Well stated!
No, you’re supposed to use giant text and different fonts and all caps when agreeing w/that.
I thought I heard they were pulled from his Facebook account. Heh-heh…surprise!
Why do you think we would have “been all over that?” I doubt anyone even would have noticed. I certainly wouldbn’t have cared.
Having said that, there was no reason for him to be there greeting McCain at all. The whole thing was a designed photo-op. They could have designed it however they wanted.
“Gym rat.”
Dude, W was hot back in the day.
Of course that was before his looks were ravaged by booze and drugs.
There is a sort of “only Nixon could go to China” feel to it. As an apparent liberal, I’m simply glad to see that we’re finally legitimizing unsafe sex and unrepentant teenage knockuppery.
Hey, now, if she was that big a hypocrite, her daughter would be getting an abortion, or not being pregnant at all because of effective birth control education provided behind closed doors.
Nah, that’s for people who work out at the gym way to much. I’d suggest “court rat” but that seems to be for tennis.
If she wasn’t a hypocrite, she would have taught her daughter how to be abstinent.
It isn’t hypocritical that Palin, a strong advocate of abstinent programs has a pregnant teen aged daughter. It’s entirely possible that despite the evidence growing in front of her, the evidence of national studies on abstinent programs, Palin’s merely an idiot.
yeah!!!1one
Actually I didn’t change the font, just made it bigger
Cripes.
Does getting pregnant as a teen make someone immoral or shameful? No.
Does being the parent of a pregnant teen make someone a bad parent, or a hypocrite, if they preach abstinance? No.
Is a candidate’s family, within reason, a legitimate political issue? No.
But there is hefty irony here, and methinks the right protests far too much about the scrutiny coming their way on this issue, poorly worded, poorly thought-out, and off-the-mark though most of it may be.
The fact is, the Republican party has made legislating specific “family values” central to its platform for years. Marginalizing homosexuals, imposing christian theology on science education, turning the legitimate debate over when a human embryo reasonably can be considered a human being into a shouting match over “murdering babies,” denying vital financial aid to AIDS-stricken countries if they refuse to push abstinance over effective contraception programs, etc.
The party of small government is nothing of the kind. It is big brother exemplified, and it has energized its farthest-right base for years by vilifying any family unit (pregant teen, unwed parents in stable relationships, gay couples, etc.) that doesn’t fit the “two heterosexual married christian parents” mold of their ideal.
Having one of the staunchest voices of social conservatism emerge as a VP candidate just as her own daughter’s unwed teen pregnancy is announced can’t be called irrelevant because it highlights the sheer wrongheadedness of certain central Republican tenets.
Abstinence education does not prevent pregnancy any more than it helps curb the spread of STDs, and it leaves teens poorly educated about thier own sexual health.
Is Sarah Palin a good parent? I don’t know, I don’t care, and I’m not making up my mind in this election based on that question.
Is her current family circumstance a reminder of why her own position on sexual education represents bad public policy?
I think so.
I’m envisioning t-shirts featuring aerial maps of Wasilla emblazoned with the slogan “There’s a village missing its idiot”.
Exactly. This is an example of politicians wanting things both ways; discussion of the pregnancy in the media is inappropriate and off-limits, but a photo-op with the clean-cut smiling participants on full display is okey-dokey. They want all of the pluses and none of the minuses.
You’ll still be able to keep up with him. Just watch Fox, Saturdays, 8PM Eastern and Pacific, 7PM Central and Mountain.
I approve of this message.
Hey, I’m with you that abstenance only = makes no sense.
But I ask you this: doesn’t any politician having a pregnant teen daughter = a “reminder that [their chosen policy on sexual education] represents bad public policy”? Even if the policy at issue was one that we would both approve of?
Say a liberal politician believed in full, frank discussion of sexual health, and the ready availability of birth control for teens (which I personally believe to be the correct policy). Then their teen daughter gets knocked up.
Does that mean that their policy has been thus proven wrong? I just don’t see it.
I admired John McCain for his reaction to the John Edwards scandal. And I admire Obama for his reaction to Palin scandal. I wish more people had the class that both men have exhibited during this campaign.
Unfortunately a lot of people just can’t resist the opportunity to sink to the depths of Bill O’Reilly and crow about the other side’s misfortune. What a shame.
Wasilla may publish them themselves, except they weren’t too deeply in debt.
If only Charlie Chaplin could have lived to see this day. (Meanwhile Warren Jeffs cables “Why is it when I do it I get arrested? I can learn to play hockey!”)