PDA

View Full Version : Bennett, Live on CNN, Rebukes CNN for Exploiting Palin's Daughter to Score Political



PoliCon
09-02-2008, 09:52 AM
By Brent Baker
September 1, 2008 - 20:55 ET

Late Monday afternoon live on CNN, Bill Bennett rebuked -- as an “outrageous” piece of “advocacy” and “attack journalism” that “has no place on CNN” -- a story the channel had just run which used the pregnancy of Sarah Palin's daughter to score political points by relaying as fact the talking points on sex education from a left-wing group. A defensive Wolf Blitzer kept saying “hold on” as he tried to justify raising the supposed hypocrisy.

Live from Anchorage at 5:33 PM EDT/4:33 PM CDT/1:33 PM ADT, Kyra Phillips revealed “there were a number of things that we were sent here to investigate,” including “trooper-gate,” but before that, she stressed “here's what's interesting,” that Palin ”has gone on the record and said that she is in full support of abstinence, and that she doesn't believe in contraception on school grounds and sex education.” Phillips then highlighted:

The Alliance for Reproductive Justice...says abstinence doesn't work, we've got to have better sex education in schools and this is just one example, this just underscores -- the pregnancy of the Governor's daughter -- to why we need sex education in schools.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2008/09/01/bennett-live-cnn-rebukes-cnn-exploiting-palins-daughter-score-political

CNN makes me sick.

linda22003
09-02-2008, 10:05 AM
I don't think this should be a matter of public debate. I think the family's decision about this pregnancy is their own business and not a matter of public policy. I would feel exactly the same way if it were about a politician's family which had decided an abortion would be best for their pregnant teenager, because I don't have a double standard.

SaintLouieWoman
09-02-2008, 11:49 AM
By Brent Baker
September 1, 2008 - 20:55 ET

Late Monday afternoon live on CNN, Bill Bennett rebuked -- as an “outrageous” piece of “advocacy” and “attack journalism” that “has no place on CNN” -- a story the channel had just run which used the pregnancy of Sarah Palin's daughter to score political points by relaying as fact the talking points on sex education from a left-wing group. A defensive Wolf Blitzer kept saying “hold on” as he tried to justify raising the supposed hypocrisy.

Live from Anchorage at 5:33 PM EDT/4:33 PM CDT/1:33 PM ADT, Kyra Phillips revealed “there were a number of things that we were sent here to investigate,” including “trooper-gate,” but before that, she stressed “here's what's interesting,” that Palin ”has gone on the record and said that she is in full support of abstinence, and that she doesn't believe in contraception on school grounds and sex education.” Phillips then highlighted:

The Alliance for Reproductive Justice...says abstinence doesn't work, we've got to have better sex education in schools and this is just one example, this just underscores -- the pregnancy of the Governor's daughter -- to why we need sex education in schools.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2008/09/01/bennett-live-cnn-rebukes-cnn-exploiting-palins-daughter-score-political

CNN makes me sick.

It's why I never watch it. I hate it at the doc's office, that always has it on in the waiting room. Blech. :mad:

biccat
09-02-2008, 12:58 PM
CNN makes me sick.
Haven't watched that crap since they made the "editorial decision" to show a sniper in Iraq killing an American soldier.

I got suckered into visiting their website once on here because I wasn't paying close enough attention to the target of a link.

If I see a story here linked to CNN, I will go to Google and find the same story from another provider. CNN is left-wing propaganda.

cat714
09-02-2008, 01:03 PM
I don't watch any of the garbage, so-called journalism from outlets such as CNN. The Enquire has more creditibility.

noonwitch
09-02-2008, 01:27 PM
On this issue, CNN is hardly alone. Alan Colmes is on FOX.

PoliCon
09-02-2008, 05:54 PM
The press has proven that they will do ANYTHING - that nothing is private and nothing is sacred. They're doing stories now on the father of Bristols baby trying hurt Sarah Palin. Scum. Attacking kids just to try to win political points is disgusting.

ArmyRet
09-02-2008, 06:04 PM
this just underscores -- the pregnancy of the Governor's daughter -- to why we need sex education in schools.

Just insert "the pregnancy of Barack Obama's mother".

Lager
09-02-2008, 06:05 PM
This campaign was getting boring. Dems picked their candidates with an American Idol style of celebrity worship, heavily influenced by the media. Repubs picked the old guy who's been around the longest. Yada Yada Yada and Bob's your uncle.

This Palin choice though, woke everybody up. I love what it's causing the libs to resort to. Even national news was talking about "vile smear tactics from the leftist blogosphere" (DU). It's friggin hilarious the uproar this has caused. Even our resident lefties are squirmin. Their daily post counts must have doubled at least. People who usually don't pay that much attention to politics are shocked at the vileness of the left's attacks. I love to watch the rest of the world repulsed by rabid lib actions. I'm enjoying watching their ill advised schemes fold in upon them.

I'm no political expert, so can anyone tell me what it is about her that caused this reaction? Whatever it is, it brought this thing to life, that's for sure.

Nubs
09-02-2008, 06:28 PM
I'm puzzled as to why the Dems are all concerned over the issue of Bristol's condidtion. If they followed theor own logic, it is not a human, it is a fetus and , as such, should be treated as a medical condition. If they followed their nominees logic, it is not a viable human being even after it is born.

The left is upset at the fact that Bristol has taken accountability for her actions and will marry to provide a family in which to raise this child.

My mother is a product of out of wedlock circumstance. I have 2 friends in highschool that were participants in shotgun weddings. With the support of their familes, one turned out to own his own construction business employing 20 persons and the other is a MD/PhD tenured professor at the University of Michigan conducting cancer research. Both have been mattied for almost 20 years.

PoliCon
09-03-2008, 12:02 AM
CNN had Donna Brazile doing commentary on CNN tonight. That network just loves stooping lower than anyone thought possible.

AmPat
09-03-2008, 03:43 AM
I think the attacks on Sex Education are priceless. As though the two involved didn't know what the possible results of having sex were.:rolleyes: What complete morons.

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 08:34 AM
I think the attacks on Sex Education are priceless. As though the two involved didn't know what the possible results of having sex were.:rolleyes: What complete morons.

I think you're missing the point. I'm sure both knew that children are a possible result of having sex. However, it does reflect poorly upon the notion of abstinence as a solution.

Even taking into account that in Alaska the high school curriculum includes sex education, the Palin household, one would assume, strongly emphasizes abstinence, family values, etc. It's a fair question to ask, "if a philosophy of abstinence as strongly taught as presumably it was in the Palin household fails, is it a reasonable approach to solving the problem of teenage pregnancy?"

