bwhahahahahahahaha
So much for 'family values' McCain picked the Spears family as VP.
Dumb dumbs who don't believe in birth control.
The 17-year-old daughter of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is pregnant, Palin said Monday in an announcement intended to knock down rumors by liberal bloggers that Palin faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her child. [p class="textBodyBlack"][span id="byLine"][/span]Bristol Palin, one of Alaska Gov. Palin's five children with her husband, Todd, is about five months pregnant and is going to keep the child and marry the father, the Palins said in a statement released by the campaign of Republican presidential candidate John McCain. [/p][p class="textBodyBlack"][span id="byLine"][/span]Bristol Palin made the decision on her own to keep the baby, McCain aides said.
[/p][p class="textBodyBlack"]
[/p][p class="textBodyBlack"][a href="vny!://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26496189/"]vny!://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26496189/[/a]
[/p]
I'm all for politicians being honest.
Kudos to Sarah Palin and family in this regard.
How are these people honest? These people are the typical 'do as I say not what I do' crowd that has polluted America's public stream of thought.
Sportsdude wrote:
How are these people honest? These people are the typical 'do as I say not what I do' crowd that has polluted America's public stream of thought.
I couldn't agree more. It's the old, "Family values are important, but not for my family. Only for your family."
Someone asked me if McCain choosing Palin as his VP would make me consider voting for him...I replied, "I wouldn't vote for John McCain if he picked ME." And it's true.
It seems wrong to me, to conclude that because a 17 year old girl is pregnant, that the family has no values ?
(//vny!://discoverseattle.net/forums/richedit/smileys/8.gif)
Republicans can get away with anything, if Biden's son's fathered a child or something, Republicans would use this as "see! Damn liberals and their un-family values, sex before marriage, wrong for america". Yet its okay if Republicans do it because they have god on their side.
Jamie Lynn Spears goes around preaching abstinence, even after she was pregnant. Then its family cultures. Right wing families can't take criticism and get offended if you point out a flaw or tell them that life doesn't revolve around them, but they love to attack and cut down your own family problems or struggles.
P.C. wrote:
[DIV style="FONT-STYLE: italic"]It seems wrong to me, to conclude that because a 17 year old girl is pregnant, that the family has no values ?
(//vny!://discoverseattle.net/forums/richedit/smileys/8.gif)
--
Exactly.
Accidents happen.
She is being honest about her situation and taking responsibility for it.
that's not the point, but it's okay.
P.C. wrote:
[div style="font-style: italic;"]It seems wrong to me, to conclude that because a 17 year old girl is pregnant, that the family has no values ?[/div]
You're absolutely right....I was generalizing. It doesn't indicate anything specific about their family or their values.
I've just seen far too many right-wing Republicans preaching on and on about "family values" only to find out later that they're slimeballs. Like Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, Bob Allen, Glenn Murphy Jr., etc etc etc.
So much for 'family values' McCain picked the Spears family as VP.
Dumb dumbs who don't believe in birth control.
SD, so what IS the point ?
A 17 year old girl who doesn't get pregnant, because she is on birth control, has more values than a 17 year old girl who is pregnant because she isn't on birth control ?
I might be missing something here....wouldn't be the first time.
I think that making this girls situation a political issue is mental. Just my personal thoughts.
Because Republicans would be shouting on high if the tables were turned and it was the Democrat's nominee's daughter who was pregnant. Republicans represent the party of abstinence and like to divide and conquer on these social issues. Republicans are the party that say they can raise their kids better, that's what 'family values' means. It's a wedge issue this girl is already a political pawn to their base.
The girl in getting pregnant represents the battle between abstinence only education which is basically "Don't do it" to sex education where they teach you everything and how to prepare yourself is something goes wrong. Republicans believe in abstinence only because contraceptives are 'morally wrong'.
I'm not asking who is shouting...I'm asking why they're shouting.
My guess is, that there are enough sheep who buy into this line of thinking. It seems to be a desperate act.....to latch on to a situation like this and make it a political issue. I suppose it's easier to think what everyone else thinks, than to think for ourselves. I am dumbfounded, to find that this has been on every news program ALL day (they're still yapping about it as we speak). Sad. To take a real life issue and twist it for political gain is shallow thinking IMHO.
