Written by Ebony Jones on Wednesday, 03 September 2008
Well, well, well. Sarah Palin the epitome of convervative motherhood, the perfect example of middle class America according to the right wing pundits and talking heads has a daughter who is an unwed mother to be and a boozer. How republican of her.
It should be pretty clear to everyone by now that McCain is an impulsive idiot who didn't vet his VP pick at all. It shouldn't be this easy for such a small potatoes blog such as this to get our hot little hands on such salacious gossip about the Palin family. The Palins are a trainwreck. I hope they stay on and steamroll right on thru McCain's campaign. Toot toot!
Anyhoo, back to the dirt.
More pics of Bristol underage drinking and being proud enough of it to pose for pics. Classy!
I especially like the shot of her and dude with all of the guns. Real classy!
These are the people they want in the Whitehouse. The people that will represent the United States to the rest of the world. I guess they want to prove the world right when they say that Americans are a bunch of loud mouthed backwater hicks.
I know I will get tons of email and comments whining about how the kids are off limits, and everone's kids experiment, blah blah blah. Yeah right. If this were Biden's or Obama's kids these pics would be in 24 hour rotation on Fox. The right is just mad because the Obamas are squeaky clean. The Obamas are the American dream. They are classy. They actually LIVE a moral life instead of just talking about it.
The Obamas don't need to thump bibles and give lip service about being pro-life and abstinence and all of that, because their daughters aren't running around with self proclaimed rednecks swilling booze and getting knocked up. If this is what the right holds up as an example of what a good mother produces then we are all doomed.
Grab your popcorn everyone, it's just begun. Remember we aren't even at the 1 week mark yet for Palin. More is sure to come.
Like you weren't drinking when you were a teenager. Liberals need to get over their double standards, particularly the ones about "it's ok for welfare mothers to keep having babies but a conservative politicians daughter!? Oh no!" It happens, get over it.
The difference Daniel is that Liberals don't preach about 'family values' or try to shove them down everyone else's throat. This is Conservative Right Wing Hypocrasy at it's finest. If this was a Democrat's daughter, rest assured, the conservative propaganda machine would be touting it as why liberals are the anti-Christ and that America has gone to hell in a handbasket because of them.
The reason liberals don't preach about values is because their whole platform is all about getting rid of "outdated" things like that and focusing more on how much you can get away with. I beleive in "practice what you preach" but if you don't preach anything, you don't have to practice anything. And that's exactly how liberals are able to avoid "hypocrisy."
anyway, it's not hypocrisy for a mother to preach one thing and for a legal-consent-aged daughter to practice exactly what liberalism fights for her to be able to do. A mother is NOT her daughter. I'm not saying i support Palin or anything like that, but really, it's hard for anyone to appear as a hypocrite when they just sit around and tell everyone that anything they do is okay because right and wrong is all just relative.
r u kidding me what the hell does sarah palins daughter have to do with sarah palin as a vp....nothing. u filthy liberals cant find any dirt on her so u go to her daughters......how bout obama doing cocaine when he was 17 why dont u talk about that.....oooo because that would mean im racist for bringin it up. so shutup liberal and get a life
Whether any of us drank as teenagers is beside the point. The point is that the man running for President of the U.S. chose a person to be his VP that has a daughter that is drinking underage and got pregnant. That shows that McCain did a terrible job vetting and has bad judgment, something do so great in a President and that Palin doesn't practice what she preaches, her abstinence only approach to sex ed. didn't work and who knows what else is going to come out about them??????
look, parents can only do so much, by the time a kid is 15 or older their generallly making their own decisions. The behavior of someone in their mid to late teen is not a reflection on the parent, REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION!!!
Some of the biggest idiots I know (exibiting similar and worse behavior) have been brought up by some of the greatest people I have ever met, and it is not a result of lack of effort by the parents.
