She was not only pregnant but really, really tired when she was done.
:smack: I type faster than I think. But then again, I’m not the daughter of one of the leader’s the Republican party, so it could be worse.
So the first three points were so unconvincing to even yourself that you had to tack on rumors and a completely hypothetical charge of “well I’m sure she’s done other wrong things…” ?
Fox is going to put her in the White House, just watch. She’s good for ratings, the more outrageously stupid, the higher the ratings. Advertising rates go up, as do profits. There’s gold in fanning those flames for the 24hr news outlets. And they are the loudest voices in American politics, it seems to me. Be afraid.
Don’t feel bad. I was around and following the election, and I have no recollection of the comment at all until I started reading about it here again.
It’s pretty obvious from the stuff she’s doing in public that Willow’s a punk-ass teenager who probably needs a good smacking. While my high school days are ten years in the past, it’s not a stretch to remember that what adults knew about kids like her and what they were actually doing was very different.
Exactly. She’s 16. 16 year old kids have poor impulse control, and have little or no idea (or interest in) how their comments will “play” in the media.
There are plenty of things to go after the Palins over. Willow’s language isn’t one of them.
That’s pretty weak. The first three points were actual evidence of your argument, and the last two were just “I’m pretty sure she’s doing other stuff that we don’t know about.” There isn’t a person in the world you couldn’t say the same for.
But yeah, I agree that Palin is a stupid lying quitter. Her misstatements are not just because her tongue slipped, but are due to her ignorance.
Fine. Ignore the last two. My point is that if Sarah Palin ever runs for office again, Willow’s antics are going to be a huge problem for her. And it’s going to be all Sarah’s fault for shoving her daughter into the limelight to begin with.
Early 2008 was a much happier time. I hadn’t heard of Sarah Palin then.
No, it won’t. Nothing is ever Sarah’s fault. Her worldview doesn’t allow anything to be her fault.
I agree hypocrisy can easily be demonstrated against Palin… but not by this incident.
Her purpose in offering up the list of gaffes is not to attack Obama for them, but to defend herself against the charge that making such gaffes is signifcant. Her argument is, in essence, “You don’t consider these gaffes to define the underlying intelligence of the speaker, so mine shouldn’t be considered to do that either.”
Wow. That was a really inspiring Thanksgiving message.
Does anyone believe that Obama thinks there are 57 states?
Sarah is not responsible for things her teenage daughter says. If we all were responsible for things our teenager said, it would be a scary world. But the general behavior of her kids does tell us a bit about how they were raised.
Does Sarah know anything about Korea? If she did not, it would make sense because of her lack of curiosity and disinterest in things that don’t make her richer or more famous. She quit as Governor of Alaska for crying out loud. How can that be OK?
The issue isn’t Willow’s language. It is Palin’s lying about Willow’s reasons for using that language.
Of course not.
Palin contends that her slip of saying NORTH Korea is our ally is the same as Obama’s saying there are 57 states.
You may believe, or disbelieve, her explanation Neiher one makes her a hypocrite.
(Plenty of other things, unmentioned in this thread, do, however.)
I wish you were wrong about that but I’m afraid you are exactly correct. My mother always said “the masses are asses”.
Even aside from that, it’s bad enough that she’s defending Willow’s comments. If your kid calls the teacher a motherfucker, you don’t respond by saying that the teacher should stop being such a motherfucker. Willow’s comments were wrong and she should be clear and unequivocal about that. Anything anyone said to provoke her is a separate issue and doesn’t mitigate her words at all.
It goes back to a larger issue I have with Palin. Her primary stated qualification for public office is that she’s such a great mother. But let’s tally it up: Track supposedly had some legal and perhaps drug issues before he joined the Army. (Nothing concrete.) Bristol was a wild child who got knocked up in her teens. Willow is turning out to be a peach. She chose to fly to Alaska with prematurely ruptured membranes rather than being checked out by a doctor in Texas before having Trigg. She constantly parades her family in front of the media and then whines when people talk about them. She uses them to shield herself from criticism–I remember one instance where she was appearing at a hockey game and they were afraid people were going to boo her, so she took (I think) Piper out on the ice with her. I’m sure I’m missing some prime examples.
I know we don’t like to say this about people, but…she’s not a good mother. In fact, she’s a pretty shitty mother. Just cranking out a bunch of kids doesn’t make you a good mother; you also have to show some evidence that you’ve raised them to be good people and productive members of society. And of course, good parents can still turn out troubled kids. But it’s hard to look at her overall record and come to the conclusion that she’s especially talented in the child-rearing department.
And certainly, she’s not the only politician who’s a lousy parent. But very few base their public persona so entirely on their parenthood as Palin does. I feel vaguely sexist making this argument, since I’m sure women are more likely to be judged by their motherhood than men by their fatherhood, but there are plenty of women in politics who don’t play up their motherhood the way Palin does.
Am I off-base here?
Palin has again demonstrated that she can be an attack dog, but can she say anything positive about her oppents? St. Ronald of Reagan, The Best President Ever In The History of Governance Now and Forevermore[sup]1[/sup] was a master at making friends even of his political opponents. Did Ronbo ever say anything as nasty about an opponent as Palin’s email about Obama? Ronnie usually waved off personal attacks with self-deprecating “aw shucks” humor. Yes, Reagan could go on the attack when he needed to (and his people even when they didn’t need to), but it was not his (or their) whole shtick.
Palin’s complaint is childish, and not at all presidential. Someone with that attitude needs to repeat kindergarten, not run for the most powerful office in the country.
[sup]1[/sup] At least, according to my conservative friends, who seem to ignore FDR, Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, etc.
I find it most amusing that she claims out of one side of her mouth that she and her family “can take it” because they “have thick skin”, while out of the other side of her mouth, acting like a whiny, defensive teenager. “I know you are, but what am I?” She’s just so fucking immature.