ahh, the perks of holding a PhD...:D

She is married, and her maiden name (according to Wiki) is Heath. She took her husband's name name, so Mrs is correct. I did happen to miss where a married woman can be called Ms, though (it's also not what I was always taught to call a married woman).

My apologies.
Half the point of "Ms" is that it's marital status ambiguous.

I still don't get your point Gun Manufacturers,
I went to the wikipedia and my understanding of the Republican hounding of Clinton over Monica Lewinsky stands. (However, the Paula Jones case was a compaint - but it still looked like the Republicans were dredging for dirt on Clinton. They couldn't nail him on Whitewater, so they aimed a low kick at his genitals)
I suggest that you are being very prickly on this issue. Is this a case of "OMG, the President lied under oath!" In which case you are being excessively naive. Or are you just an angry Republican looking for a cause to get moralistic about? If so, I suggest you look no further than Haliburton and Blackwater's role in that nasty little military operation in Iraq that is killing off Americans and Iraqis by the thousand.
But I guess we all have our priorities, don't we?

Kenneth Starr was the one doing the investigating (aka dredging for dirt), and he was an Independent Counsel. He expanded his investigation with the approval of Attorney General Janet Reno (a Clinton nominee for the position).

BTW, I'm not a Republican, I'm registered as an Independent. Also, if prosecuting crimes (such as perjury and obstruction of justice) makes me naive, then pass me the Evian*.


*Evian is naive spelled backwards.

Half the point of "Ms" is that it's marital status ambiguous.

Like I said, I'd been taught that Ms. and Miss was single, and Mrs. was married.

I think she may abandon them, forcing them to live with a colony of ants. Or possibly coercing them into becoming community organizers...

I'm rapidly becoming a Bob Barr fan... At least he seems serious and not determined to lose at all costs.
hey there is a lot to be said for a straight man with a moustache!

The Clinton impeachment was on criminal charges (there were allegations he lied under oath during a civil trial, about having sex with Monica Lewinski). There is no criminal act with Palin's daughter getting pregnant (unless there's something I missed).

BTW, just a small point. Sarah Palin is married. It's Mrs, not Ms.
huh?

and ALL female people are correctly referred to as MS.

It's Ms. It makes no difference if she's married or not.

eh? I thought it was whatever you wanted to be called?

My wife doesn't like "Ms"

I wonder why it wasn't spelled "Mz"

eh? I thought it was whatever you wanted to be called?

My wife doesn't like "Ms"

I wonder why it wasn't spelled "Mz"

Why not MZ? Because then she would be a motorcycle and everyone would want to ride her?

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee218/Balderdash71964/MZ_Motorcycle_2001.jpg

eh? I thought it was whatever you wanted to be called?

My wife doesn't like "Ms"

I wonder why it wasn't spelled "Mz"
Fun back story:

This may be apocryphal, but the story goes that the woman who came up with "Ms" was inspired by a type-o in a document she was reading. The reason it is pronounced "Mizz" is because the inventor was a Missouri native, and both "Miss" and "Mrs" were/are often pronounced "mizz" in her area.

And yes, it is appropriate to address a woman using whichever title she prefers. Just like if a man has a doctorate but prefers to be called "Mister" then you should call him "Mister" rather than "Doctor." It's generally polite to use the names that people wish to be called. :D However, the current accepted norm is to use "Ms" in any uncertain case, i.e. if you either don't know a woman's marital status or don't know what she prefers to be called. It is always grammatically correct to use "Ms," but it's polite to use "Mrs" or "Miss" if that's what the person in question prefers.

Or I would rather she did what my mom actually did, which was to discuss birth control before I even thought about having sex.
Of course she discussed birth control! She told Bristol that birth control is a horrible violation of God's will.

Of course the fact that her daughter is pregnant has little to do with Palin and what she believes, if Palin had become pregnant outside of marriage or had and abortion after she publicly said it shouldn't be allowed would be a different matter.
Palin's first child was born a little under eight months after her marriage. Apparently they eloped promptly at her first missed period.