So stop using the behavior of a fairly typical teenage girl as an indication of someones abillity to lead the country. I grew up in a rural area and I can tell you the scenes depicted in these pictures are common as dirt, its just that we now have "wonderful" networking sites like facebook and myspace that allow everyone and their brother to access the photos.
Moral of the story leave Palin's daughter out of it, there's plenty of other negative information out on the net besides her daughter's behavior that you can mindlessly obsorb and feel good about.
If a tiny little blog can dredge up pictures like these then it means there are probably alot more out there. Which leads me to conclude that Palin has no clue what her daughter is up to.
If she can't run her family properly then how can you expect her to run a nation properly if the president becomes incapacitated?
I don't see how that doesnt matter. Most (nearly all) teens drink. I think it would be weirder if she didnt drink.
And you can only blame Palin so much for the teen pregnancy, she trusted her daughter with the responsibility of taking care of herself and she messed up and got knocked up. Hardly palin's fault
I am in no way a Mccain/Palin supporter but I don't see why this should be harmful in anyway. This is just the democrats trying to pussy-foot the real issues as republicrats often(ALWAYS) do.
I didn't drink when I was a teenager. And I don't drink now that I am 22. I know PLENTY of kids that didn't drink then. And no, I didn't have strict parents, my mother said I could choose between drinking with her consent and supervision, or not drinking at all, and I made the wise choice of not drinking. Kids only drink nowadays because they think it is ok, peer pressure, and they're stupid. Palin's daughter is obviously one of the stupid ones.
I agree, abstinence only education is a pipe dream. Obama has a wife who says "America is a down-right mean country" and "for the first time in my adult life I'm proud of my country" and she's "off limits"? He's friends with William Ayers, yet it's ok. His pastor hates the United States, but don't judge him based on that. Drop the double standard folks. If Obama really endorsed change, he wouldn't have picked a running mate who'd been in office since he was 10!
Hang on, hang on. Double standards? Talk about sweeping generalizations, taking quotes out of context, and making jokes to attempt to destroy credibility of Obama. Let's focus on the real issue here of Palin before we address your comments about Obama.
It is obvious that McCain has done a god awful job of vetting before offering Palin the ticket. Not only is she a nobody with less political experience than Obama, she can't even prove that any of her policies have any practical application to teenagers and young adults of today. Abstinence only education? Strict enforcement of alcohol laws? Yea right. You can bring up all the nonsense of teenagers having the right to experiment and such and that it's not Palin's fault; however, this is moot when judging the applicability of her politics.
@Daniel-
Getting to your massive generalizations...No we don't condone people on welfare abusing the system, most liberals agree that there need to be fundamental changes made. Way to use Michelle Obama quotes completely out of context - if I started spouting off McCain quotes without background info, I would make him seem like a nutcase. Friends with William Ayers doesn't mean much unless you can prove that they have jolly good times together. Ayers donated to the Obama campaign, they served together and he has worked to reform his life for the better. Regarding your comment about Pastor Wright, Obama is no longer a member of the church. Just because a member of a higher authority says something does not mean the people within the Church agree with it. Many things Bush has said people don't necessarily agree with. Likewise, statements made by employers, teachers, professors, parents, and the like, which you agree to voluntarily place yourself in association with, do not speak at all about your personal ideologies.
I hope next time you post you put a little more thought into your dim-witted insights.
Well, I just finished up those teenage years recently, and I can say I never drank through my years in high school and the first half of college. (Haven't done the second half yet )
It doesn't look particularly good for someone expected to help lead the free world remain lax in her own morals when trying to win over everyone else.
So yes, while many kids do drink underage, it's very, very rarely openly accepted. It has no place to be so closely linked with our elected leaders. Remember, we all wanted "to have a beer with" Bush, and that didn't turn out to well for our current results. Let's not have a similar regard for this election too!
I have absolutely no intention and will not vote for McCain/Palin. The choice to make Palin his running mate speaks volumes about McCain's fit as POTUS.