Well they're talking about it for reasons I'll list
It's the VP's child, in America we like to see our President and Vice President as a reflection of ourselves someone we could have a beer with somebody like us. This doesn't mean they're good at running the country though... So if a majority of people believe in 'family values' like sex before marriage, religion (there will never be an atheist president) etc. We frown upon extra marital affairs, etc. Voters pick people they like, it's never about ideas...
McCain picked a person he had only met once before in his life, she comes from a state most Americans only go to once in their life on a cruise, if at all. Nobody knows anything about her, so these revelations are huge in defining who a person is in the public square. You as a politician want to define yourself and not have anything define you first because once public opinion shifts to a negative view point, you're done.
So in that respect it's a major news story.
I don't need a list as to why they are talking about it. I GET why they are talking about it. I am suggesting, that it is misguided to buy into it. I am suggesting that it is on a par with highschool gossip. I am suggesting that we have become so weak in our convictions, that we need someone to tell what we are supposed to think.
I am also suggesting that anyone who takes something like this as 'defining who a person is', has lost the ability to think for themselves.
*add: I DO get what you're saying....and there is truth in what you're saying about how people think. I'm trying to back it up to a place where our opinions aren't directed by the media and a culture that seems to make an issue out of non issues.
I am also suggesting that anyone who takes something like this as 'defining who a person is', has lost the ability to think for themselves.
Well people will, people can read into this and say "she can't raise her kids right, so then why should we trust her with the keys to the white house since she's a heart beat away". She's under investigation in Alaska, now the pregnancy of her kid, when the average person who doesn't pay attention to issues per say and sees this in the news, they'll have a negative opinion of the person.
Republicans used this against Kerry with Swiftboat, used Willie Horton against Dukakis, feminism, '68, civil rights against McGovern, red scare against Stevenson. Liberals used it against Harper and the Conservatives, Tories in the UK used it against Old Labour, Campbell uses it against the New Dems.
Michel wrote:
The real issues are the war in Irak, the war in Afghanistan, the foreclosure crisis, the eventual spreading of the war to Pakistan and Iran etc., the warmogering of the USA with its puppet regime in Georgia against Russia, their hatred, fear and loss of power at the hands of China and the European Union, their miserable dollar, the ruin of giant enterprises in USA and the losses of thousand of jobs, the comedy of "we vote Obama because we're not racist" like the Republicans (gimme a break...) etc. The fact that the Democrats, their supporters and their media lackeys focus so much on that sordid affair of a young girl who got pregnant just show once more how void and hypocrit their political program is.
-------------------
Elections are never about the issues. When you give people the right to vote freely for a President or leader they'll pick on somebody that represents them or looks good and has a nice wife and kids. Media is just doing what it does in order to get ratings or the most internet traffic.
The fact that the Democrats, their supporters and their media lackeys focus so much on that sordid affair of a young girl who got pregnant just show once more how void and hypocrit their political program is.
Precisely.
....and the point that I was trying to make, was that the people who are buying into it are equally as void. I'm frankly a little frightened that THIS can be a deciding factor in accessing ones character, values and abilities. If I want moral guidance, I'll look for it in a church....not in the political arena. It should be working the other way around as well.
I found this somewhat insightful.