This episode of utter irrelevance has been brought to you by the letters S, O, W, and the number 4.

while her daughter's pregancy is a family problem and irrelevant to her mother's run for the VP, it does make me wonder if the very people she was chosen to pander to might be turned off by a mother who "doesn't have control of her child"

Nah, Sarah Palin is right-wing and middle-class, so she gets judged by an entirely different set of standards than other women with pregnant teen daughters. Mr. & Mrs. Evangelical Voter look at Palin and see someone they can identify with, so they'll overlook any familial lapses.

I am massively irritated that the same judgemental idjits who scream "Where are the parents!!!" whenever the local paper runs a story about teen pregnancy rates among Latinos on the West Side or Blacks on the South Side are now toeing the line of "Oh, parents aren't to blame for the failings of their children" when it's a nice white girl from a good family. But I'm mad at the idjits only; about Palin, I have no opinion.

Funny. My mom said the exact same thing.

Holy Shit! Stop the presses! Lunatic Goofballs is revealed as Knights of Liberty's MOM!

Nah, Sarah Palin is right-wing and middle-class, so she gets judged by an entirely different set of standards than other women with pregnant teen daughters. Mr. & Mrs. Evangelical Voter look at Palin and see someone they can identify with, so they'll overlook any familial lapses.

I am massively irritated that the same judgemental idjits who scream "Where are the parents!!!" whenever the local paper runs a story about teen pregnancy rates among Latinos on the West Side or Blacks on the South Side are now toeing the line of "Oh, parents aren't to blame for the failings of their children" when it's a nice white girl from a good family. But I'm mad at the idjits only; about Palin, I have no opinion.
word.

but women are VERY critical of other women. we tend not to give other women the benefit of the doubt. instead we take whatever defect we can latch on to and claim it to be the reason that something bad happens in another woman's life.

it doesnt have to make sense or be consistent. we dis working moms, stay at home moms, women who choose to not be moms at all.

but women are VERY critical of other women. we tend not to give other women the benefit of the doubt. instead we take whatever defect we can latch on to and claim it to be the reason that something bad happens in another woman's life.

it doesnt have to make sense or be consistent. we dis working moms, stay at home moms, women who choose to not be moms at all.

True that. If womanhood had a slogan, it would be something like "Women: Undermining Ourselves Since The Day Eve Ate The Apple". I guess the voter impact of the pregnancy will depend on how good the GOP is at keeping its people on-message.

True that. If womanhood had a slogan, it would be something like "Women: Undermining Ourselves Since The Day Eve Ate The Apple". I guess the voter impact of the pregnancy will depend on how good the GOP is at keeping its people on-message.
I think the voter impact will be virtually nil if the GOP just keep their mouth strictly shut about it.

To me and many others, it is just another bit of evidence that she is wobbly on her positions, but it's not as if it's the only thing to beat her up with. It's just that if it gets mentioned, then yeah, it's gonna get mentioned. But if everyone does as Obama "officially" says and leaves it alone, then there are plenty of other issues to attack her on. And it's not as if her daughter doesn't have a perfect right to get pregnant and married at 17, if she wants to. But like I said, if Palin is going to open the door to discussing her stances on parental wisdom and responsibility and abstinence-teaching or any of that sort of private thing that she thinks the government should have a say about, then her own parenting decisions become a legitimate question. If she doesn't, then they don't.

As for McCain/Palin core supporters, this was never going to make a difference anyway, so it's not like they have to account for it to their base.

"Least said, soonest mended" should be the proper approach to this -- and that comes from a person who wants to see the McCain/Palin ticket go down in flames.

You're not the first. My mother is a Ms. who has been married for over 30 years, and she still has people get confused about it. 'Course, she generally solves it by just saying, "Look, if you can't handle the Miz then you can just call me Doctor." Ahh, the perks of holding a PhD...:D

It's a pain in the ass trying to get 6-year-olds to call you "Miz" Ryadn, but I always introduce myself as "Ms." so at least they'll be exposed to it. What annoys me more is when my coworkers call me "miss" and totally undermine it.