That being said, however, the vitriol and venom that is being aimed at Palin's family is absurd. Michelle Obama has chosen to insert herself in the political conversation. Barack and Michelle chose to bring their family to the forefront of the discussion. They made their family a cornerstone of their campaign and for good reason: the family is strong, well behaved and impressive. However, had the Obama's chosen to shield their family and request that the media AND the public respect the privacy afforded them, it would be a reasonable request. As an educated and civilized society, we would expect each other to understand that at the ages at the Obama's children are, they will make mistakes, mistakes that cannot be scrutinized by the collective "parenting" on which the opposition claims to have a corner. I would expect that gaffes for children are taken out of context and cherry-picking photos that show them only in the light that supports the oppositions view is called propaganda and should be labeled as such.
You, madame, are a propagandist. And while you may argue that so is the opposition, you debase yourself to being just as backward thinking, underhanded and unethical as them. You think that your contrite attitude gives you a platform for respect? You're more like the Republican spin machine than I think you'd like to be.
The lack of discussion about issues on one hand astounds me. But I can't say that I'm surprised. Blog posts like this are indicative of the times: the public at large is more interested with painting the biggest monster than deciding who is the best leader.
Why not post something about why Obama is the best leader rather than trying to propagandize people against the opposition?
Like the pictures you used to stereotype the Republican campaign, your post only furthers your own stereotype. Are you comfortable with being thought of as uneducated, snarky and dumb?
I am constantly surprised by the moronic comments made on pages of this sort.
I think this information is pertinent, it goes to show that "Abstinance only" sex ed does not work, hence the knocked up daughter, it also helps show how focused on her family Palin is, how highly she rates them in her priorities. She has enough time to misuse her power in revenge on her ex brother in law, yet she doesn't have enough time to make sure her daughter isn't boozing it up.
You can say that families are off-limits all you want, they are not off-limits. Obama asked for his children to be left out of the news and they haven't been. How people treat their family goes toward their character. Just like John McCain and how he treated his first wife. It is pertinent information.
A young pretty girl who drinks and has sex?! What the FUCK?! How can we possibly allow anyone related to her to work anywhere ever? I am highly insulted that McCain would suggest that such a heathen be allowed to live, let alone work in government. My God.. Alcohol? Sex? These two things should join the Axis of Evil.
Yeesh, we all get it already! Palin was a poor choice in VP candidate since she hasn't yet managed to make sense of her own positions!
But honestly, enough with this obsession with her kids!
Whether or not she's neglecting her kids and whether or not her policies on abstinence only work is not the larger issue here. Palin is the VP candidate- we'd do Obama a bigger favor if we went back to comparing Presidential candidates and their competency or at the VERY LEAST Palin vs Biden?
I'm really sick of all this garbage over Palin and I don't even like her. But we're better than this!
Bristol Palin is not running for any office. I assume you have no teenage children of your own and you don't remember when your teenage years either. Teens are, oddly enough, real people with their own ideas and agendas. They don't necessarily reflect their parents' philosophy and certainly not their political ideals. Besides, Obama had his own issues with drug abuse himself; we don't need to look to his children for evidence of his unfitness and insufficient experience and knowledge to be qualified for the office of President of the United States.
look, parents can only do so much, by the time a kid is 15 or older their generallly making their own decisions. The behavior of someone in their mid to late teen is not a reflection on the parent, REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION!!!
Parents can only do so much, but part of that 'so much' is actually being there for your children when they need you. She chose a career with a high time requirement and large travel requirement around the most impressionable part of her life especially when your spouse is an executive with similar time and travel requirements.
That's not to say what she is doing wouldn't have happened if they were fully invested in their children but there is a good chance it wouldn't.