SaintLouieWoman
09-03-2008, 08:59 AM
CNN had Donna Brazile doing commentary on CNN tonight. That network just loves stooping lower than anyone thought possible.

Yesterday late afternoon I was in the orthopedic surgeon's waiting room for an hour. What upset me more than the anticipation of the 2nd of a series of 3 shots in the knee was the CNN on the screen in the waiting room. Even worse, the volume was too high.

Wolf Blitzer was on, and they were spewing their venom. It did get people talking. One woman rolled her eyes and said the attacks disgusted her. Others also shook their head in agreement.

This is not a perfect world. We can teach our children and hope they absorb our values. But God gave everyone free choice. No parent can be with their kids every minute. Sometimes it is easier for those with no children to cast stones at the Palins. They tried their best.

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 09:43 AM
CNN had Donna Brazile doing commentary on CNN tonight. That network just loves stooping lower than anyone thought possible.

At least during the day (and I assume also at night) during the Democratic Convention CNN had Republican strategists doing commentary as well.

Goldwater
09-03-2008, 10:21 AM
Sometimes it is easier for those with no children to cast stones at the Palins. They tried their best.

Yup, very true.

megimoo
09-03-2008, 10:31 AM
At least during the day (and I assume also at night) during the Democratic Convention CNN had Republican strategists doing commentary as well............RINO'S

ConJinx
09-03-2008, 10:32 AM
I'm just curious, do the leftists care that if this type of nonsense achieves their political objectives, that WE the people will remember and retaliate. The days of weak willed conservatives are over.

ConJinx
09-03-2008, 10:34 AM
CNN had Donna Brazile doing commentary on CNN tonight. That network just loves stooping lower than anyone thought possible.

The execs over at cnn are blowing Glenn Beck for having a great interview with Gov Palin.

Rebel Yell
09-03-2008, 10:34 AM
Yup, very true.

If she'd just been queer, this never would have happened. Hey, that could be the answer to unwanted pregnancies. Unless we evolve into being capable of having butt babies.

PoliCon
09-03-2008, 04:24 PM
I think you're missing the point. I'm sure both knew that children are a possible result of having sex. However, it does reflect poorly upon the notion of abstinence as a solution.

Even taking into account that in Alaska the high school curriculum includes sex education, the Palin household, one would assume, strongly emphasizes abstinence, family values, etc. It's a fair question to ask, "if a philosophy of abstinence as strongly taught as presumably it was in the Palin household fails, is it a reasonable approach to solving the problem of teenage pregnancy?"Why not? In all but one case - when ever it has been practiced - Abstinence has been a 100% effective proof against teenage pregnancy. NOW - just because someone fails to practice it should we call it ineffective? Would you be saying the same thing if Sarah had preached condoms and they had failed to use a condom? Just because kids are going to make less than perfect choices does not mean you stop telling them the very best way to do things.

PoliCon
09-03-2008, 04:31 PM
At least during the day (and I assume also at night) during the Democratic Convention CNN had Republican strategists doing commentary as well.Yes - republican STRATEGISTS not slime ridden attack dogs. Larry king and Jesse Ventura, DL Hewgley, and some chick and called that a panel to comment on the day!

Speedy
09-03-2008, 04:38 PM
100% abstinence is 100% effective 100% of the time. This is irrefutable. No one practicing abstinence (except for the Virgin Mary) 100% of the time has ever gotten pregnant.

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 05:04 PM
Why not? In all but one case - when ever it has been practiced - Abstinence has been a 100% effective proof against teenage pregnancy. NOW - just because someone fails to practice it should we call it ineffective? Would you be saying the same thing if Sarah had preached condoms and they had failed to use a condom? Just because kids are going to make less than perfect choices does not mean you stop telling them the very best way to do things.

Because preaching abstinence to teenagers is quite different than saying, "I wish you wouldn't have sex, but if you do, use the appropriate measures."

Shall we compare the effectiveness percentage of the two approaches: (1) don't have sex and birth control is evil or (2) don't have sex. bit if you do have sex, use birth control. I think if your objective is to reduce teenage pregnancy, then (2) is the clear winner. If your objective is to impose a moral standard, then your selection is (1), but don't complain when she gets knocked up.

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 05:05 PM
100% abstinence is 100% effective 100% of the time. This is irrefutable. No one practicing abstinence (except for the Virgin Mary) 100% of the time has ever gotten pregnant.

That's nice. How's it work out in practice?

biccat
09-03-2008, 05:38 PM
That's nice. How's it work out in practice?
Why the hell do they have to teach about condoms and birth control pills at school?

Schools should not be in the business of teaching our kids about morality. Let the parents figure that one out. If parents think that condoms and birth control pills are immoral, tell the kids that. If they think that they're acceptable, tell the kids that.

Either way, teaching morality (or a lack of morality) in school is inappropriate and forces parents to accept a certain view.

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 05:44 PM
Why the hell do they have to teach about condoms and birth control pills at school?

Schools should not be in the business of teaching our kids about morality. Let the parents figure that one out. If parents think that condoms and birth control pills are immoral, tell the kids that. If they think that they're acceptable, tell the kids that.

Either way, teaching morality (or a lack of morality) in school is inappropriate and forces parents to accept a certain view.

Amusing. So you were one of the early proponents (or would have been had you been around) of removing Christian prayers from schools? Good for you. I completely agree.

However, teenage pregnancy and the use of (or lack thereof) birth control has very little to do with morality. It's much more of a practical matter. And, while the Palins may have the financial means to support their child's progeny, in general, society as a whole is stuck with supporting them. Sex education and the use of birth control has nothing to do with morality.

blueyonder
09-03-2008, 08:24 PM
what they are not saying is the school she went to teaches sex education not abstinence

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 08:31 PM
what they are not saying is the school she went to teaches sex education not abstinence

Uh, everyone has said that, including me! And my God, all the lib'rl media has said that as well. So, what you're implying is that the sex education (just like Flip Wilson's devil) made her do it, despite all the virtuous teachings of abstinence from her family values mommy? Isn't it a more probable explanation that she was a horny little 17 year old to whom the preachings of her sanctimonious mother were a joke?

AmPat
09-03-2008, 09:01 PM
I think you're missing the point. I'm sure both knew that children are a possible result of having sex. However, it does reflect poorly upon the notion of abstinence as a solution.

Even taking into account that in Alaska the high school curriculum includes sex education, the Palin household, one would assume, strongly emphasizes abstinence, family values, etc. It's a fair question to ask, "if a philosophy of abstinence as strongly taught as presumably it was in the Palin household fails, is it a reasonable approach to solving the problem of teenage pregnancy?"

