Huckabee "misspoke"? Yeah, right!!

[bengangmo]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I was not aware that Portman was “celebrating” single motherhood. Was there some kind of a party? Is she a spokesperson for the "Single Mothers are the Best Mothers Association?

or by “celebrating” it, do you mean actually appear in public?

Or perhaps appearing without a large red letter “A” emblazoned on her clothing? or a tattoo?

Are you upset that she is not sufficiently ashamed?

Honestly, I don’t give two flying fucks about Ms Portman, her lifestyle, when, how where or why she has kids. If the woman came and hit me with a slimey fish I still wouldn’t recognise her.

What she does with her life, how she wants to live it, when she wants to have kids and with whom is her problem.

FYI - I am not christian, not in the slightest, not even a little bit.

I was not married in a church, nor according to my wife’s customs.

I don’t give a rat’s arse about church weddings. Marriage is nothing more or less than the commitment that two people make to each other - HOW you make that commitment is your problem.

The only thing I was suggesting (and yes, I agree given that Portman is engaged she is a poor example) is that being a single mother is not something that should be held up a positive, enriching, good life choice to make.

This is not to say that there aren’t many single mothers that aren’t doing an awesome job, or that sometimes, despite the best planning people get overtaken by circumstances - and also make a great life out of it.

Speaking in the general sense, raising a kid alone is something that takes a rather large amount of both financial and “personal” resources. Unless you are in the upper echelons of wealth to afford the necessary help to lighten your load it is “better” (in the general sense) to go into parenthood as a couple.

Naturally, someone with the status and income equivalent to Portman does have exactly the sorts of resources that make it better - HOWEVER, when single motherhood is held up as a good example to follow, there will be many that don’t have those sorts of resources - and then go into it with less than optimal results.

Just to be clear again, I DON’T subscribe to the idea that marriage is only something between man and woman that happens in a church.

I do subscribe to the idea that, if we can choose, all else being equal, kids belong with parents (plural) who are in a committed long term relationship.

Getting back to the point, recognising that particular segments of our society have a large proportion of single mothers (note I say “single” and not “unwed”) that need state assistance - and then seeing what can be done to address this problem (if indeed the figures are even an accurate representation) is something that we should be doing. We should not run from addressing it because “we can’t tell people to cross their legs” or “its inappropriate to tell people they should be in a relationship before having kids”

I hope this is clear enough.

[Dewey_Finn]

@bengangmo

The only thing I was suggesting (and yes, I agree given that Portman is engaged she is a poor example) is that being a single mother is not something that should be held up a positive, enriching, good life choice to make.

Who exactly is holding up single motherhood as a “positive, enriching, good life choice?”

[pseudotriton_ruber_ruber]

@bengangmo

Honestly, I don’t give two flying fucks …I hope this is clear enough.

You’re overthinking this.

No one seriously disputes that being rich is better than being poor for bringing up kids, nor that being happily married makes your day-care situation easier, or that having three new cars is better than having one old bicycle. But Huckabee is simply and utterly without logic appealing to the mouth-breathing in attacking a Hollywood darling–she’s a public figure so it’s permissable to attack her, but what’s the friggen point? It’s just to make Huckabee look good taking on licentious sex, glamour, liberals who spend money on their appearance, IOW, all the things the saltaduhearth mouthbreathers despise. If attacking kittens would do that trick for him, Huckabee would be strangling them by the dozen on FACE THE NATION.

[bengangmo]

Man…what a morass this has become…

It was suggested, that Huckabee was criticising Portman for being a “role model for single motherhood” (unless I am mistaken). And further that he was trying to imply I dun know what by highlighting the high rate of unwed / single mothers (no the two are not the same) in specific communities.

All I said, for all that I think the guy’s a jerk, in this instance he is correct - not in his example, but in his sentiment. I took the sentiment to be that kids belong in committed long term relationships (the parents not the kids ok? Before some smartarse says something).

IF there really is a larger proportion of kids being born to single, low income mums within specific communities it is ok to say so, and to see what can be done to highlight it. We should not let political correctness hold us back.

[bengangmo]

@pseudotriton_ruber_ruber

You’re overthinking this.

No one seriously disputes that being rich is better than being poor for bringing up kids, nor that being happily married makes your day-care situation easier, or that having three new cars is better than having one old bicycle. But Huckabee is simply and utterly without logic appealing to the mouth-breathing in attacking a Hollywood darling–she’s a public figure so it’s permissable to attack her, but what’s the friggen point? It’s just to make Huckabee look good taking on licentious sex, glamour, liberals who spend money on their appearance, IOW, all the things the saltaduhearth mouthbreathers despise. If attacking kittens would do that trick for him, Huckabee would be strangling them by the dozen on FACE THE NATION.