It's a pain in the ass trying to get 6-year-olds to call you "Miz" Ryadn, but I always introduce myself as "Ms." so at least they'll be exposed to it. What annoys me more is when my coworkers call me "miss" and totally undermine it.

. . . they call you Ms. Ryadn? Like...literally?

Nah, Sarah Palin is right-wing and middle-class, so she gets judged by an entirely different set of standards than other women with pregnant teen daughters. Mr. & Mrs. Evangelical Voter look at Palin and see someone they can identify with, so they'll overlook any familial lapses.

I am massively irritated that the same judgemental idjits who scream "Where are the parents!!!" whenever the local paper runs a story about teen pregnancy rates among Latinos on the West Side or Blacks on the South Side are now toeing the line of "Oh, parents aren't to blame for the failings of their children" when it's a nice white girl from a good family. But I'm mad at the idjits only; about Palin, I have no opinion.
Thursday, December 20, 2007

By Bill O'Reilly

"...On the pinhead front, 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. The sister of Britney says she is shocked. I bet.

Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves....."
Link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317577,00.html)

. . . they call you Ms. Ryadn? Like...literally?

Yes, the first thing I do in a new class is get every student an NS account. Then the mayhem begins!

I suppose I should have said "Miz [Ryadn]", Mr. Details.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

By Bill O'Reilly

"...On the pinhead front, 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. The sister of Britney says she is shocked. I bet.

Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves....."
Link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317577,00.html)
think he is saying the same thing now about ms palin and her daughter?

Yes, the first thing I do in a new class is get every student an NS account. Then the mayhem begins!

This would actually explain much.

I suppose I should have said "Miz [Ryadn]", Mr. Details.
who told you my name????

And that's Mr. Details, Esq. to you.

Yes, the first thing I do in a new class is get every student an NS account. Then the mayhem begins!

I suppose I should have said "Miz [Ryadn]", Mr. Details.
Funnily enough, Mr. Details is his real name. ;)

(EDIT: Bah! He beat me to it. Damn you, Neo Details!)

think he is saying the same thing now about ms palin and her daughter?
Don't be silly. Britney Spears is in the entertainment industry, and that makes her and her entire family the spokesmanniquins for everything liberal and evil, and all the private details of their lives grist for his mill.

Whereas, Ms. Palin is a right-living, right-wing, right-next-to-the-president-he-wants, fine upstanding example of moral womaninity who shows her love of Christ by her big dangly crucifix earrings, so naturally everything she does is moral and correct, and all her family are examples of the perfect success of every idea she has ever supported.

Funnily enough, Mr. Details is his real name. ;)

(EDIT: Bah! He beat me to it. Damn you, Neo Details!)


Don't be silly. Britney Spears is in the entertainment industry, and that makes her and her entire family the spokesmanniquins for everything liberal and evil, and all the private details of their lives grist for his mill.

Whereas, Ms. Palin is a right-living, right-wing, right-next-to-the-president-he-wants, fine upstanding example of moral womaninity who shows her love of Christ by her big dangly crucifix earrings, so naturally everything she does is moral and correct, and all her family are examples of the perfect success of every idea she has ever supported.
i love it when pundits and politicians do a 180 on things like this when to keep the old position is bad for their team.

Political dynamite???

elections in the US are THAT lame this year?

i love it when pundits and politicians do a 180 on things like this when to keep the old position is bad for their team.
I'm ready to chuck the pundits into the Pit of Death right after the bloggers and just before Britney herself. Ugh.

http://media.monstersandcritics.com/articles/1398392/article_images/meet.jpg

Obviously this is a shining example of why woman should stay home. If Ms. Palin had simply stayed home to give her children the love and attention they need from their mother instead of hanging up her apron to jump into the political pond that clearly belongs to men, then this never would have happened.

Honesty! Republicans need to get a better hold of their women!