I think I'm right on point. You steered this to Abstinance, I responded to "sex education."

which used the pregnancy of Sarah Palin's daughter to score political points by relaying as fact the talking points on sex education from a left-wing group. A defensive Wolf Blitzer kept saying “hold on” as he tried to justify raising the supposed hypocrisy.:cool:

AmPat
09-03-2008, 09:03 PM
Why not? In all but one case - when ever it has been practiced - Abstinence has been a 100% effective proof against teenage pregnancy. NOW - just because someone fails to practice it should we call it ineffective? Would you be saying the same thing if Sarah had preached condoms and they had failed to use a condom? Just because kids are going to make less than perfect choices does not mean you stop telling them the very best way to do things.

Max Applause. Excellent post.:)

Lager
09-03-2008, 09:19 PM
I taught my kids not to drink alcohol before they were of legal age. I told them they would be tempted, and I told them there are ways to drink responsibly, but I told them there was no rush. Once they were adults they'd have plenty of time to enjoy it as much as they wanted. I also let them know that if they did drink, not to make the situation worse by trying to drive or get in a car with someone who had been drinking. I would pick them up whenever or wherever they might be, with no lecture at least until the next morning. :)

I Let them know they might get away with nothing bad happening once or twice, but that the only way to avoid real trouble was to not drink until they were ready to handle it. So far no mistake related to alcohol has happened. I'm no fool. I'm certain they gave it a taste anyway. But I still believe that telling them to abstain was the best course of action, and even though I dabbled in it when I was younger too, I don't feel like a hypocrit.

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 09:46 PM
I taught my kids not to drink alcohol before they were of legal age. I told them they would be tempted, and I told them there are ways to drink responsibly, but I told them there was no rush. Once they were adults they'd have plenty of time to enjoy it as much as they wanted. I also let them know that if they did drink, not to make the situation worse by trying to drive or get in a car with someone who had been drinking. I would pick them up whenever or wherever they might be, with no lecture at least until the next morning. :)

I Let them know they might get away with nothing bad happening once or twice, but that the only way to avoid real trouble was to not drink until they were ready to handle it. So far no mistake related to alcohol has happened. I'm no fool. I'm certain they gave it a taste anyway. But I still believe that telling them to abstain was the best course of action, and even though I dabbled in it when I was younger too, I don't feel like a hypocrit.

You seem like a very wise parent. If I extrapolate the bolded section of what you said regarding alcohol to sex, it would read something like "I taught my kids not to have sex before they were married. I told them they would be tempted, and I told them there are ways to have sex responsibly, but I told them there was no rush." What it doesn't say is "I told them not to have sex and that's it."

PoliCon
09-03-2008, 09:58 PM
Because preaching abstinence to teenagers is quite different than saying, "I wish you wouldn't have sex, but if you do, use the appropriate measures."

Shall we compare the effectiveness percentage of the two approaches: (1) don't have sex and birth control is evil or (2) don't have sex. bit if you do have sex, use birth control. I think if your objective is to reduce teenage pregnancy, then (2) is the clear winner. If your objective is to impose a moral standard, then your selection is (1), but don't complain when she gets knocked up. And all encouraging condoms and making the readily available does it give them a false sense of invulnerability. Absitinance only does not mean that you do not educate kids about the uses and more importantly the failures of the various prophylactics - it means you alway push towards abstinance as the ONLY safe rout. Not only the only safe way to prevent pregnancies - but the only safe way- and the most effective way to avoid various STD's and exposure to the aid's virus.

Shannon
09-03-2008, 09:59 PM
For the record...I told my kid that he would die if he had sex before he was married.

PoliCon
09-03-2008, 10:01 PM
That's nice. How's it work out in practice?
Everyone who PRACTICES it - succeeds at not getting pregnant. :cool:

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 10:02 PM
For the record...I told my kid that he would die if he had sex before he was married.

Ah, you were educating him in Renaissance poetry? The common term for sex for a male at the time was "the little death." :D

PoliCon
09-03-2008, 10:06 PM
Max Applause. Excellent post.:)http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h302/brmax/smilies/blush2.gif thanks.

Cold Warrior
09-03-2008, 10:08 PM
Everyone who PRACTICES it - succeeds at not getting pregnant. :cool:

Yes. And the next question for reasonable people is what percentage of the teenage population will practice it? How many horny little teenagers are going to refrain from sex because mommy said so? Therefore, is it better to preach a doctrine that is 100% effective, and practiced by a percentage of the population significantly less than 100%, or to preach a doctrine that is 99% effective (if done correctly) and will be practiced by a significantly higher percentage of the population?

AmPat
09-03-2008, 10:15 PM
[QUOTE=Cold Warrior;43049]You seem like a very wise parent. If I extrapolate the bolded section of what you said regarding alcohol to sex, it would read something like "I taught my kids not to have sex before they were married. I told them they would be tempted, and I told them there are ways to have sex responsibly, but I told them there was no rush." What it doesn't say is "I told them not to have sex and that's it."[/

What I extrapolate from the bolded text is that you think this is what abstinance teaches. Abstinance is the only truly effective way to avoid pregnancy and STD's yet shouldn't be exclusive of a larger sex education training. I believe the differences are primarily over who does the teaching.

I just saw a news story regarding the Mexican government teaching their students sex education. In the text books they covered topics like BDSM, homosexuality, cultural differences, etc, etc. I don't trust government to teach my children. Look at who teaches in our schools and you'll probably agree too that our schools are not a very good place to base sex education. At least not without some scrutiny.

Shannon
09-03-2008, 10:19 PM
All kidding aside. I think that every parent should "preach" to their kids what they believe is right. I really don't believe that schools should even be involved in "sex education". Simple enough.;)

Odysseus
09-04-2008, 05:48 PM
All kidding aside. I think that every parent should "preach" to their kids what they believe is right. I really don't believe that schools should even be involved in "sex education". Simple enough.;)

What I don't get is, why is Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy an example of a failure to teach the pitfalls of sex outside of marriage, but John Edwards' love child isn't? Horny teenagers are hormones with feet, but shouldn't a successful, married trial lawyer and senator know by now that he's supposed to use protection, or is the media's silence all the protection that he needs? For that matter, you'd think that a guy who spent that much time chasing ambulances would've picked up some medical knowledge. :confused:

Cold Warrior
09-04-2008, 05:57 PM
What I don't get is, why is Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy an example of a failure to teach the pitfalls of sex outside of marriage, but John Edwards' love child isn't? Horny teenagers are hormones with feet, but shouldn't a successful, married trial lawyer and senator know by now that he's supposed to use protection, or is the media's silence all the protection that he needs? For that matter, you'd think that a guy who spent that much time chasing ambulances would've picked up some medical knowledge. :confused:

Uh, in so many ways. Perhaps, first and foremost, John Edwards, to my knowledge, has never attempted to make monogamy or "faithfulness" part of public policy, while Sweet Sarah has a history of making "abstinence" a public policy initiative. And don't get me wrong. John Edwards is a hypocrite while Sarah Palin is not. Palin is simply misguided and her "it happens in the best of families" followers are the hypocrites.