From: [a href="vny!://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20080902_Ronnie_Polaneczky__Bristol_Palin__Proof_that_abstinence-only_education_doesn_t_work.html"]vny!://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20080902_Ronnie_Polaneczky__Bristol_Palin__Proof_that_abstinence-only_education_doesn_t_work.html[/a]
[hr style="width: 100%; height: 2px;"].....Bristol is Exhibit A for why policies like her mom's abstinence-only programs, whose fallout is felt far beyond the Palin household, don't work.[/p] The teen also is Exhibit A for the towering hypocrisy of McCain and Palin's anti-abortion stance. Yesterday, the McCain camp crowed about how Bristol had decided to keep her child, a choice that was "supported by her parents."[/p] The irony of that statement has not been lost on pro-choice advocates who've been burning up the blogosphere in the wake of Bristol's baby announcement.[/p] "And yet John McCain doesn't want women like Bristol Palin to have the ability to make that decision," posted a writer on the New York Times Web site yesterday. "This campaign cannot be allowed to make political hay out of a young woman making a choice when they don't believe she should have that choice."[/p] Another reader noted how Bristol's middle-class status had somehow elevated her above the scorn usually heaped upon poor unwed teens: [/p] [p style="font-weight: bold;"]"African-American teenage pregnancies in urban areas = the destruction of 'family values' by liberal principles. White, Republican teens get pregnant = a glorious day for traditional values."[/p][hr style="width: 100%; height: 2px;"]
P.C. wrote:
....and the point that I was trying to make, was that the people who are buying into it are equally as void. I'm frankly a little frightened that THIS can be a deciding factor in accessing ones character, values and abilities.
Agreed. This would never make an iota of difference in who I would vote for. Anyone that decide on who to vote for based on something like this shouldn't be allowed to vote.
[/div][div]
Slightly offtopic....
I wonder why Sarah Palin agreed to run for VP at a time like this. Why would she subject her family to all the scrutiny?...She is in the spotlight enough as Governor of Alaska.
Teenagers make mistakes all the time. It's too bad that Bristol Palin's life has become the big news story of the week.
Political/career opportunism, just like she decided a couple years ago to run for mayor on from her PTA position, then run for Gov. Gotta remember these people who are politicians, that's their job, so it would be like every 2 or 4 years you having to run or campaign to keep your own job. Then 'moving up' like getting a better job within a company (or a raise) would be to them going from mayor to the house then the senate etc.
I'm a cynic when it comes to political ploys, I saw her pick as a ploy to get Hillary supporters which if the case has backfired. Apparently McCain was going to pick Lieberman which would have split the Republican party in half (the christian right, theocracy types wouldn't of shown up otherwise. If you are a Republican you cannot challenge the "Moral Majority" Focus on the Family types). The Republican big wigs said if he did that it would be suicidal to the party. So in McCain picking Palin as she represents the party's base beliefs in order to get people excited about the 'Republican brand'.
So Palin's pick really shows what's wrong with American politics. I knew a guy in college back in the states who is a gay black republican. He always said he wanted to vote for the Republicans on economic issues, but obviously as a gay black man he couldn't vote for that party, since they are fundamentally opposed to his existence.
Or the other classic example is a 'New England Republican' which is socially left, economically right. That doesn't fit in the Republican party. Democrats are a bigger tent, they control Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Arizona by running more liberatarian types.
Then on the west coast a Republican is a social left or moderate economic moderate. In the South a Democrat is a social right/economic moderate. Then in the Midwest its a civil war because all the midwest states straddle the southern way of thinking(conservative) and the Northern Midwest (liberal) way of thinking.
hope that makes a little bit of sense.
That does make sense, SD.
It's just so...sad. Don't get me wrong...politics aside...I really want to like Sarah Palin. She's a gorgeous, tough woman from Alaska.
But dragging her poor daughter's sex life through the mud in front of CNN?
Not to mention the fact that her youngest kid is only 4 months old...and she's on the campaign trail...this looks like seriously bad timing.
All of us parents can attest to dragging our kids around at some time or another when they were tired, cranky or hungry...(often out of necessity...) but we try to put our kids first...when we can...
Well I find her sketchy when and how she uses her kids as political pawns.
She used her Down Syndrome baby as a political ploy, she toured the 48 saying how she's still going to have the baby that it shows how pro-life she is etc. Then she has the baby and 3 days later she's back on the job. I've never heard of a scenario where a mother goes back to work 3 days after she gave birth to a child.
She's not the only Republican to use her kids for cheap political points. My local congressman who is believes in Theocracy and only puts up legislation in Congress when it happens to deal God in public, used his kids as cheap pawns during the stem cell research battle in Missouri.
It's up to the politicians to decide if they want to use their children or not. If politicians have in the past used their kids as political points, I'm afraid the leave my kids alone argument doesn't work. They were the ones who decided to bring them into this in the first place.