That aside, I doubt this will change much. The religious right has already proven it's ability to pick and choose what it wants to believe. It'll turn a blind eye to "unwed teenage pregnancy" as long as it's followed by "chose to keep baby" and "fully supported by family". The fact that they used "unwed teenage mother" to disprove the rumors of "unwed teenage mother" strikes me as... odd when it would have been easier to deny it (otherwise known as telling the truth in this case) and simply left the issue in silence. The election is only a couple months away anyway, what would it have mattered, so long as they kept their daughter out of the public eye? I'm sure they could have tossed together a wedding in that time on the side.

Hell, the poor girl probably doesn't even know what contraception is, being the product of an evangelical upbringing. Total abstinence until marriage is the only way when you've got a friend in Jesus.

So he's that kind of guy, huh?

Political dynamite???

elections in the US are THAT lame this year?

Just this year? If only the world was that lucky! Sex usually gets moods heated in the USA, especially when the penetration of moist parts happened out of wedlock. Things would be a lot simpler if all teenagers would get their rocks off by firing automatic weapons at targeting ranges. That's a healthy hobby for good Christian & patriottic children, after all.

PS: hormones are a product of Soviet biotechnology! It's those godless communists again with their Satanic plots to destroy the American way!!!

That aside, I doubt this will change much. The religious right has already proven it's ability to pick and choose what it wants to believe. It'll turn a blind eye to "unwed teenage pregnancy" as long as it's followed by "chose to keep baby" and "fully supported by family".

I suspect that a lot of this girl's "choice" was more or less an "If you want to live in my house, you'll live by my rules/You'll ruin your mother's political career if you do choose otherwise..." sort of thing that make teenagers needing access to abortions without parental consent important.

No doubt if I Can't Believe It's Not Hillary was a Democrat or if Obama or Biden had a seventeen year old daughter pregnant out of wedlock the Republican Noise Machine would have brought on the whole Family Values bullshit attack.

Obama is being too nice. Should have grilled I Can't Believe It's Not Hillary on having an unwed pregnant teen daughter while supposedly pushing for Family Values.

No doubt if I Can't Believe It's Not Hillary was a Democrat or if Obama or Biden had a seventeen year old daughter pregnant out of wedlock the Republican Noise Machine would have brought on the whole Family Values bullshit attack.

Obama is being too nice. Should have grilled I Can't Believe It's Not Hillary on having an unwed pregnant teen daughter while supposedly pushing for Family Values.

He can't. It'd look like Black Man Attacks White Woman.

He can't. It'd look like Black Man Attacks White Woman.

One of the unofficial 408(?) Groups could do the dirty work for him.

A commercial with a montage of McCain and/or Republicans lecturing on Family Values and how the Democrats supposedly don't have them.

Interspersed with shots of Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Newt Gingrich, Bristol Palin, so on and so forth.

One of the unofficial 408(?) Groups could do the dirty work for him.

A commercial with a montage of McCain and/or Republicans lecturing on Family Values and how the Democrats supposedly don't have them.

Interspersed with shots of Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Newt Gingrich, Bristol Palin, so on and so forth.
there will be PLENTY of media attacks, blog attacks, pundit attacks, comedian attacks.

obama can and should take the high road on this one.

I'm ready to chuck the pundits into the Pit of Death right after the bloggers and just before Britney herself. Ugh.

http://media.monstersandcritics.com/articles/1398392/article_images/meet.jpg

NO! Never reference that or any movie made by those people again.

there will be PLENTY of media attacks, blog attacks, pundit attacks, comedian attacks.

obama can and should take the high road on this one.

I hope and believe you are correct.

Sorry, ignorant English person question, what is GOP? I've heard it mentioned but I dunno what it is.

GOP means Grand Old Party, which is a nickname for the Republican Party.

there will be PLENTY of media attacks, blog attacks, pundit attacks, comedian attacks.

obama can and should take the high road on this one.

Olbermann and maybe Stewart will make it a highlight on their shows, but as for the rest of The Liberal Media? Not gonna happen.

NO! Never reference that or any movie made by those people again.
*chucks New Manvir into the Pit of Death*

Olbermann and maybe Stewart will make it a highlight on their shows, but as for the rest of The Liberal Media? Not gonna happen.
dont forget the enquirer--more read by the conservatives than the other 2 are watched by them.