Odysseus
09-04-2008, 07:46 PM
Uh, in so many ways. Perhaps, first and foremost, John Edwards, to my knowledge, has never attempted to make monogamy or "faithfulness" part of public policy, while Sweet Sarah has a history of making "abstinence" a public policy initiative. And don't get me wrong. John Edwards is a hypocrite while Sarah Palin is not. Palin is simply misguided and her "it happens in the best of families" followers are the hypocrites.

I wouldn't say that her supporters are hypocrites. The fundamental assumption of the Judeo-Christian tradition is that all people sin, but that it is the effort to resist it and genuinely repent that is redemptive. Palin's daughter had been taught the message, but failed, and took responsibility for her actions by marrying her boyfriend and preparing to have the baby.

Also, while Edwards has never been an advocate of monogamy or marital fidelity as a policy issue, he did rather scathingly denounce Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal:


"I think this President has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen."

Cold Warrior
09-04-2008, 07:55 PM
I wouldn't say that her supporters are hypocrites. The fundamental assumption of the Judeo-Christian tradition is that all people sin, but that it is the effort to resist it and genuinely repent that is redemptive. Palin's daughter had been taught the message, but failed, and took responsibility for her actions by marrying her boyfriend and preparing to have the baby.

Also, while Edwards has never been an advocate of monogamy or marital fidelity as a policy issue, he did rather scathingly denounce Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal:

How long did she know her daughter was preggers while still advocating a public policy of abstinence and restricted sex education? And what is your definition of a "hypocrite?" That sortof fits mine.

PoliCon
09-04-2008, 08:03 PM
Yes. And the next question for reasonable people is what percentage of the teenage population will practice it? How many horny little teenagers are going to refrain from sex because mommy said so? Therefore, is it better to preach a doctrine that is 100% effective, and practiced by a percentage of the population significantly less than 100%, or to preach a doctrine that is 99% effective (if done correctly) and will be practiced by a significantly higher percentage of the population?That's exactly the point. When it's just mom telling them that - not many. When it's being presented as a valid option by someone other than just MOM - it's going to get their attention. BETTER STILL - show it to be the best choice by highlighting and illustrating the draw backs and failures of every other prophylactic measure.

PoliCon
09-04-2008, 08:06 PM
All kidding aside. I think that every parent should "preach" to their kids what they believe is right. I really don't believe that schools should even be involved in "sex education". Simple enough.;) I'm okay with dealing with it as a larger part of a biology class showing the very negative sides of what illicit sex brings and I'm okay with covering reproduction in that way. Trouble is - you're right. Too many sex ed courses are nothing other than social engineering and brainwashing by those who want to change society.

PoliCon
09-04-2008, 08:08 PM
. . . her "it happens in the best of families" followers are the hypocrites.
Holding a high standard is not hypocrisy. NEITHER is accepting and encouraging those who fail to meet that high standard hypocrisy.

Cold Warrior
09-04-2008, 08:17 PM
Holding a high standard is not hypocrisy. NEITHER is accepting and encouraging those who fail to meet that high standard hypocrisy.

I think I've already answered your original question. Are you being purposely obtuse or were you born that way?



Originally Posted by PoliCon
Where is it that you see hypocrisy in this? I'm not seeing what you see - so please explain how the issue of Bristol Palin being pregnant makes WHO hypocrites?

God, I really hope you're being purposely dense. Because, if you're not, you're pretty hopeless.

The hypocrisy in the partisan sense lies with all those folks who think CystBoy is God, even after comparing a 13 year old (public figure) girl to a dog, but are shocked, shocked do you hear, that liberal commentators might go after the preggers 17 year old daughter of a crusader for abstinence and restricting sex education in schools.

The hypocrisy lies with those posters here who would go after Chelsea Clinton or any lib's daughter in a heartbeat if she were in a similar situation, but spout inane platitudes like "it happens in the best of families" when in happens in a conservative family.

Jeez!

FlaGator
09-04-2008, 08:36 PM
What is wrong with accepting the consequences of one's actions? As has been pointed out, Palin's daughter and her beau knew the outcome of their actions might be something a little more tangible than a mutual orgasm. They got exactly what they bargained for and now must do the adult thing and take care of the child. No one has got to die to correct something that doesn't need to be corrected.

Shannon
09-04-2008, 08:39 PM
What is wrong with accepting the consequences of one's actions? As has been pointed out, Palin's daughter and her beau knew the outcome of their actions might be something a little more tangible than a mutual orgasm. They got exactly what they bargained for and now must do the adult thing and take care of the child. No one has got to die to correct something that doesn't need to be corrected.

Exactly.

.....

MrsSmith
09-04-2008, 08:40 PM
How long did she know her daughter was preggers while still advocating a public policy of abstinence and restricted sex education? And what is your definition of a "hypocrite?" That sortof fits mine.


Sarah Palin is a member of Feminists for Life of America. Perhaps their answer on contraception will clear up some of your misperceptions.



What is Feminists for Life's position on contraception?
Feminists for Life's mission is to address the unmet needs of women who are pregnant or parenting. Preconception issues including abstinence and contraception are outside of our mission. Some FFL members and supporters support the use of non-abortifacient contraception while others oppose contraception for a variety of reasons. FFL is concerned that certain forms of contraception have had adverse health effects on women.
Our membership enjoys a broad spectrum of opinion that reflects the diversity of opinions among the American public.

In the time of the early American feminists, sex between married couples was not always consensual. Many women bore 20 or more children, of whom only half survived. In order to affirm women’s rights within marriage, most feminist foremothers promoted “voluntary motherhood,” whereby women would have the education and right to fully participate in the decision to have sexual relations. FFL likewise supports life planning by focusing on one's education and career plans coupled with mentoring and empowering programs for teens.
LINK (http://www.feministsforlife.org/FAQ/index.htm#contraception)


I'm wondering, in all these arguments for and against "comprehensive" sex ed, which says to kids, "Don't, but we know you will, so here...." where are the laws that say a parent cannot discuss contraception with his/her child, schedule a doctor's appointment for a prescription, provide condoms, etc. etc.? This sex ed thing is a smokescreen for those liberal parents who are too lazy or too cheap to take care of their own children.