Kids do make their own decisions when they get to their teens, but still reflect the values they experienced when younger. There are some positive aspects of teaching your kids that it is wrong to throw your body at problems or frustrations and I think there is also value in teaching our kids to not just memorize verse but think about how to solve problems in a practical manner. After decades of raging abortion debate, we haven't addressed the "root cause". That is our failure whether Dem or Rep. I think it is some strange side effect of the digital age that we can only discuss politics from either a 0 or 1 viewpoint. Regardless of political persuasion, I think a president should be intelligent enough to form a complete English sentence as a matter of national pride. Clearly, as results of the last two elections indicate, I am in the minority. Hey, but what matter that our national leaders are known as international bullies and liars? What's the worst that can happen? It's not like we are in a national debt crisis, or misguided war, or health management crisis, or social security debacle, or leaving world climate leadership for other countries to assume .........hey wait a minute......
Shame on you.
Leave that child alone.
Talking about her indicates that you don't have any valid arguments. It makes people (like me) more likely to vote against your side.
Shame.
If this site can get the pictures, so could McCain. I find it hard to believe his entire staff are that ignorant to all this.
There were so many other republican women to choose from, why would he pick one that has these issues? It almost seems like he doesn't want you to vote for him or is using it as a distraction from more important issues.
In retro, I don't think any of this is a big issue. For it to be a big issue would be very hypocritical as alot of the people in this country went through this stage in their life (I myself didn't tote a gun though)
This diatribe is why America is divided. Instead of discussing issues in a logical and educated manner, some on the left would rather launch attacks, without one iota of proof, I might add.
There is a scripture in the Bible that talks about "you who have no sin, cast the first stone." This stone casting by imperfect people does nothing to resolve the issues America is facing. All it does is make you feel better and hurt a family that is trying their best to do their part in affecting positive changes in their society .
Maybe, instead of engaging in this despicable behavior, it is time for you to get off your butt and do something - like run for office? No offense intended but I am sick of people doing this. Let's grow up and find solutions and stop launching these sort of personal attacks.
This should be about "we the people" coming together not lets crucify our neighbors!
First - I won't leave her kids out of it because Palin won't leave her kids out of it. Palin will this very evening parade her pregnant daughter and the daughter's boyfriend around at the RNC. If she want's her kids left out of it why bring the boyfriend?
Second - This is another example of McCain's poor decision making. How dare he attempt to put this person in such a position of power without checking her out first.
Third - Were there no other republicans available anywhere? This nomination is an insult to our intelligence. Instead of hyping up Palin and making excuses for her, the republicanbots should be damn mad about McCain picking her.
Fourth - Palin's family and lifestyle is a valid issue because SHE chooses to make it so. She is the one running around injecting God and morals into her public policies. If you run as the "morality" candidate then the morals of you and yours are open for discussion.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Bristol Palin is a little whore. Now add to that she is a drunk whore. No wonder the little bitch got knocked up. If the Republicans don't shove Palin down a steep set of stairs, we are screwed in November.
So let me see if I got this. Palin may or may not have used a pregnancy to cover up the rape of her daughter by her husband. Her husband has a DUI. Her daughter is a whore and a drunk. She has shady business dealings. She abused power by firing people who didn't do exactly what she wanted. Palin is a member of a separatist party. Palin broke the law by hunting from an airplane. She never went overseas until 2007. They count a layover at Shannon Airport as a trip to Ireland.
Is John McCain demented or just playing to highest stakes of chicken in history?
According to Wikipedia---Obama's "squeeky clean" wife in 1993 was the
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR--- for the Chicago office of Public Allies, a non-profit group that ENCOURAGES---- YOUNG PEOPLE to work on social issues in non-profit groups and government agencies
[u][b]
TO PROMOTE COMMUNISM[/b][/u].
GOD FORBID---I'D FAR RATHER HAVE A DRUNK, PREGNANT, GUN TOTING TEEN---THAN A COMMUNISTIC ONE!!!!!
Why do you hate our freedom? If you are equating working for government agencies with communism, then you are calling the government of the US of A communist! My red phone is dialing Joseph McCarthy right now to turn your ass in, commie!