I don't care, at least not all that much. I clearly care enough to post that I don't care, and to explain that I actually do not not care, but my level of care is extremely low.

Unless yahoo is noticably liberal, the only real mention I've seen so far is fairly non-partisan.

"McCain fought money on teen pregnancy programs"

"WASHINGTON - Republican John McCain, whose running mate disclosed that her unmarried 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, has opposed proposals to spend federal money on teen-pregnancy prevention programs and voted to require poor teen mothers to stay in school or lose their benefits."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_teen_pregnancies

Unless yahoo is noticably liberal, the only real mention I've seen so far is fairly non-partisan.

"McCain fought money on teen pregnancy programs"

"WASHINGTON - Republican John McCain, whose running mate disclosed that her unmarried 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, has opposed proposals to spend federal money on teen-pregnancy prevention programs and voted to require poor teen mothers to stay in school or lose their benefits."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_teen_pregnancies
Nice! :D Warms the cockles of my heart, it truly does.

Nice! :D Warms the cockles of my heart, it truly does.

Well, the GOP were obviously really ready to slam Obama if he took a single step in the direction of mentioning the Palin progeny. Their attack machine has gone all out on mention of the fact that Palin's hubby has been an active member of an Alaskan Independence movement with secessionist tendencies, and has gone apeshit over any suggestion that Palin may have raised money for Buchanan.

I think they were gearing up for a smear-blitz, and have been left a little hungry.

But, I'm feeling no pity. That McCain is suddenly blindsided by two or three niggling little details is no big deal - but it IS evidence that his pick of Palin was a last minute consideration. Clearly, she'd not been heavily vetted (no matter what the GOP camp are saying), and clearly, there were more than the expected number of skeletons in the closet.

It tells me a couple of things. It tells me that the GOP really thought that Obama was going to pick Hillary, and we're completely caught by surprise when he picked a candidate with a penis. Hence the mad scramble for a vagina to put on the McCain ticket. And - apparently - any vagina will do.

It also tells me that the GOP were careless, and that Palin is probably the only candidate they could get on such short notice that would fit the bill. If she'd have known in greater advance, this would be a non-story, because they would (likely) have rushed a wedding through to MAKE it a non-story. Indeed - then it would have been a heartwarming morality tale for the evangelicals, about young people marrying and having legal and god-approved progeny.

Well, the GOP were obviously really ready to slam Obama if he took a single step in the direction of mentioning the Palin progeny. Their attack machine has gone all out on mention of the fact that Palin's hubby has been an active member of an Alaskan Independence movement with secessionist tendencies, and has gone apeshit over any suggestion that Palin may have raised money for Buchanan.

I think they were gearing up for a smear-blitz, and have been left a little hungry.

But, I'm feeling no pity. That McCain is suddenly blindsided by two or three niggling little details is no big deal - but it IS evidence that his pick of Palin was a last minute consideration. Clearly, she'd not been heavily vetted (no matter what the GOP camp are saying), and clearly, there were more than the expected number of skeletons in the closet.

It tells me a couple of things. It tells me that the GOP really thought that Obama was going to pick Hillary, and we're completely caught by surprise when he picked a candidate with a penis. Hence the mad scramble for a vagina to put on the McCain ticket. And - apparently - any vagina will do.

It also tells me that the GOP were careless, and that Palin is probably the only candidate they could get on such short notice that would fit the bill. If she'd have known in greater advance, this would be a non-story, because they would (likely) have rushed a wedding through to MAKE it a non-story. Indeed - then it would have been a heartwarming morality tale for the evangelicals, about young people marrying and having legal and god-approved progeny.

They were praying that Ebil Mozlem Obama would pick Hillary as VP, and when he picked Biden instead they saw the disgruntled Clinton Democrats and tried to sell them I Can't Believe It's Not Hillary. Except they overlooked a few minor details on her background as mentioned.

Unless yahoo is noticably liberal, the only real mention I've seen so far is fairly non-partisan.