FlaGator
09-04-2008, 08:41 PM
Uh, in so many ways. Perhaps, first and foremost, John Edwards, to my knowledge, has never attempted to make monogamy or "faithfulness" part of public policy, while Sweet Sarah has a history of making "abstinence" a public policy initiative. And don't get me wrong. John Edwards is a hypocrite while Sarah Palin is not. Palin is simply misguided and her "it happens in the best of families" followers are the hypocrites.

I think you are seriously off base here.


Hypocrisy and Bristol Palin’s Baby
<snip>
Leftist pundits need only to think of their own experience with children.

No need to be cynical. Surely some leftist pundits have children and I have no doubt that those who do are good parents. They almost certainly teach their children not to lie. When they lie anyway, as children do, leftist pundit parents no doubt attempt some sort of corrective measure (not spanking of course) to reinforce the rule against lying.

And then they forgive. If there are consequences associated with the lie (say the child has lied to a teacher or some external authority) and if the leftist pundits are good parents, they permit the child to bear whatever consequences that result while offering, at the same time, love and support.

Does the act of forgiveness negate the offense? No. Does forgiveness imply that the rule against lying has changed? Of course not. Are our leftist pundit parents “hypocritical” for both expecting honesty and forgiving deceit? Absurd.


The Full Article (http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/15891/)

Lager
09-04-2008, 09:01 PM
With all this thinly disguised joy at Palin's predicament with her daughter. I was anxious to see where her detractors got their information that she was such a staunch opponent of sex education. CW even goes as far as to imagine the conversation she might have had with her daughter. As far as I can tell, there is not much information out there. According to Salon.Com, which is certainly no conservative mouth piece,



she hasn't been a particularly disruptive advocate of Alaska's sex-ed programs, which says something (a very little something) about her lack of enthusiasm for abstinence-only programs during George Bush's eight year roll-back of reproductive rights and his worldwide propagation of abstinence-only reprogramming.




Palin has only once weighed in on the topic. When asked a confusingly worded question about whether she would "support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools," she replied, "Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support." She is a member of Feminists for Life, an anti-choice group that does not take a prohibitive stand on birth control.


link http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/09/01/palin_baby/index.html

Those who are willing to attack her, act as if she was out there preaching like Jerry Falwell, every chance she had, and yet it seems we've intuited all this information, right down to what she tells her kids about sex, based on the scantest of public information. So if you folks that are tauting this as a prime example of hypocrisy have other sources of info, perhaps you could share it.

Cold Warrior
09-04-2008, 09:13 PM
With all this thinly disguised joy at Palin's predicament with her daughter. I was anxious to see where her detractors got their information that she was such a staunch opponent of sex education. CW even goes as far as to imagine the conversation she might have had with her daughter. As far as I can tell, there is not much information out there. According to Salon.Com, which is certainly no conservative mouth piece,


link http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/09/01/palin_baby/index.html

Those who are willing to attack her, act as if she was out there preaching like Jerry Falwell, every chance she had, and yet it seems we've intuited all this information, right down to what she tells her kids about sex, based on the scantest of public information. So if you folks that are tauting this as a prime example of hypocrisy have other sources of info, perhaps you could share it.

Rather than have me list them here, why don't you google "Palin sex education" and "Palin abstinence" for news results. Has she supported the passage of legislation against it? No. But has she, in her 1.5 years supported the passage of any legislation? No.

Cold Warrior
09-04-2008, 09:19 PM
I think you are seriously off base here.

The Full Article (http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/15891/)

In what way am I off base, FlaGator? In the quote you cited, I noted that Palin herself was not the hypocrite, but rather those followers who (1) would vehemently condemn a lib's daughter (and have done so) in the same situation and (2) those who recite the mindless mantra "it happens in the best of families" in this case.

Lager
09-04-2008, 09:22 PM
..... while Sweet Sarah has a history of making "abstinence" a public policy initiative.

I did google exactly that. Now I'll be the first to admit my google Kung Fu isn't the greatest. But all I could find was one answer to one survey she filled out. There's no history of her making even a half hearted effort to end sex ed in Alaska schools, and as everyone knows, she had no problem sending her daughter to one where it was taught. And there's no evidence she was against contraception, except possibly handing out contraception in schools. So I was curious where you got the information that caused you to make the statement quoted above.

FlaGator
09-04-2008, 09:25 PM
Rather than have me list them here, why don't you google "Palin sex education" and "Palin abstinence" for news results. Has she supported the passage of legislation against it? No. But has she, in her 1.5 years supported the passage of any legislation? No.

I'm still not sure what her daughter's pregnancy has to with the Govenor's stance on sex education or contraception. There are plenty of children whose parents supported sex education who have gotten pregnant. There are plenty of teens whose parents supported abstinence that have gotten pregnant.

LibraryLady
09-04-2008, 09:28 PM
lager, that's the only reference I have ever found. The left has just run with it and made it sound like she walked around with a sandwich board for Abstinence based sex ed.

Lager
09-04-2008, 09:29 PM
I'm still not sure what her daughter's pregnancy has to with the Govenor's stance on sex education or contraception. There are plenty of children whose parents supported sex education who have gotten pregnant. There are plenty of teens whose parents supported abstinence that have gotten pregnant.

There is always a certain glee involved, when we perceive anyone as holier than thou, and they stumble a little. CW is right. It's practiced on both sides. That's why the glass houses parable is still relevant today.

FlaGator
09-04-2008, 09:37 PM
In what way am I off base, FlaGator? In the quote you cited, I noted that Palin herself was not the hypocrite, but rather those followers who (1) would vehemently condemn a lib's daughter (and have done so) in the same situation and (2) those who recite the mindless mantra "it happens in the best of families" in this case.

I must have misread your original statement and I apologize for that. But, on the otherhand, I am not sure what followers you are talking about who would have condemned a lib in the same situation. I'm not saying that they are not out there, I'm just saying that I don't feel it is a pervasive as you seem to be implying. I've never been a what's good for the goose is good for the gander person and I hope I would be the last one to point fingers in directions they need not be pointed. I would suggest that a trip over to DU to weigh the hypocracy that is there with any hypcracy on this site would shed a bit of light on where hypocracy lies on this issue. I think that if Chelsea Clinton was to turn up pregnant out of wed lock there would be some snickering coming from the right but not the outright condemnation that we see coming from DU and KOS the left.

