# Palins Divorce **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 1, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000 "2009-08-01T20:54:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/201 "2009-08-08T01:52:07Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_Dunlop](#): > > Palin gets a ton of coverage because she’s crazy stupid and it’s fun to laugh at her. And because a whole bunch of people defended her idiocy. One member of this board kept talking about how incredibly smart she is, and how she’s an energy _expert_ and a brilliant choice for McCain, so the only way anyone could be against her is if they’re haters. I follow baseball and there was this guy on a board where I hang out. If a female poster said anything good about Grady Sizemore (who is considered something of a hottie) and/or said anything bad about one of the players who is not considered hottie material, this guy would say, “You’re only saying that because you’re so shallow.” If we objected to that, it was proof to him that he was right. It’s the same thing here. Any comment on Palin’s suitability for national office serves as proof that the person is being unfair. According to this logic, the only fair thing to say about Palin is that she’s super. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/202 "2009-08-08T05:40:15Z")
> [@Algorithm](#): > > Yes, the Democrats were so stunned and flabbergasted by Palin’s appearance on the national scene that they only won by a margin of 192 electoral votes. I’m sure they are quaking in their boots at the prospect of another candidate emulating that clearly effective strategy. Just because she’s an idiot, doesn’t mean that Dems weren’t caught flat-footed. 'Cause they were. Fortunately, they were ambushed by a vicious wolf-killing ant. (see Monty Python, if confused) Next time, perhaps not so lucky. > [@Marley23](#): > > It’s best not to attribute too much depth to political machinations. Yes, they’re frequently lying and bullshitting, but the lies are usually not that secretive. Sarah Palin really believes she can be president… It may be terrifying to admit, but she’s the reality. Oh, I don’t doubt for a second that Palin is dead serious in her own regard. What I’m thinking is that there are people out there smart enough to hide behind the media orgy that is Palin, and that few people are really looking for them, as the majority sieze the low-hanging fruit. > [@jayjay](#): > > I completely understand this viewpoint. It’s very seductive. “A major political party couldn’t possibly be THIS STUPID…it must be a smokescreen!” Of course it can be… And it’s not my position that Palin is deliberate. Only that others may be making hay whilst everyone’s diverted. > [@Fuzzy\_Dunlop](#): > > I don`t say this to intentionally be rude but I think your problem is that you don’t watch the press and politically minded people closely enough. Since Obama’s inauguration, a whole bunch of potential candidates have been talked about and proven themselves awful. No offense taken. No, I don’t normally obsess about politics, but I _do_ read the political section fairly regularly. It’s usually full of salacious crap about people whom don’t much matter, or by more salacious crap about people whom ought to be holding themselves above the fray. I knew about Jindal - Never believed he was viable as a potential candidate. Huntsman was a smart move on Obama’s part - Both in getting a good ambasador, and in undermining a potential foe. Sanford and Ensign never impressed me all that much. Pawlenty? Dunno. Romeny? Real potential there, and I hear damned little about him these days. What’s he up to? I bet a lot of the resources wasted on Palin could be turned to better purpose aimed at Romney, and people like him. Who else? The press, by-and-large, isn’t exactly beating the bushes looking for other potentials. > [@](#): > > Palin gets a ton of coverage because she’s crazy stupid and it’s fun to laugh at her. Hmmm. Maybe it’s because I find it incredibly tawdry and sad that so much effort has been thrown down a rathole demonizing and laughing at a woman who should already long ago become a footnote. I know the press needs to make money, and I know it’s fun kicking a cripple - If you’re a sadistic bastard. I think the press\* should be doing better things with their time. I frankly _don’t_ think the press have done a good enough job looking at, and for, potential GOP candidates. Oh, some few have, but the mass? Not so much, IMO. It shouldn’t take a specialist to be familiar with the guys hiding in the tall grass - The press should be cutting that grass, and showing us who else might be out there. I’m laying my wager now (One six-pack virtual beer - your choice of brand) that there’s gonna be a strongly-performing ‘surprise’ candidate in 2012, and that the press _could_ have seen him or her coming, if they’d bothered to look. \*And when I say “press” I mean bloggers, too. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/203 "2009-08-08T05:49:36Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > Just because she’s an idiot, doesn’t mean that Dems weren’t caught flat-footed. Actually, that’s WHY we were caught flat-footed. We never guessed that McCain, a fellow we generally respected, even if we didn’t agree with, would choose such a MANIFEST MORON WITH MORE SKELETONS IN HER CLOSET THAN THE BURR OAK CEMETERY. We made the mistake to believe the Republicans were not as STUPID as they turned out to be. ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_Dunlop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/848f3c/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_Dunlop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_Dunlop)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/204 "2009-08-08T13:52:05Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > I frankly _don’t_ think the press have done a good enough job looking at, and for, potential GOP candidates. Oh, some few have, but the mass? Not so much, IMO. It shouldn’t take a specialist to be familiar with the guys hiding in the tall grass - The press should be cutting that grass, and showing us who else might be out there. See this is where I really disagree with you. It’s much too early for most people to be looking for candidates for 2012. The right people are talking and thinking about it. Most people - not so much. There’s more than enough to report on that’s more pressing. > [@Tranquilis](#): > > I’m laying my wager now (One six-pack virtual beer - your choice of brand) that there’s gonna be a strongly-performing ‘surprise’ candidate in 2012, and that the press _could_ have seen him or her coming, if they’d bothered to look. I’ll take that bet. It’s certainly not impossible. But I don`t think anyone is out there. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/205 "2009-08-08T14:48:31Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Completely misinterpreting what I say is not an “olive branch”. > > I do not believe that what a Democrat does justifies what a Republican does. I do not use a double standard. No, your problem is that whenever a Republican is accused of something, anything, your response is to find a Democrat who did something similar. If the Democrat wasn’t roasted by us liberals for that, then that somehow makes what the Republican did just hunky-dory. You don’t address the issue, you just attack others for daring to hold the Republican accountable for his actions. You accuse others of blind partisanship, but ignore it when you, yourself, do it. If you’d bothered to read MY post, you might’ve realized that was what I was saying. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/206 "2009-08-08T15:40:28Z")
> [@Lightnin](#): > > No, your problem is that whenever a Republican is accused of something, anything, your response is to find a Democrat who did something similar. If the Democrat wasn’t roasted by us liberals for that, then that somehow makes what the Republican did just hunky-dory. Close. Rather than making the Pubbie’s actions hunky-dory, it simply means that we aren’t permitted to make a federal case out of it unless we also made a federal case out of the Democrat doing it. To which I say: _pffft_. If Mr. Regards wishes to excoriate a Dem for the similar incident, he’s free to do so. Preferably at the time that it actually happened. If he wishes to accuse anybody of double standards/hypocrisy, it would be a good strategy for him to make note of the liberals defending the Dem he excoriated. If he doesn’t find that leg- and spadework worth his time, he can pound sand now, AFAIAC. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/207 "2009-08-08T16:33:05Z")
> [@treis](#): > > All you can do is make vague insinuations about unspecified people. Making a direct accusation against a specific poster seems to be beyond your abilities. OK, here’s my first direct accusation: you didn’t answer my question. You posted an attack on me instead of answering what I asked. The last time I took the time to compile five or six links demonstrating a particular poster’s egregious wrongs, the general response was, “Hey, get a life. Don’t you have anything better to do than compile lists of grievances?” ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/208 "2009-08-08T17:19:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK, here’s my first direct accusation: you didn’t answer my question. Forgive me if I’ve mssed it, but you never answered my question from the beginning of the thread. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2009, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/209 "2009-08-08T17:48:30Z")
Sorry, not the beginning of the thread, but here: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11411934&postcount=146](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11411934&postcount=146). ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/210 "2009-08-09T04:01:38Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK, here’s my first direct accusation: you didn’t answer my question. You posted an attack on me instead of answering what I asked. No, I did answer your question. You asked whether you could accuse others of blind partisanship. I answered that no, you can’t because in my experience you don’t make direct accusations. > [@Bricker](#): > > The last time I took the time to compile five or six links demonstrating a particular poster’s egregious wrongs, the general response was, “Hey, get a life. Don’t you have anything better to do than compile lists of grievances?” Link? (See, you’re already doing it again). ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_Dunlop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/848f3c/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_Dunlop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_Dunlop)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/211 "2009-08-09T22:09:00Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > I knew about Jindal - Never believed he was viable as a potential candidate. Huntsman was a smart move on Obama’s part - Both in getting a good ambasador, and in undermining a potential foe. Sanford and Ensign never impressed me all that much. Pawlenty? Dunno. Romeny? Real potential there, and I hear damned little about him these days. What’s he up to? I bet a lot of the resources wasted on Palin could be turned to better purpose aimed at Romney, and people like him. Who else? The press, by-and-large, isn’t exactly beating the bushes looking for other potentials. FYI - [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25923.html](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25923.html) [QUOTE=Ken Vogel for Politico] While hundreds of millions of dollars are spent in battles over President Barack Obama’s ambitious legislative agenda in Washington, underneath the radar, some of the Republican Party’s next best hopes are laying the groundwork for the bid to replace him — or at least secure their place in the GOP hierarchy. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/212 "2009-08-09T22:38:53Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > I knew about Jindal - Never believed he was viable as a potential candidate. Jindal is a very interesting minority candidate because he doesn’t have the support of his own minority. Indian-Americans are among the most Democratic minority group after African-Americans and Jews; we voted 4 to 1 for Kerry over Bush, for example. Moreover, Jindal is a Catholic convert, and took a Anglicized nickname, which makes him suspect to a lot of Indians (myself included, as I’ve discussed here before). Since Indian-American support is hardly going to make or break his election hopes, their support isn’t that important in terms of votes, but given the relative affluence (and, therefore, influence) of Indian Americans, he’ll have to do something to court them - most likely buck his party on Middle Eastern/Pakistan policy. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/213 "2009-08-09T23:10:54Z")
Well, Bricker, it WAS a bullshit question. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/214 "2009-08-10T01:13:11Z")
> [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > Now that it’s been pointed out to me, we have two dates: the birthdays of Trig (4/17/08) and Tripp (12/29/08) Palin, which are only 8 1/2 months apart. So, I think it’s safe to move this from unlikely to really freakin’ unlikely. Good enough for me. And thanks everybody who responded. Isn’t it also more common for children with Downs Syndrome to be born to older woman? So I would think Sarah would be more likely to have a Downs child than Bristol. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/215 "2009-08-10T01:33:14Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Isn’t it also more common for children with Downs Syndrome to be born to older woman? So I would think Sarah would be more likely to have a Downs child than Bristol. Yes, but it’s not as though younger women _can’t_ have Down’s children. It’s just less likely. Same holds true for almost any birth defect, in fact; AFAIK, there are no risks that decrease with the age of the mother. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/216 "2009-08-10T02:07:56Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Yes, but it’s not as though younger women _can’t_ have Down’s children. It’s just less likely. Same holds true for almost any birth defect, in fact; AFAIK, there are no risks that decrease with the age of the mother. I know – I’m just saying that’s just one argument that Trig is more likely to be Sarah’s son. (I, for one, think the rumors that he’s not are nonsense) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/217 "2009-08-10T02:19:52Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > I know – I’m just saying that’s just one argument that Trig is more likely to be Sarah’s son. (I, for one, think the rumors that he’s not are nonsense) Well, yes, especially given the timeline **Do Not Taunt** provided. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/218 "2009-08-10T16:55:54Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Sorry, not the beginning of the thread, but here: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11411934&postcount=146](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11411934&postcount=146). > [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > I think many of us questioned whether anyone would make a decision to fly from Texas to Alaska while leaking amniotic fluid, and why. > > Does that sound like a reasonable thing to do? I don’t know; I’m not a doctor. I can say that it sounds understandable to want to get to YOUR doctor, who you trust. I don’t recall seeing anything from a licensed physician saying that it’s completely unreasonable. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/219 "2009-08-10T17:01:53Z")
**Dr J** is a physician on this board who said it was completely irresponsible. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000/220 "2009-08-10T17:04:42Z")
She knew the baby was going to be born with a developmental disability, and she’s pro life. A little bit of willful risk on her part? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palins-divorce/505000.md?page=12)