"McCain fought money on teen pregnancy programs"

"WASHINGTON - Republican John McCain, whose running mate disclosed that her unmarried 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, has opposed proposals to spend federal money on teen-pregnancy prevention programs and voted to require poor teen mothers to stay in school or lose their benefits."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_teen_pregnancies

So it's McCain's fault she's pregnant!

So it's McCain's fault she's pregnant!

Johnny really can't keep his little POW inside the bamboo cage can he?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia3-2008sep03,0,5335020.story



Once again, Republicans, the party that preaches personal responsibility, cant even practice what they preach, and instead are QQing about teh ebil liberal mediaz and how they are out to get the poor girl.

So it's McCain's fault she's pregnant!

It takes a village to get a 17 year old pregnant. Or something.

In this case, the collective policies of the entire GOP collective, channeled through the mighty organs of Bush, Dick, and little Johnny.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia3-2008sep03,0,5335020.story



Once again, Republicans, the party that preaches personal responsibility, cant even practice what they preach, and instead are QQing about teh ebil liberal mediaz and how they are out to get the poor girl.

The whining doesn't stop there-check this out. (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/mccain-cancels-larry-king-interview/?hp)

The whining doesn't stop there-check this out. (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/mccain-cancels-larry-king-interview/?hp)

So, asking Republicans tough questions is "being unfair", and calling them on their BS causes them to cry and play the "ebil liberal media" card. Got it.


All right, I can be an anchor now!

Questions I CAN ask:

"So, how much do you love America? A ton? So bunch? Or an insane amount?"

"How much does your opponent hate America? A lot? As much as Bin Laden?"

"How much better of a president will you be then your opponent?"


Questions I CANT ask:

Anything that would call McCain's decisions or decision making ability into question

Anything calling John McCain's leadership ability into question

Anything critical of Sarah Palin


I wonder if even asking them "How are you?" would be an unfair, liberal biased question? I mean, what if theyre moody? Then their moods keep changing! That could be tough to answer! IT WOULD BE A CATASROPHE!

It takes a village to get a 17 year old pregnant. Or something.

In this case, the collective policies of the entire GOP collective, channeled through the mighty organs of Bush, Dick, and little Johnny.
That list of names is amusing in this context. :D

I can't express how much I am enjoying this little brouhaha, especially that it's all the Republicans tripping all over themselves trying to get ahead of Ms. Palin's onslaught of closet-skeletons. Seriously, it seems like, every 6 hours, it's something new with this woman. What's next? She ran over a little girl's dog in 1987 -- twice? And after that, what? She's a cannibal? This is hilarious.

That list of names is amusing in this context. :D

I can't express how much I am enjoying this little brouhaha, especially that it's all the Republicans tripping all over themselves trying to get ahead of Ms. Palin's onslaught of closet-skeletons. Seriously, it seems like, every 6 hours, it's something new with this woman. What's next? She ran over a little girl's dog in 1987 -- twice? And after that, what? She's a cannibal? This is hilarious.

I like how all the Republicans on this board are brushing this off saying its not news worthy.

I KNOW theyd all be all over this if it was Obama's 17 year old daughter. I KNOW they all thought it was news worthy when Clinton was getting BJs from interens. The level of willful blindness and cognitive dissonance is disgusting.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia3-2008sep03,0,5335020.story



Once again, Republicans, the party that preaches personal responsibility, cant even practice what they preach, and instead are QQing about teh ebil liberal mediaz and how they are out to get the poor girl.


Sort of unfair to judge millions of people based on the actions of an irresponsible teenage girl and what the McSame campagin says...

Personally, I prize my intellect too much to take part in that joke we call Election '08, so I honestly don't care what what's-her-face's daughter did.

I like how all the Republicans on this board are brushing this off saying its not news worthy.

I KNOW theyd all be all over this if it was Obama's 17 year old daughter. I KNOW they all thought it was news worthy when Clinton was getting BJs from interens. The level of willful blindness and cognitive dissonance is disgusting.
I agree. I'm sorry, but I can't even make myself pretend that I respect these people anymore. They have reached the level of self-parody, and at this point, I think it would be inappropriate not to laugh.