FlaGator
09-04-2008, 09:42 PM
There is always a certain glee involved, when we perceive anyone as holier than thou, and they stumble a little. CW is right. It's practiced on both sides. That's why the glass houses parable is still relevant today.

I understand that. CW corrected me on my misreading of his post. We had this same type of thing happen here a while ago over people wishing for DUers to commit suicide. I thought that it was an embarrassment for those of us on the right that didn't what our side to behave as we perceive the left doing. It was all out war for a while and some feelings got hurt. I personally don't wish to be aligned with the hypocrisy that CW is pointing out.

Cold Warrior
09-04-2008, 09:59 PM
Here ya' go...


Below (http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/515445.html) are Palin's responses on the 2006 questionnaire for governor candidates from the Eagle Forum, which describes itself as a forum for conservative and pro-family men and women.
...
ALASKA EAGLE FORUM QUESTIONNAIRE

2006 CANDIDATES

ADVERTISEMENT

FOR ALASKA GOVERNOR

1. Complete the sentence by checking the applicable phrases (you can check more than one). Abortion should be:

Banned throughout entire pregnancy.

Legal to save the life of the mother.

Legal in case of rape and incest.

Legal if the baby is handicapped.

Legal if the baby has a genetic defect.

Legal in the first trimester.

Legal in the second trimester.

Legal in the third trimester.

Other:__________________

PALIN: I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor's determination that the mother's life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent's life.
...
3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

PALIN: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.


Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/09/03/palin-s-handling-of-other-people-s-pregnant-teens.aspx), the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live.

After the legislature passed a spending bill in April, Palin went through the measure reducing and eliminating funds for programs she opposed. Inking her initials on the legislation -- "SP" -- Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers.

According to Passage House's web site, its purpose is to provide "young mothers a place to live with their babies for up to eighteen months while they gain the necessary skills and resources to change their lives" and help teen moms "become productive, successful, independent adults who create and provide a stable environment for themselves and their families."

Yeah, she hasn't done very much about it, but that's only because she's only been in office less than 2 years. Every indication, as illustrated above, is that, given the time, reach, and power, she will.

LibraryLady
09-04-2008, 10:04 PM
Huffington Post is full of liars


Sarah Palin did not slash funds for teen mothers
Posted on September 3rd, 2008 by Warren

Contrary to a report from the Washington Post, Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin, did not slash funding for a program for teen mothers.

The Washington Post’s Paul Kane reported late yesterday that “Palin Slashed Funding for Teen Moms.” The far-left Huffington Post repeated the story this morning. To support this contention Kane pointed out that “Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million.”

Covenant House Alaska is a faith-based, not-for-profit agency which provides a variety of services to troubled teens, including a home for teen moms. Although the work with adolescent mothers is only one component of their work, Kane focused on this aspect of their work due to the revelation that Governor Palin’s teen daughter is 5 months pregnant.

In Alaska, the governor is allowed to reduce spending allocations in the service of sound management and fiscal accountability. To prove his contention that Palin slashed funds for teen mothers, Kane produced the Alaska 2008 budget with Sarah Palin’s line by line adjustments. It is true that lawmakers allocated 5 million to Covenant House Alaska and that Mrs. Palin cut that allocation to 3.9 million dollars. However, what is misleading about the Post headline is that the allocation of 3.9 million is three times more than Covenant House Alaska received from government grants in 2007. According to records on the Covenant House Alaska website, the organization received just over 1.3 million dollars from grants in 2007 and nearly 1.2 million in 2006. Even with the reductions, Governor Palin signed a budget which provided three times more funds than the organization received in 2007.

Thus, the Post report is misleading on two counts. One, the funding in question went to an organization which engaged in many different services, including work with teen mothers. There was no funding exclusively earmarked for pregnant teens.

Two, the report leaves the impression that the Governor reduced existing funding levels, when in fact, the Palin-approved budget allowed a massive expansion of funding for this worthy faith-based organization. The organization’s total revenue for 2007 was just over 3 million dollars and so the 3.9 million approved by Palin and the Alaska legislature was a huge increase.

Source (http://wthrockmorton.com/2008/09/03/sarah-palin-did-not-slash-funds-for-teen-mothers/)


I cannot figure out why this context was not provided. It is clear that Governor Palin did not cut funding. It cannot be a cut in funding when you get a raise, even if the raise was not as great as originally contemplated.

UPDATE: 9/4/08 - The Covenant House Alaska Executive Director states that she is glad for the support of Governor Palin.

Shannon
09-04-2008, 10:06 PM
Alright. So friggin what? I teach the brat as best I can and hope he listens. In a few years he will most likely do whatever the hell he wants anyways. Am I a hypocrite for telling him not to do things that I think could result in bad situations for him?

LibraryLady
09-04-2008, 10:07 PM
Covenant House
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 4, 2008
Contact: Deirdre A. Cronin
Executive Director
907-339-4203

“Covenant House Alaska is a multi-service agency serving homeless and runaway youth, including teen mothers. The majority of the agency’s annual operating budget is privately raised, with no more than 10 to 15 percent of funds coming from state grants in any given year. We are grateful for the support we have received from Governor Sarah Palin, the Alaska legislature and our Congressional delegation over the years.

Despite some press reports to the contrary, our operating budget was not reduced. Our $3.9 million appropriation is directed toward a multi-year capital project and it is our understanding that the state simply opted to phase in its support for this project over several years, rather than all at once in the current budget year.”

Covenant House Alaska is Alaska’s largest private non-profit adolescent care agency serving homeless, runaway and at–risk youth between the ages of 13 and 21. With particular expertise in helping some of the most hopeless teens grow into independent, successful and productive adults.

-END

Their Press Release

FlaGator
09-04-2008, 10:18 PM
Alright. So friggin what? I teach the brat as best I can and hope he listens. In a few years he will most likely do whatever the hell he wants anyways. Am I a hypocrite for telling him not to do things that I think could result in bad situations for him?

Not as long as you lock him in the basement with only a computer with AOL for a ISP and feed him twinkies, cheetos and beer for the rest of his life for not listening to you. That you make you a good mom with highly evolved parenting skills.

Cold Warrior
09-04-2008, 10:22 PM
Alright. So friggin what? I teach the brat as best I can and hope he listens. In a few years he will most likely do whatever the hell he wants anyways. Am I a hypocrite for telling him not to do things that I think could result in bad situations for him?

*sigh* As I tried to indicate many times in these posts, when I use the term "hypocrite" it's not directed at Palin (and, therefore, by projection, not at parents in general). It's directed at those people who are happy to brush the 17 year old preggers daughter of an abstinence crusader off as "well, it happens in the best of families," but would rip apart any similar situation regarding the daughter of a lib.