I agree w/ you SD......she should have been at home breastfeeding her baby or barefoot in the kitchen preparing her husband's meal. How dare she tread in a man's world!
49er wrote:
I agree w/ you SD......she should have been at home breastfeeding her baby or barefoot in the kitchen preparing her husband's meal. How dare she tread in a man's world!
That's not what I'm implying at all. I don't understand how a pre-mature by a month, down syndrome kid can go home after 3 days as this article implies. Then she's 8 months pregnant and flying around in Texas.
[a href="vny!://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/382560.html"]vny!://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/382560.html[/a]
In Canada, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends women in their eighth-month avoid air travel that's more than one hour long.
[a href="vny!://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2001/12/13/travelpregnant_011213.html"]vny!://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2001/12/13/travelpregnant_011213.html[/a]
Michel wrote:
Meanwhile, European Union just decided to side, well not really with the US, but definitly against Russia on the Georgia question. China and the Shangai Cooperation Organisation (see it as ex stalinist countries practicing wild capitalism and in concurence with US, EU and Japan - hey does that stangely sounds like the position of Germany, Japan and Italy who were rivals of US, UK and France in 1914 and 1939 ?) has decided to side with Russia.
World War III has always been on it's way, it was just not too clear who would jump to the throat of who exactly, neither when. Now it's getting alarmingly clearer.
But it's OK Obama ans his liberals friends will save us by talking ad nauseam about hypocrits moralist parents with pregnant daughter... --------------
Everybody knows by now the next world war will just be over power and not against some 'idea'. The second the U.S. realizes they're has beens..... fun times ahead.
Powers:
EU (if they can stay together) (somewhere in the middle)
China (strengthened)
US (weakened)
Doesn't give a shit category:
Russia
Thorn in the side:
EU- Northern Africa/Africa
China- India
US- South America
.........Then she has the baby and 3 days later she's back on the job. I've never heard of a scenario where a mother goes back to work 3 days after she gave birth to a child.
This was her 5th birth!.......... and she looks like she's from strong stock.
If the media continues to harp on her pregnant unwed daughter why don't they look into when Obama's parents got married and his date of birth
Because... Obama isn't from a party that believes in no marriage before sex, abstinence and so on... Nobody cares if a Democrat comes out gay "mr. gay American" everyone finds it funny. Then when Mr. Anti-Gay is shown to be gay, it's haha look at the Republicans, hypocrites.
Same goes for any politician running on an anti-corruption platform *cough Stephen Harper cough* or to 'Change Washington', it's politics as usually because that's politics.
base on your logic all children follow their parents affiliation
no, not at all (although most I know do)
I'm saying if you grew up in a society that was radically different from the norm or perceived norm, that sets your views much more instead of some book you read in class. The book part can either confirm your beliefs or open up something new.
I'd have a different outlook on life if I was growing up in Milwaukee instead of St. Louis. Just like Michel and Quebec, you and San Fransisco. I think we are more representative of our societies and communities we grew up in more so then our parents teaching. Where do children spend the most time during the day? At school and around other people who could be from different walks of life or could be from all the same background.
so if the parent believes in and preaches abstinence but the child doesn't and practices the opposite..... the media should then crucifies the parent?
If the parent believes that they are in the 'right' and everyone else is in the 'wrong', then I don't see why not. When you consider yourself 'family values' person and preach that, you should practice it, no?
It's just funny to see Republicans take a Democratic view point of acceptance, when if it was a Democrat's daughter they'd be saying "see look at those liberals". That's my issue anyway.
It's just that if an alien from outer space was to drop onto us it would get the impression that this is the only major problem we are facing
haha. I don't think Aliens would be able to handle our antics. The alien would have to check into Alien rehab.
I don't have cable tv...so someone please give me a re-cap of the late night talk show jokes.
I heard one when I was out today...
The father of the baby is actually John Kerry..
I really don't see what the big deal is.
It's not like the daddy is Bill Clinton.
lol The media was talking about the father's facebook profile...
It says he's a proud"f*cking redneck" and "I don't want kids"
OOOOOOOPS. bwhaha lol hilarious.