Well if you put it like that +:D

BUT, I think we should also be careful to recognise that there are / have been hollywood stars that hold out single parenthood as being a good thing. Which is great for them, they have the resources - but when they are also role models for those that don’t have the resources it can be a bad thing.

I think, although he did it poorly - he did also address a very real problem facing many societies - that of single, low income mothers, and when there is a greater prevalence of this with a specific, identifiable group, we should take action.

In essence - don’t dismiss the totality of what he says, just because it was wrapped up in an unpalatable package.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@bengangmo

BUT, I think we should also be careful to recognise that there are / have been hollywood stars that hold out single parenthood as being a good thing. Which is great for them, they have the resources - but when they are also role models for those that don’t have the resources it can be a bad thing.

I don’t doubt you, but I’d like to see an example of a hollywood star who has promoted single parenthood as being a “good thing”. That is, they have aspired to be role models for others, and encouraged single parenthood, even for those who do not have the resources of a hollywood star. Because then they’d be dumb.

The thing is, it seems that for those of Huckabee’s persuasion, they think that if someone appears in public, or does not don sackcloth and ashes, or is not suitably ashamed of themselves… that, by itself, means that they are “promoting single parenthood”. They think that if someone does not obviously and publicly FAIL, then by definition, they are promoting single parenthood.

[kaylasdad99]

@bengangmo

Man…what a morass this has become…

It was suggested, that Huckabee was criticising Portman for being a “role model for single motherhood” (unless I am mistaken). And further that he was trying to imply I dun know what by highlighting the high rate of unwed / single mothers (no the two are not the same) in specific communities.

All I said, for all that I think the guy’s a jerk, in this instance he is correct - not in his example, but in his sentiment. I took the sentiment to be that kids belong in committed long term relationships (the parents not the kids ok? Before some smartarse says something).

IF there really is a larger proportion of kids being born to single, low income mums within specific communities it is ok to say so, and to see what can be done to highlight it. We should not let political correctness hold us back.

Don’t have time to argue the point right now. On my way to work. But perhaps it’s worth asking if Huckabee was being a bit of a dick in using Ms. Portman’s public expression of her happiness about her upcoming baby as the trigger that set off his unsolicited sermon on the issue of single motherhood and the potential for attendant social problems.

[bengangmo]

@Euphonious_Polemic

That is, they have aspired to be role models for others, and encouraged single parenthood, even for those who do not have the resources of a hollywood star. Because then they’d be dumb.

To me the problem is though, they don’t have to “proclaim” themselves to be a role model. In fact, nobody does.

Purely because an example can be pointed to “oohhh look, single mum, she is very happy” that is enough. It’s not neccessarily the fault of the star, and they shouldn’t be blamed. It still remains however that they are by default a role model, whether they want to be or not.

[bengangmo]

@kaylasdad99

Don’t have time to argue the point right now. On my way to work. But perhaps it’s worth asking if Huckabee was being a bit of a dick in using Ms. Portman’s public expression of her happiness about her upcoming baby as the trigger that set off his unsolicited sermon on the issue of single motherhood and the potential for attendant social problems.

I don’t doubt he was being a dick. And I don’t want to defend him.

But his dickishness does not detract from the basic message that low income, single mums is a very real social issue, one that needs to be addressed. Low income single mums DO consume more in state help. This is something that I support, as after all, they NEED more help. However if we could address the situation such that they didn’t need that help in the first place - isn’t it a better (and probably cheaper) outcome?

[Little_Nemo]

So how was Natalie Portman relevant? She’s not a low income mother and she’s not going to be collecting welfare for her child. Why does Huckabee feel her pregnancy has anything to say on the subject of single mothers collecting welfare?

The only connection is that Portman is an unmarried woman who is pregnant. So Huckabee, by bringing her into his statment, was making the de facto claim that unmarried women being pregnant is a problem. And that’s a moral issue not an economic issue - there’s no government involvement there.

It’s one thing for Huckabee to say “we have a right to decide how government money is spent and who receives it.” But what he was saying was “we have a right to impose our moral standards on other people and condemn people who do things we don’t like.”

[bengangmo]

@Little_Nemo

So how was Natalie Portman relevant? She’s not a low income mother and she’s not going to be collecting welfare for her child. Why does Huckabee feel her pregnancy has anything to say on the subject of single mothers collecting welfare?

The only connection is that Portman is an unmarried woman who is pregnant. So Huckabee, by bringing her into his statment, was making the de facto claim that unmarried women being pregnant is a problem. And that’s a moral issue not an economic issue - there’s no government involvement there.

It’s one thing for Huckabee to say “we have a right to decide how government money is spent and who receives it.” But what he was saying was “we have a right to impose our moral standards on other people and condemn people who do things we don’t like.”

I have very little idea what he meant, what he intended or what it was accepted to mean.

If his problem was “she is not married” he can indeed put it in his pipe and smoke it.