PoliCon
09-04-2008, 11:25 PM
You don't get it CW. Just because I believe that absitance is best - I'm hardly going to condemn someone who fails to do what is best. I would say the same thing no matter who's family it happened in. Who do you see saying different in what instance? Can you point to a leftie who's kid has gotten knocked up and which conservatives said that she should not keep the baby?

wilbur
09-05-2008, 07:21 AM
*sigh* As I tried to indicate many times in these posts, when I use the term "hypocrite" it's not directed at Palin (and, therefore, by projection, not at parents in general). It's directed at those people who are happy to brush the 17 year old preggers daughter of an abstinence crusader off as "well, it happens in the best of families," but would rip apart any similar situation regarding the daughter of a lib.

Or even a celebrity, like Jamie Lynn Spears. Remember the right media's reaction to that? Did that happen before the downtime? Wonder what we'd find if we searched through the archives.

wilbur
09-05-2008, 07:26 AM
You don't get it CW. Just because I believe that absitance is best - I'm hardly going to condemn someone who fails to do what is best. I would say the same thing no matter who's family it happened in. Who do you see saying different in what instance? Can you point to a leftie who's kid has gotten knocked up and which conservatives said that she should not keep the baby?

http://ccinsider.comedycentral.com/cc_insider/2008/09/jon-stewart-ann.html

Cold Warrior
09-05-2008, 08:33 AM
Or even a celebrity, like Jamie Lynn Spears. Remember the right media's reaction to that? Did that happen before the downtime? Wonder what we'd find if we searched through the archives.

That was before the crash. But there was an outpouring of support from these same CU members for the poor girl. I mean, after all "it happens." There were literally dozens of posts of support here on the order of "it happens in the best of families." It was a thing of beauty. :D

FlaGator
09-05-2008, 08:41 AM
Or even a celebrity, like Jamie Lynn Spears. Remember the right media's reaction to that? Did that happen before the downtime? Wonder what we'd find if we searched through the archives.

What was the right media's reaction to Jamie Lynn Spears? Most of the eye raising comments were aimed at a book on her mother had written about good parenting. The ridicule from that was from both right and left. Apparently both sides of the aisle show the irony.

PoliCon
09-05-2008, 08:58 AM
Or even a celebrity, like Jamie Lynn Spears. Remember the right media's reaction to that? Did that happen before the downtime? Wonder what we'd find if we searched through the archives. Dude - Spears was being held up as an icon. A role model and her mother was writing a book about how she was such an awesome parent. NO ONE is holding up Bristol as a role model and Sarah is not writing a book lecturing people about how to raise their kids. THAT was the issue with her getting pregnant.

PoliCon
09-05-2008, 09:00 AM
The ridicule from that was from both right and left. Apparently both sides of the aisle show the irony.
The ridicle from the left was personal attacks and anti-morality attacks while the right went after her role model and celebrity status.

Cold Warrior
09-05-2008, 09:12 AM
Bill O'Reilly...


'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. And by the way, the mother, Lynne Spears, has reportedly already sold pictures of the upcoming baby of her 16-year-old for a million bucks. Incredible pinhead'

Did he call sweet Bristol a pinhead just then? Does the blame fall primarily on Bristol's parents?

Cyst Boy...


Caller: Would you tend to think that a family in this position,
though, wouldn't you think that there would be a more watchful eye as
a parent to be watching over these kids so this doesn't happen to
them?

RUSH: I would certainly hope so, but it's long past time for this to
happen. The parents here are the culprits!

Ah, so the real culprits are Snowsled and Sarah Palin? Is it long past time for a "parent to be watching over" Bristol?

Funny how neither one of them said, "it happens in the best of families."

Cold Warrior
09-05-2008, 09:15 AM
What was the right media's reaction to Jamie Lynn Spears? Most of the eye raising comments were aimed at a book on her mother had written about good parenting. The ridicule from that was from both right and left. Apparently both sides of the aisle show the irony.

So would it be fair then for most of the "eye raising comments" to be aimed at sweet Sarah's approach to good parenting, i.e., preach abstinence, in this case?

PoliCon
09-05-2008, 09:23 AM
Bill O'Reilly...



Did he call sweet Bristol a pinhead just then? Does the blame fall primarily on Bristol's parents?

Cyst Boy...



Ah, so the real culprits are Snowsled and Sarah Palin? Is it long past time for a "parent to be watching over" Bristol?

Funny how neither one of them said, "it happens in the best of families."Dude - O'Reilly is a centrist not a conservative.

And rush does not blame the girl or attack the girl as the press has been attacking Bristol.

Cold Warrior
09-05-2008, 09:27 AM
Dude - O'Reilly is a centrist not a conservative.

And rush does not blame the girl or attack the girl as the press has been attacking Bristol.

No, he blames the parents and their philosophy of and ability to raise children. Why aren't we doing the same thing in this case?

And O'Reilly's only a centrist from the perspective of the extreme right. From a centrist's perspective, he's probably not as whacky-whacky as Rush, but he's out there.

PoliCon
09-05-2008, 09:39 AM
No, he blames the parents and their philosophy of and ability to raise children. Why aren't we doing the same thing in this case?

And O'Reilly's only a centrist from the perspective of the extreme right. From a centrist's perspective, he's probably not as whacky-whacky as Rush, but he's out there.
Saying O'reilly on the right - shows just how left you really are. I'm always amused when people call O'Reilly a conservative.

As for Rush - he's got a point. One daughter preggers under aged and the other playing the party slut for all the world to see and this woman has the NERVE to write a book about how to parent?? I feel bad for both kids because it's clear that their parents gave them no grounding - they have no roots - nothing to hold on to. The lack the solid core of beliefs and faith and character that allows others to weather the storms these girls have had to face. They live for the pleasure of the moment and then wonder why their lives are empty. :(

Cold Warrior
09-05-2008, 09:44 AM
Saying O'reilly on the right - shows just how left you really are. I'm always amused when people call O'Reilly a conservative.

As for Rush - he's got a point. One daughter preggers under aged and the other playing the party slut for all the world to see and this woman has the NERVE to write a book about how to parent?? I feel bad for both kids because it's clear that their parents gave them no grounding - they have no roots - nothing to hold on to. The lack the solid core of beliefs and faith and character that allows others to weather the storms these girls have had to face. They live for the pleasure of the moment and then wonder why their lives are empty. :(

And yet bouncy Bristol, who's had family values and abstinence preached to her all her life is in exactly the same position.

wilbur
09-05-2008, 10:09 AM
And yet bouncy Bristol, who's had family values and abstinence preached to her all her life is in exactly the same position.

