Sarah Palin is McCain's Choice for VP

[quote name='thrustbucket']I'm not sure why what her daughter does is big news. It has almost nothing to do with Palin, your ma spears comparison is totally ridiculous.

Did Cheney's daughter put him on par with Ru Paul?[/QUOTE]

I don't see this as being hurtful. If it disproves the rumor of the downs syndrome child really being Bristol, it's a good thing.

This isn't really hurtful. But for the first rumor, if she'd lied to cover up her child's pregnancy and was secretly raising her grandchild as her child that would have done more harm. That would paint her as a liar who cared more about her political reputation than supporting her pregnant daughter in the normal fashion.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I'm not sure why what her daughter does is big news. It has almost nothing to do with Palin, your ma spears comparison is totally ridiculous.

Did Cheney's daughter put him on par with Ru Paul?[/QUOTE]

I'm sure some ultra-conservative people will look down on this. You can't compare it to Cheney's daughter (IMO). Being born a certain way is much different than taking action and doing something.
 
[quote name='seanr1221']I'm sure some ultra-conservative people will look down on this. You can't compare it to Cheney's daughter (IMO). Being born a certain way is much different than taking action and doing something.[/QUOTE]

Not for the ultra conservatives though as they don't by that she was born that way.

So if Cheney's daughter didn't bother them, I don't think a teen pregnancy will either. Especially if she is keeping the child and marrying the father. It's a non-story.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I'm not sure why what her daughter does is big news. It has almost nothing to do with Palin, your ma spears comparison is totally ridiculous.

Did Cheney's daughter put him on par with Ru Paul?[/quote]

It is relevant in that it reflects directly on the hypocrisy of her stance on birth control, sex education in schools, etc. It shows the consequences of such positions.

And frankly, Cheney's daughter WAS relevant in discussions of his stances on gay discrimination, gay marriage, etc.

These politicians do not exist in a bubble.
 
[quote name='Tybee']It is relevant in that it reflects directly on the hypocrisy of her stance on birth control, sex education in schools, etc. It shows the consequences of such positions.
[/QUOTE]

Sorry, no. If it was Palin herself that did something, yes. But it was her daughter. You can't judge a person on their child's actions, that's ridiculous.

If your kid one day snapped and blew the head off of a 7-11 clerk, does that mean you are a hypocrite for being against anti-gun?
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Not for the ultra conservatives though as they don't by that she was born that way.

So if Cheney's daughter didn't bother them, I don't think a teen pregnancy will either. Especially if she is keeping the child and marrying the father. It's a non-story.[/QUOTE]

:lol: True, I forgot how ignorant they can be.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Sorry, no. If it was Palin herself that did something, yes. But it was her daughter. You can't judge a person on their child's actions, that's ridiculous.

If your kid one day snapped and blew the head off of a 7-11 clerk, does that mean you are a hypocrite for being against guns?[/quote]

Sooooo...You're taking the stance then that a parent is in no way responsible for their minor child's actions?

Well, it's bold, I'll give you that. Good luck getting it to stand up in court.
 
[quote name='Tybee']Sooooo...You're taking the stance then that a parent is in no way responsible for their minor child's actions?

Well, it's bold, I'll give you that. Good luck getting it to stand up in court.[/QUOTE]

Wow.

Look, if a 17 year old kid gets knocked up, the parents may hold some financial burden by a court simply because the 17 year old kid likely has no way of supporting it.

But it in no way reflects the values, morals, judgment of the parent like you are saying. Now if her 17 year old daughter got an Abortion, then you have news, because she'd need her parents consent. She didn't need Governer Palin's consent to pull down her pants and bend over in the neighbor kids garage, so you can't hold her accountable for it.
 
[quote name='seanr1221']:lol: True, I forgot how ignorant they can be.[/QUOTE]

It's still an irrelevant point. Conservatives in general believe that even if homosexuality is something your born with (which still is not scientifically proven, just assumed) then it's not any different than a birth defect. And conservatives aren't going to blame a parent for a child's birth defect.

Note: I'm not saying this is what I believe, just stating what I think conservatives believe.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Sorry, no. If it was Palin herself that did something, yes. But it was her daughter. You can't judge a person on their child's actions, that's ridiculous.

If your kid one day snapped and blew the head off of a 7-11 clerk, does that mean you are a hypocrite for being against anti-gun?[/QUOTE]

Actually you can make judgement for 2 reasons.