All teens push the limits as they make choices in their lives. It's sort of like the 'terrible two's' when a toddler first learns the power of saying 'no'. Teenagers almost always rebel in some ways as part of being able to break away from childhood (parental rule) into adult choices. Some make worse choice than others while establishing their independence. Politics always looks for any weakness to attack credibility of a candidate, so this is just another digging up dirt episode. One gets dirty while digging up dirt, though.
There is nothing wrong with kids being kids. As for the drinking gun toting thing, what the f do you think they do in Alaska? They aren't in NY city, they are in the real wilderness where you need guns to kill animls and booze to stay warm. What is the matter with you people? Don't you know that? I'm voting for McCain because of these pics so HA!
Come on people. Kids will be kids. Not every one lives in a perfect bubble. I say experience what you want life to offer. This is supposed to be America a free country. If you don't like what other people do, so what, don't judge them. I find it crazy all the things the bible thumpers do, just because god doesn't exist doesn't mean they are wrong to believe it does. Don't judge other people, just because it something you wouldn't do.
I'm really shocked that you didn't photoshop her sucking some AID's infected black pimp. Typical negro's whining about some white children throwing gang signs and holding a few bottles of booze! Anything to slime the conservatives or the republicans - it's all about image for you crack heads ho's. That slut Mrs. O-ring is a slacker from the gitgo and wouldn't have gotten any sort of education without her negro hide being flashed everywhere.
How is that GOP kool-aid you're drinking? Is it cool and delicious? I hope it is. Because it will need to be if people like you continue to allow the "conservatives" to lead our country to hell on rollerskates.
If abstinence education isn't working for a family of their socioeconomic background and superior morals, I don't understand how they expect it to fare any better for the masses.
Back again to check the boards and the successive comments.
I'm going to direct this at the author of the blog; my intent is to question your premise and I hope you respond with valid reasons for your argument.
My first question revolves around your questioning of abstinence and the Republican ethical platform (despite how oxymoronic that currently sounds). You have propped Bristol Palin up as an example of hypocrisy: you argue that since Bristol has had pre-marital sex and gotten pregnant it automatically indemnifies VP candidate Palin as a hypocrite. While I fully accept responsibility as a parent myself, I hope that the choices my kids make in the context of their own lives do not completely reflect my success or failure as a parent. I'll take that one step back: my wife and I got pregnant before we were married. That was a product of our choice and our upbringing; however, my parents made every effort to try and avoid this outcome. My parents chose the abstinence method as well. It didn't work. The fact that it didn't work doesn't mean that my parents were failures or "bad parents." It simply proves that in my case, it didn't work. The same way the sex education doesn't divert unwanted pregnancy as well. A parent that follows your curriculum of sex education is not guaranteed that the parent will get what she is hoping for.
With that in mind, please justify your statements regarding Bristol's pregnancy as proof that Sarah Palin is a poor parent and that it translates to her performance as the VP.
Additionally, the drinking issue follows the same argument pattern as the pregnancy pattern. I now have three kids. One of them - the oldest - is very similar to me in temperament and personality. She's also my biggest challenge simply because we share so many like weaknesses and foibles. My second is a peach and my relationship is much different. Now my question to you is this: which one is going to be my black sheep? Which one is going to blemish me should I choose to run for public office? While you may have some insight, I do not. I do not know what events will take place in the next 10 years to change my daughters and to change me. I hope for the best and know that the worst may come anyway. That's called context. As a parent, you know the context and the things with which your children struggle may be seated in that context. That context involves your parenting skills and it can also be through no fault of your own. So to hold a parent solely responsible for the actions of their kids without understanding the possible causes is shortsighted and naive.
I need to re-emphasize that I disagree with the choice for Palin as VP; and I want to continue to emphasize that posts like this author's do nothing to add to that conversation. They are based purely on speculation and hearsay and so not have any sort of context for understanding.
Now these are the two primary examples that have been stated on these boards to demonstrate that the wheels have fallen off the Republican morality wagon.