I agree. I'm sorry, but I can't even make myself pretend that I respect these people anymore. They have reached the level of self-parody, and at this point, I think it would be inappropriate not to laugh.

Im beyond laughing at this point. Im approaching weeping.

Some of the Reps. here that are dismissing this would dismiss it in the reverse (like Im sure Neo Bret would) but some are just pathetic.


And frankly, the Republican leaders and pundits are the worst.

That list of names is amusing in this context. :D

I can't express how much I am enjoying this little brouhaha, especially that it's all the Republicans tripping all over themselves trying to get ahead of Ms. Palin's onslaught of closet-skeletons. Seriously, it seems like, every 6 hours, it's something new with this woman. What's next? She ran over a little girl's dog in 1987 -- twice? And after that, what? She's a cannibal? This is hilarious.
its so bizarre.

in a different candidate they are insignificant little negatives. for HER they are all she has so they are all important.

pregnant daughter, political firings, bad business paper filing, false claim to have visited ireland--plane stopover, lying about opposing the bridge to nowhere, distancing herself from senator stevens, a commencement speech saying that the iraq war is god's will.

if she had a record, none of these things would matter a bit. they are just too minor.

did you see that the republican platform calls for outlawing abortion even in cases of rape and incest?

its so bizarre.

in a different candidate they are insignificant little negatives. for HER they are all she has so they are all important.

pregnant daughter, political firings, bad business paper filing, false claim to have visited ireland--plane stopover, lying about opposing the bridge to nowhere, distancing herself from senator stevens, a commencement speech saying that the iraq war is god's will.

if she had a record, none of these things would matter a bit. they are just too minor.

did you see that the republican platform calls for outlawing abortion even in cases of rape and incest?

Dont forget being a member of a successionist group!

...And frankly, the Republican leaders and pundits are the worst in my opinion.

Fixed.

Fixed.

No, not fixed. Anyone with eyes, isnt blind with bias, and has had a pulse the last 16 years will see that their level of hypocrisy is easily the worst. They are easily the biggest joke and the most infuriatingly ignorant.



Its not a matter of opinion to anyone who knows anything.


EDIT: By the way, what you just did is trolling/flamebaiting.

Obama must be behind this...

No, not fixed. Anyone with eyes, isnt blind with bias, and has had a pulse the last 16 years will see that their level of hypocrisy is easily the worst. They are easily the biggest joke and the most infuriatingly ignorant.



Its not a matter of opinion to anyone who knows anything.


EDIT: By the way, what you just did is trolling/flamebaiting.


Not really... It's true. There's no way to prove your statement and it can easily be turned back on you.

For instance, look at the Democratic congress. They've achieved nothing they said they would do and have been very cooperative with the Bush Administration. Take a look at your own party too before you call someone "the worst."

EDIT: Just so you know, I'm not a Republican either... Baseless claims just irritate me.

Obama must be behind this...

Im honostly suprised O'riely hasnt said yet that it was Obama, the evil liberal black man, who raped this poor white girl forcing her to become pregenet.

He just saw some of that sweet, sweet white flesh and couldnt control himself.

I like how all the Republicans on this board are brushing this off saying its not news worthy.

I KNOW theyd all be all over this if it was Obama's 17 year old daughter. I KNOW they all thought it was news worthy when Clinton was getting BJs from interens. The level of willful blindness and cognitive dissonance is disgusting.
To be fair, if I must, I think that's a little bit of a disingenuous comparison. First of all, calling out someone on predicted reactions to hypothetical situations is flimsy at best. And Clinton himself got the blow job in what, in even the most generous light, was an issue of misconduct in a position of authority. She was an intern. And, while the question was not worth the money spent to ask, he did lie about it. But the important distinction is that it was all his doing, not his daughters.

Now, McCain has way back in 1998 joked that Chelsea Clinton was 'so ugly' because Janet Reno was her father (http://www.salon.com/news/1998/06/25newsb.html)...but that was a whole two years before he was a candidate. Not all children are off limits...