1. If the person is ultra conservative and preaches family values and then their underage daughter gets knocked up......that kinda makes it an issue. Its like the people that preach family valeus then go to a whore.

2. It will matter to ultra conservative people looking for family values. most of them will stick with McCain probally because of the abortion issue. But when you look for family values in a candiate and 1 persons daughter is knocked up and the other has a kid in Iraq whom he raised as a single father....again it will make a difference.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I'm not sure why what her daughter does is big news. It has almost nothing to do with Palin, your ma spears comparison is totally ridiculous.

Did Cheney's daughter put him on par with Ru Paul?[/QUOTE]

What's wrong with RuPaul? Didn't you ever see "But I'm a Cheerleader"?

Also, my comment on Bristol:

epic-fail-guy-election.gif
 
at best this makes McCain look like a bad judge of character or just someone who didn't did his research..
and won't lose many voters...

I don't mind people making mistakes.. humans make mistakes... covering it up is what bothers me..
 
Wow, I said the next two months were going to be interesting, and I'm proven right in about 3 days.

Whoever said it was right, the Obama campaign doesn't have to lift a finger (not that they would regarding Palin's family issues), the internet itself will write the entire smear campaign for them.

I could probably guarantee that the Obama campaign will earn bonus points for itself by issuing a statement in a week that the Palin family life has nothing to do with politics, and that everyone should respect their privacy.

~HotShotX
 
[quote name='HotShotX']I could probably guarantee that the Obama campaign will earn bonus points for itself by issuing a statement in a week that the Palin family life has nothing to do with politics, and that everyone should respect their privacy.[/QUOTE]

Yes, of course - with the knowledge that this will be the ONLY THING anyone talks about between now and November.

The unwed mother in the White House.
 
I really don't think anyone's going to care about Palin's daughter. She's 17, marrying the guy and keeping the baby. It's a non-issue. I bet the only people who'll mention it after today are hacks like Olbermann.
 
John Kerry 2008 rules in all the ways John Kerry 2004 was a wimp:

STEPHANOPOULOS: … Howard Wolfson, Senator Clinton’s former communications director, said that this pick might just work to draw women to the Republican ticket. Are you worried about that?

KERRY: Well, with all due respect to Howard, you know, I have much more respect for the Clinton supporters than that sort of quick- blush take with — I mean, how stupid do they think the Clinton supporters are, for Heaven sakes?

Do they think Clinton supporters supported Hillary only because she was a woman. For Heaven sakes, they supported Hillary because of all the things she’s fought for, because she fights for health care, which John McCain doesn’t support; she fights for children and children’s health care, which John McCain voted against; she fights for a windfall profits tax on the oil company, which John McCain opposes.

I mean, for Heaven sakes, the people who supported Hillary Clinton are not going to be seduced just because John McCain has picked a woman. They’re going to look at what she supports.

The fact that she doesn’t even support the notion that climate change is manmade — she’s back there with the Flat Earth Caucus. And I don’t see how those women are going to be fooled into believing — I think it’s almost insulting to the Hillary supporters that they believe they would support somebody who is against almost everything that they believe in.

STEPHANOPOULOS: OK.

KERRY: What John McCain has proven with this choice — this is very important, George. John McCain wanted to choose Tom Ridge. He wanted to choose Joe Lieberman. He wanted to choose another candidate, but you know what? Rush Limbaugh and the right wing vetoed it.

And John McCain was forced to come back and pick a sort of Cheney-esque social conservative who’s going to satisfy the base. What John McCain has proven with this choice is that John McCain is the prisoner of the right wing, not a maverick.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']
But it in no way reflects the values, morals, judgment of the parent like you are saying. [/QUOTE]

I don't think it reflects on her job as a parent.

But it does show why people shouldn't be so conservative and close minded about issues like sex education, promoting birth control etc. It's poetic justice when such people have a teen pregnancy at home.

I don't think it has any bearing on her candidacy, but I can't help but smile at the poetic justice of people who espouse ignorant views getting a shot of reality at home.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I don't think it reflects on her job as a parent.[/QUOTE]

I think it does; what kind of fool would think that, as a parent, they have no bearing on whether or not their idiot kid gets pregnant?

It's not a full indictment, sure - but it certainly is SOME kind of indictment.
 
Good point, Maul.