The problem with statements like Ms. Jones' is that there is an implied argument that whomever has the biggest public gaffes and dirt makes the party he represents the most immoral and least capable. Posts like this and across the blog-iverse seem to see politics as a scale: the more you can pile on dirt without addressing the issues, the more the scales swing in your favor.
Unfortunately, in today's political environment, I tend to agree: that is the way our system is working. But that is not the way it should work. And that is why I will continue to call those who seek to move it that direction on their blatant demoralizing and undermining of the system. Propaganda like this seeks to take advantage of those who aren't as dilatory in their research efforts before casting their vote: shame on those who are opportunists in this vein.
The determinant of the moral capability if the parties should be discussed based on the issues and track record of each. There is enough ammo now to bludgeon the Republican party without having to stoop to such deplorable levels.
I wish that we could just sit and talk about issues, about the war, about missing WMD, about the horrible economy,healthcare, etc etc. But the right doesn't want to do that. They want to appeal to the uniformed masses who will vote for someone because they appear to have a "nice family" or because they go to church or are "god fearing" or like guns, etc etc. The political junkies who actually think about the issues are few and they have already made up their minds.
Do you think the right was talking about issues when they talked non-stop about Obama being a muslim or about his loudmouthed pastor, or about him doing a "fist bump" with his wife or about how his daughters were "too precocious"...oh or how about Hillary? How she wasn't a strong woman because she stood by her husband, about her wardrobe, about her crying. Or how about their very own Mitt Romney who they went on and on about him being a mormon, so much so he had to make a statement?
The uniformed masses that will decide this election do not vote on issues. They vote on emotions. They vote on who they would like to have a beer with.
I actually could care less about who a candidate is sleeping with, or worshiping, or if their kids eat fire...that stuff is in essence irrelevant to the job at hand. But the reality is that these are the things that will elect the next administration.
This blog is a prime example of that. We post articles about real issues, no one reads. We post pics of Palin's boozy daughter, a stampede.
So I say to you Tyler if you want to talk about issues that's great. I'll talk issues with you...but it will just be you and I talking...everyone else will be sitting around staring at Bristol's belly.
So in closing, since this election will be decided on who "appears" to the masses to be a nice moral person, I will seek to show that McCain and his crew are not a nice moral people. I will try to show the masses that they would not want to have a beer with McCain and Palin.
Unfortunately, if you want to fight with republi-pigs you have to jump into the mud with them.
Thank you for your reply. It was thought out and gave reasons for why you feel you are justified using your methodology: "Unfortunately, if you want to fight with republi-pigs you have to jump into the mud with them."
For clarification sake, I understand that your argument is that since the Republicans/Right use smear tactics and like the examples in your second paragraph, your counter-smear tactic is warranted. As stated in your first paragraph, you believe that the loyal factions have already determined for whom they will vote: "The political junkies who actually think about the issues are few and they have already made up their minds." Therefore, your concern must be about the uninformed masses that reside in the middle, correct?
My request in my last post was that you reconcile your tactics with justification for them. If my aforementioned understanding of your reasons are correct, who is your audience? Is it really the "swing voter" in the middle? If that is the case, do you ignore the fact that this voter tends to be the opposite of your uninformed mass stereotype: that this voter is a "swing" tally because they actually are more informed that the polarized factions? If that is the case, are you confident that your tactics are actually working?
This is the issue I take with your argument. You claim that because you need to fight fire with fire, you must respond to the Right in kind. The problem is that the audience to whom you pander has already decided their vote! What your tactics and the tactics of the Right accomplish is simply a lobbing back and forth of the mud between each other. You and the Right are not convincing anyone; you're just increasing your collective blood level.