If he was trying to point out (which is probably doubtful) that care must be taken when protraying “single” (yes I know she’s not single - but that’s part of what his initial comments were) mothers from hollywood lest they be taken as role models for those that don’t have the same level of resources then it was possibly a fair comment to make.

Moving away from the idea of whether or not Portman is single, attached or otherwise, in the general sense, isn’t it a good idea that we take care how “single” motherhood is portrayed in the media?

[bengangmo]

@Little_Nemo

The only connection is that Portman is an unmarried woman who is pregnant. So Huckabee, by bringing her into his statment, was making the de facto claim that unmarried women being pregnant is a problem. And that’s a moral issue not an economic issue - there’s no government involvement there.

"

What if you changed “unwed” to “single” though?

Is it still a case of imposing moral standards or would it become a genuine case of an issue that the government should be involved in?

Not to the state of in anyone outlawing etc, but at least in recognising that low income single mums is not a good thing and seeing what sort of education can be done to reduce it?

[Little_Nemo]

How was she being “portrayed”? Natalie Portman is a real person not a fictional character. She appeared at the Academy Awards ceremony to accept an award. And she’s pregnant.

That’s it. Nobody wrote a script. Nobody was advocating single parenthood.

I’m not sure what Huckabee supposedly wanted. We’ve ruled out abortion. Is Portman supposed to go into seclusion until she delivers her child?

And it doesn’t matter if you call it unmarried, unwed, single, living in sin, or scarlet womanhood - it simply is not our concern if Natalie Portman is pregnant or not.

[Sacrilegium]

@Little_Nemo

it simply is not our concern if Natalie Portman is pregnant or not.

Oh, but it is! If we let her run around being pregnant out of wedlock, that’s another thing God is going to punish our country for. The PoA is under attack, public displays of faith are under attack, gays want to get married, straights don’t and now Natalie Portman doesn’t have the good sense to be ashamed of herself for her own choices.

And you wonder why we get attacked by terrorists, our economy is in the garbage, we have floods and hurricanes and Snooki.

Don’t say Huckabee didn’t warn you.

[MovieMogul]

@bengangmo

Well if you put it like that +:D

BUT, I think we should also be careful to recognise that there are / have been hollywood stars that hold out single parenthood as being a good thing. Which is great for them, they have the resources - but when they are also role models for those that don’t have the resources it can be a bad thing.

I think, although he did it poorly - he did also address a very real problem facing many societies - that of single, low income mothers, and when there is a greater prevalence of this with a specific, identifiable group, we should take action.

In essence - don’t dismiss the totality of what he says, just because it was wrapped up in an unpalatable package.

If he really was all that concerned about high-profile single mothers being poor role models, where was all his indignation when Bristol Palin got knocked up? With all his Republicans fawning all over her about how “brave” she was to make the right “choice”, she certainly is much closer to fitting the mold of a young girl (not adult professional) with no resources making poor decisions being held up as a standard of positive behavior.

But he was quiet. Why? Because he doesn’t care nearly as much about single motherhood as he does about making points about hair-trigger social issues that are red meat to his base. Does he have a point? Maybe, but it’s so buried under cynicism, hypocrisy, and partisan politics that it’s rendered largely moot.

[carnivorousplant]

@ArchiveGuy

Because he doesn’t care nearly as much about single motherhood as he does about making points about hair-trigger social issues that are red meat to his base. Does he have a point? Maybe, but it’s so buried under cynicism, hypocrisy, and partisan politics that it’s rendered largely moot.

Word.

[BigT]

@carnivorousplant

Word.

And that’s what I meant by “he had me fooled.” I believed he was sincere before.

Further revelations may make me take back my assessment of his governorship. Perhaps you are right, CP.

[Little_Nemo]

I don’t agree with Huckabee’s politics but I used to respect him as a person.

Although if he’s able to do something about Snooki…

[saoirse]

@ArchiveGuy

If he really was all that concerned about high-profile single mothers being poor role models, where was all his indignation when Bristol Palin got knocked up? With all his Republicans fawning all over her about how “brave” she was to make the right “choice”, she certainly is much closer to fitting the mold of a young girl (not adult professional) with no resources making poor decisions being held up as a standard of positive behavior.

I don’t think there’s any question that he was really talking about Bristol Palin, only obliquely. He and Bristol’s mom are about to enter the Conservative Evangelical Thunderdome.

[Little_Nemo]

@saoirse

I don’t think there’s any question that he was really talking about Bristol Palin, only obliquely. He and Bristol’s mom are about to enter the Conservative Evangelical Thunderdome.

I don’t think that was Huckabee’s intent. It’s one thing to complain about rich Hollywood liberals and black and hispanic welfare cheats. The point is to blame things on “them”. But Sarah? She’s one of “us”.