And I'm sure you or Myke (being the grad students ;) ) can pull up the research that abstinence talks only slightly delay pre-marital sex. I could have sworn that's what I read.
 
http://www.google.com/search?q=effe...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

There y'go. Have a looksie. Abstinence-only usually doesn't change attitudes, but it does often mean people are clueless about proper methods of contraception. A recent evaluation of Florida showed that kids receiving abstinence-only education thought drinking Mountain Dew, a capful of bleach (!), or smoking a joint would make sure they didn't get pregnant.
 
[quote name='DJSteel']at best this makes McCain look like a bad judge of character or just someone who didn't did his research..
and won't lose many voters...

I don't mind people making mistakes.. humans make mistakes... covering it up is what bothers me..[/quote]

Who is saying they tried to cover it up? I mean...they came out with it.
 
Just this once I want to see the headline:

SOMEBODY'S BEEN fuckIN!!!!!!!!

I mean, really - if the media is so liberally biased, this shouldn't be that hard to make happen.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://www.google.com/search?q=effe...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

There y'go. Have a looksie. Abstinence-only usually doesn't change attitudes, but it does often mean people are clueless about proper methods of contraception. A recent evaluation of Florida showed that kids receiving abstinence-only education thought drinking Mountain Dew, a capful of bleach (!), or smoking a joint would make sure they didn't get pregnant.[/quote]

Um...attempted murder?
 
It's what happens when education decides there are topics it shouldn't broach, and teenagers only have each other, and the legends/myths they make up, to rely on instead.

If birth control were introduced in class, then, a teacher could say "A CAPFUL OF BLEACH? ARE YE' fuckIN' MAD!?!?!"
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I think it does; what kind of fool would think that, as a parent, they have no bearing on whether or not their idiot kid gets pregnant?

It's not a full indictment, sure - but it certainly is SOME kind of indictment.[/QUOTE]

Kids will be kids. I think most kids are going to have sex regardless of whether their parents are hammering abstinence, not talking to them at all or preaching safe sex.

Now, preaching safe sex may lead to less pregnancies, and that was part of my point of it being poetic justice when a hardline abstinence knucklehead has a kid get knocked up.

But my point was I don't think conservatives who support abstinence will necessarily think "she did a shitty job of parenting" as I think they know there's only so much you can do to control your kids and many probably have similar problems with kids rebelling and going against their conservative teachings.
 
Not to derail things, but my favorite line from one of my many abstinence talks in high school was about porn...

"Men, porn gives you an unhealthy view of what sex is really like. Besides, how would you feel if on your wedding day your wife said, I've been looking at pictures of porn all year to prepare for this night."

I remember thinking to myself, "Sweet deal." :lol:
 
My favorite thing about the whole teaching abstinence vs safe sex thing was last year when statistics came out and showed that conservatives had succeded in reducing the amount of teen sex going on....but only vaginally. See while the traditional form of man on woman action was down more and more girls were having anal and oral sex.........both were up something crazy like 40 and 80%.

So the abstinence programs have just turned these conservative children into butt freaks and fluffers. Atleast 30 years from now when their in the closest husband starts only requesting it in the back door they will be prepared.
 
And Obama does take the high road on this issue! Grabbed this off another forum.

From NBC's Savannah Guthrie:

In his media avail, Obama just responded to reporters' questions about the Bristol Palin story. Noting that his mother had him when she was 18 years old, Obama said families are "off limits" in campaigns. He was very impassioned.

"I've heard some of the news. I've said before I think families are off limits, children limits. It has no relevance," Obama said. "I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. My mom had me when she was 18. And how families deal with issues of children shouldn't be part of our politics.

Regarding to the accusation from the McCain camp that rumors of Bristol Palin were being spread by liberal bloggers, some with connections to the Obama campaign, the Illinois senator replied: "I am offended by that statement. There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us. I hope I'm as clear as we can be. We don't go after people's families. Our people were not involved in any way. And if I thought anyone in my campaign they'd be fired."
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']My favorite thing about the whole teaching abstinence vs safe sex thing was last year when statistics came out and showed that conservatives had succeded in reducing the amount of teen sex going on....but only vaginally. See while the traditional form of man on woman action was down more and more girls were having anal and oral sex.........both were up something crazy like 40 and 80%.

So the abstinence programs have just turned these conservative children into butt freaks and fluffers. Atleast 30 years from now when their in the closest husband starts only requesting it in the back door they will be prepared.[/QUOTE]

The best stat is some tiny conservative town in Texas that my law prof was telling me about: it's one of the most conservative in the nation they only teach abstinence and it's #1 in the nation per capita in teen pregnancy and STDs.
 