It was probably Jamie Lynn Spears' fault.

wilbur
09-05-2008, 10:14 AM
Saying O'reilly on the right - shows just how left you really are. I'm always amused when people call O'Reilly a conservative.

As for Rush - he's got a point. One daughter preggers under aged and the other playing the party slut for all the world to see and this woman has the NERVE to write a book about how to parent?? I feel bad for both kids because it's clear that their parents gave them no grounding - they have no roots - nothing to hold on to. The lack the solid core of beliefs and faith and character that allows others to weather the storms these girls have had to face. They live for the pleasure of the moment and then wonder why their lives are empty. :(

This is is generally referred to as a double standard.

Cold Warrior
09-05-2008, 10:17 AM
This is is generally referred to as a double standard.

Come on now. I'm sure everyone here's reaction to Spears was that "it happens in the best of families" and that it couldn't be connected with the way the parents raised the child. Don't ya' know? :D

AmPat
09-05-2008, 09:59 PM
And yet bouncy Bristol, who's had family values and abstinence preached to her all her life is in exactly the same position.

That's it, you've convinced me not to vote for Bristol. I say S.P. disowns her for her eggregious error. Off with her head. Stone the sorry sinner. :rolleyes:

Sarah Palin tried to teach her daughter right from wrong. She did what any good parent would do. Because of this, she cannot be held accountable for the actions of her daughter. Her daughter chose to not follow the teaching she received and is paying the Stupid Tax because of it.

This is their business and not the property of a scared and pathetic political Party trying desperately to make political hay out of a personal matter. When Bristol runs for office on a Chastity ticket, pile on. Until then,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,shut up.

Cold Warrior
09-05-2008, 10:03 PM
That's it, you've convinced me not to vote for Bristol. I say S.P. disowns her for her eggregious error. Off with her head. Stone the sorry sinner. :rolleyes:

Sarah Palin tried to teach her daughter right from wrong. She did what any good parent would do. Because of this, she cannot be held accountable for the actions of her daughter. Her daughter chose to not follow the teaching she received and is paying the Stupid Tax because of it.

This is their business and not the property of a scared and pathetic political Party trying desperately to make political hay out of a personal matter. When Bristol runs for office on a Chastity ticket, pile on. Until then,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,shut up.

Temper, temper. I really don't care who you vote or don't vote for. As I've repeatedly stated, bouncy Bristol and sweet Sarah don't really interest me. I'm much more amused by the hypocrisy of the right and members here. In another thread, one member has suggested that getting preggers at 17 is a wonderful thing. I'm not sure why members aren't encouraging everyone to do it. I mean, after all, "it happens in the best of families."

Hatejane
09-06-2008, 04:54 PM
Temper, temper. I really don't care who you vote or don't vote for. As I've repeatedly stated, bouncy Bristol and sweet Sarah don't really interest me. I'm much more amused by the hypocrisy of the right and members here. In another thread, one member has suggested that getting preggers at 17 is a wonderful thing. I'm not sure why members aren't encouraging everyone to do it. I mean, after all, "it happens in the best of families."

and those on the left think it is a wonderful thing when 17 year old ( and younger) abort their umtimely pregnancies

lacarnut
09-06-2008, 06:17 PM
Temper, temper. I really don't care who you vote or don't vote for. As I've repeatedly stated, bouncy Bristol and sweet Sarah don't really interest me. I'm much more amused by the hypocrisy of the right and members here. In another thread, one member has suggested that getting preggers at 17 is a wonderful thing. I'm not sure why members aren't encouraging everyone to do it. I mean, after all, "it happens in the best of families."

You are so full of shit; just like all the lefties. This should not be an issue to start off with. If so, then Old Joe's daughter's drug problems with the law should be thoroughly thrashed out. I guessed you missed that part. Palin's daughter is a minor and Joe's daughter is an adult. . Not the same side of the coin; is it?. Got it.

When Clinton was in office, the press did not go after his daughter. The hypocrisy you see of conservatives is a fabrication of your left leaning brain.

Do you equate underage drinking like the Bushy daughters to Driving under the influence with Kennedy. If my memory serves me right, did the press go after daddy, Ted Kennedy. Hell no. This drug addict got a pass because who his daddy is. Not the same side of the COIN like you like to equate is it?

Next time try to do a little better because your comparison of conservative hypocrisy is a figment of your imagination.

BTW, go read the Jimmy Carter malaise speech and you will have your answer who screwed the pooch when it comes to our lack a energy policy.

PoliCon
09-06-2008, 07:26 PM
And yet bouncy Bristol, who's had family values and abstinence preached to her all her life is in exactly the same position.And because Bristol isn't perfect she must not be conservative? Actually - who cares either way if she is or if she isn't. She's not the candidate. Her mother is. And her mother is not basing her candidacy on abstinence education.

PoliCon
09-06-2008, 07:29 PM
This is is generally referred to as a double standard.Bull shit. Jamie's mom was basing her credibility on the success both of her daughters are. Palin is not basing her candidacy on her daughter or on abstinence education. So there is no double standard except in the minds of the left - who are convinced that if anyone connected to a conservative turns out to not be perfect that the conservative is a hypocrite.

LibraryLady
09-06-2008, 07:29 PM
Here she is with her evil boyfriend.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c12/dtharman/mccain/Photo1.jpg

AmPat
09-08-2008, 02:05 AM
No, he blames the parents and their philosophy of and ability to raise children. Why aren't we doing the same thing in this case?

And O'Reilly's only a centrist from the perspective of the extreme right. From a centrist's perspective, he's probably not as whacky-whacky as Rush, but he's out there.

I believe it is legitimate to blame the parents if they have not taught the children better or have not demostrated a responsible life style for the children to model. If the parents have done all they could, the blame is on the child.

AmPat
09-08-2008, 02:15 AM
Temper, temper. I really don't care who you vote or don't vote for. As I've repeatedly stated, bouncy Bristol and sweet Sarah don't really interest me. I'm much more amused by the hypocrisy of the right and members here. In another thread, one member has suggested that getting preggers at 17 is a wonderful thing. I'm not sure why members aren't encouraging everyone to do it. I mean, after all, "it happens in the best of families."

HMMMMMMMMM,,,,,,, HMMMMMMMMMMMM,,,,,,,,,,, ******Chanting************

:D

Actually most of this was for general consumption and not meant for your eys only. I should have selected the new reply button instead of the quote. My apologies sir.:o