That's why Democrats are always classier than Republicans.

I fully remember how every member of the Clinton family was publicly maligned during the 1990's. Bill, Hillary, young (well under 17!) Chelsea, and even cousin Roger.

ALL FAIR GAME. It's like the GOP sometimes gets itself confused with Scientology in terms of attacks.

Hell, you can't even go a minute today without the GOP talking points trying to tear apart Clinton.

This is why I respect the Democrats. And it is also why the Democrats lose elections most times. "Water off a duck's back" is an appropriate strategy here, but the perpetual nastiness of the GOP and their talking points really does a number to Democrats who try to have a stiff upper lip.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
This is why I respect the Democrats. And it is also why the Democrats lose elections most times. "Water off a duck's back" is an appropriate strategy here, but the perpetual nastiness of the GOP and their talking points really does a number to Democrats who try to have a stiff upper lip.[/QUOTE]

I really think tables are turning.

People really got sick of it after Rove taking to the extreme. And Obama has done a great job by making it a focus of his campaign to say that politics needs to get away from that stuff and calling out republican's for stooping to personal attacks.

Seems like Dems before just largely ignored them and didn't make such attacks themselves, but none made a point of their campaign to change politics and strongly denounce those types of campaign tactics.
 
I just read about Palin's daughter. That's... a bit... interesting.


I guess someone thought "I'd hit that" and actually hit it.
 
Obama's full comments. Not much from what I grabbed from the other forum earlier, but does have a few lines that were omitted there.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/01/obama-palin’s-family-off-limits/

MONROE, Michigan (CNN) – Barack Obama told reporters firmly that families are off-limits in this campaign, reacting to news that Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is five months pregnant.

“Let me be as clear as possible,” said Obama, “I think people’s families are off-limits and people's children are especially off-limits. This shouldn't be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as governor, or her potential performance as a vice president.”

Obama said reporters should “back off these kinds of stories” and noted that he was born to an 18 year-old mother.

“How a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn't be the topic of our politics and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that’s off-limits.”

The Illinois senator became aggravated when asked about rumors on liberal blogs speculating that Palin’s fifth child - Trig - is actually her daughter Bristol’s. A Reuters report Monday quotes a senior McCain aide saying that Obama’s name is in some of posts, “in a way that certainly juxtaposes themselves against their 'campaign of change,’”

“I am offended by that statement,” Obama shot back, not letting the reporter finish his question. “There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us.”

“We don’t go after people’s families,” Obama said. “We don’t get them involved in the politics. It’s not appropriate and it’s not relevant. Our people were not involved in any way in this and they will not be. And if I ever thought that there was somebody in my campaign that was involved in something like that, they’d be fired.”
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I really think tables are turning.

People really got sick of it after Rove taking to the extreme. And Obama has done a great job by making it a focus of his campaign to say that politics needs to get away from that stuff and calling out republican's for stooping to personal attacks.

Seems like Dems before just largely ignored them and didn't make such attacks themselves, but none made a point of their campaign to change politics and strongly denounce those types of campaign tactics.[/QUOTE]

Ignoring personal attacks is still better than making them, I'd think.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']Ignoring personal attacks is still better than making them, I'd think.[/QUOTE]

Of course. But it didn't work that way in the last 2 elections as the party making the personal attacks one.

Hopefully by going the extra mile and speaking out against personal attacks, and not responding with them in kind, will be a plus for Obama.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']So the abstinence programs have just turned these conservative children into butt freaks and fluffers. [/quote]

The programs work!
 
Wow you democratic party supporters are just having a field day with this. It's like watching a latin American soccer match; tons of people running around hooting and hollering, slapping each others backs, celebrating, and getting in fights all for what amounts to a glorified version of pong. Reading the last 3 pages of this thread, my eyes haven't rolled so much in years.
 
[quote name='HotShotX']I stand corrected. It didn't take a few days, just a few hours.[/quote]

I find it telling that Obama came to Palin's (and her daughter's) public defense before McCain did.

I also find thrust's petulant commentary deeply satisfying.
 
[quote name='Tybee']

I also find thrust's petulant commentary deeply satisfying.[/QUOTE]

You're welcome.

Why are you wasting time here? Shouldn't you have the Elephant pinata up by now with a few kegs open?
 
Oh, look. It's a classic from the GOP playbook:

deny any wrongdoing in a scandal, and turn the pointing finger around to those who are actually appalled at either (1) the scandal as an act itself or (2) the inherent hypocrisy in the platform/values of the candidate and the scandal they're involved in.

I'm not falling for it. Palin's family shows that "family values" is a farce. Like Mark Foley, like Larry Craig, like David Vitter. The ideology on social issues is a sham, a laughably pathetic puritanical attempt to quash social problems by metaphorically putting hands over our kids' ears and yelling "LALALALLALALALATHEYCAN'THEARYOULALALALALA!!!"

Palin's family proves that the Republican party, on the whole, is out of touch by a long shot on social issues. Obama may take the high road, and bull for him, but this issue is relevant. When a woman whose own daughter can't keep from getting pregnant not only (1) feels the need to tell you something else entirely when it comes to social issues is the truth, (2) wants to deny you the right to gaining the knowledge necessary to avoid those problems, and (3) *is in a position of power to actually influence your rights*, then it's a conflict of interest.

She is irresponsible as a mother and her daughter is irresponsible as a kid. Palin may or may not be a good parent; one issue doesn't make or break that judgment. But it shows substantial oversight such that she shouldn't be Vice President of the United States.

Moreover, they dumped this news three days after the announcement, so they did hide this information from the public for three days. This means they contemplated, on some level, to either hide it or manipulate it. Additionally, they dumped it onto the news in a day where they knew it would get buried in Gustav news. Strategically wise for them, but still a shady move.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']The programs work![/QUOTE]

Yes they do, now if only they would bring them to the of age or close to of age girls in my town!
 
Myke, you're really reaching with those hail-mary's there.

But your colorful, if unoriginal, stereotypes of conservatives/republicans are sometimes smile worthy.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Who is saying they tried to cover it up? I mean...they came out with it.[/QUOTE]

Well, not the pregnancy, but the little boy Trig...rumors are flying around that the boy is not her son.. but her pregnant daughter's.. like I said.. nothing against people being human..but if you are going to support certain social stances AND you are running for office, you better make sure you are telling the truth..
 
I see Myke's points. I do have issues with a person running for VP that only wants to teach abstinence having a teenage daughter get pregnant. But at the same time I realize kids will be kids, so I don't assume her a shitty parent. Just a person with stupid views that got a nice dose of reality at home.

But in the end, I deplore this type of personal stuff being used in campaigns. I just don't care much about what one does at home. Even if she is a crappy parent, there are plenty of people I know who I think are pretty poor parents but are great at what they do in their career.

I just think the personal stuff should be left out of it, unless it's tied to corruption, outright lying etc. that has a more direct bearing on a person's capabilities to serve in office.

Thus I'm very pleased Obama took the high road and firmly denounced bloogers etc. jumping on this. If he'd jumped on it himself I'd have severely regretted the $100 I donated after his speech since the part about politics needing to move way from these type of Karl Rove attacks on people's character was the part I liked the most.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I see Myke's points. I do have issues with a person running for VP that only wants to teach abstinence having a teenage daughter get pregnant. But at the same time I realize kids will be kids, so I don't assume her a shitty parent. Just a person with stupid views that got a nice dose of reality at home.

But in the end, I deplore this type of personal stuff being used in campaigns. I just don't care much about what one does at home. Even if she is a crappy parent, there are plenty of people I know who I think are pretty poor parents but are great at what they do in their career.

I just think the personal stuff should be left out of it, unless it's tied to corruption, outright lying etc. that has a more direct bearing on a person's capabilities to serve in office.

Thus I'm very pleased Obama took the high road and firmly denounced bloogers etc. jumping on this. If he'd jumped on it himself I'd have severely regretted the $100 I donated after his speech since the part about politics needing to move way from these type of Karl Rove attacks on people's character was the part I liked the most.[/QUOTE]

The President has influence over what children get taught in school. This means that they set the course for things like sex ed programs. Her getting knocked up while her mother preaches abstinence only shows the flaws in that policy. It also shows that she is a bad parent. She should know if her daughter is sexually active, and if she knew and did nothing that makes her an even bigger failure in my mind.

Republicans don't want to talk about the personal stuff in this election because all the shady shit is on their side.
 
It's going to be hard for the GOP to portray itself as the party of values and morals if this keeps up. That or they'll show themselves to be hypocrites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top