I am one of those slightly undecided voters (I've already decided there is no way I will be voting for McCain/Palin). Your argument does not appeal to me; in fact, it repels me from your candidate. And the reason it repels me is that he is someone who stood up and stated that the families need to be left out of this; he wanted a discussion about the issues. These are the virtues you extol in Obama; yet despite being his proponent, you insist on doing the opposite of what he wants. When it comes to the issues like welfare and socialized programs, this response is exactly what I DO NOT want to occur. Obama is running a campaign with socialized platforms based on the understanding that he believes in the goodness of people: that given a chance, the downtrodden and disadvantaged will take the hand extended to them and be pulled out of the mud. How can I believe that when you provide such a stark picture of the obvious: Obama claims to have a plan to make politics a better forum and that includes keeping families out of the line of fire; you claim you know better and do the opposite of what he requests! If Obama believes that it is people's virtue that will right this country when given a helping hand, but his followers can not exhibit any of that virtue in the race for the Whitehouse, then how can I expect his proposed plan to be a success when it is based on the virtue of those same followers?
You do yourself a disservice. The very audience you are trying to convince is unconvinced. Rather than look for a way to elevate the discussion, you are comfortable debasing yourself to the level of the Right.
In short, promises of change are given short shrift by the fact that nothing has changed. If that is the case, then why vote Obama? Convince me.
I get what you're saying, I really do...and about 8 years ago I would have agreed with you fully. But today is a different day. The people who I am talking to do not live in a reality based world where 1 + 1 = 2, in the world they live in 1 + 1 = whatever is convenient for them today, sometimes it's 2 sometimes it's 5.
The people I'm talking to are the uninformed kool-aid drinkers that think that because Palin is a "good church going woman" she's a good VP candidate. They won't listen to talk about her record or policies, or how she handled things as mayor...they won't listen to bullet points on Obama's voting record or his experience... to them that sounds like "blah blah blah". These are the people who listen to Rush and nod and agree with any silly thing he says. These people will not vote for Obama, or Hillary, or Kerry or Gore, or Biden or anyone the Dems put up. For some reason (which I have yet to figure out) they are fervently and sometimes irrationally "conservative". They vote against their own best interests economically and politically (the war for example).
I'm talking their language so that they will get disgusted with their candidates and stay home on election day. One less vote for McCain is one more vote margin by which Obama can win.
Quite honestly, Tyler I don't know if this country can be pulled out of the muck it is in. You should see some of the email and such we get. Take a peek over at some of the "red" blogs and forums, the vitriol over there will turn your hair white. I'm a fluffy puppy compared to them.
But I say all that to say, vote for Obama to affect a change in course. A change in course on the war, on the economy, in civil rights, in our reputation in the world.
Thank you again for your reply. I think we are coming to terms, those terms being that we are going to disagree on the effectiveness of the tactic employed herein.
I want to point out something disparate in your latest comment and encourage you to be sure your stance is reconciled within itself because your credibility is questionable when you contradict yourself.
In your second paragraph, you describe the "kool aid drinkers" and state that these types of people "will not vote for Obama, or Hillary, or Kerry or Gore, or Biden or anyone the Dems put up." You concede at this point that these people are lost causes because they will vote only according to their affiliation ( and I hope you concede that there are these types of voters on both sides).
I am confused, however, by your next paragraph where you then identify them as your audience stating you employ this tactic "so that they will get disgusted with their candidates and stay home on election day." But you can't have it both ways: you can't have them be in-the-wool conservatives that vote Republican no matter what, and at the same time willing to convert based on their disgust.
My comment is a cautionary one: be acutely aware of the audience to whom you are addressing your message. And if your message doesn't convince your intended audience, you may consider that you have written for a different audience.
Look, we're in the same boat on our view of the country: I am equally pessimistic about the outlook for the country. It is sometimes more therapeutic to point out all the evidence for why the political process is defunct. The Palin nomination is easy fodder.
But on a site that states its goal is "to capture and embrace that richness by promoting the exchange of dialogue and ideas in hopes to diminish or remove the bigotry that lingers" tactics like this - along with the Rights tactics - seem to only polarize and increase the bigotry between parties, not reconcile differences.
I'm happy to conclude that we agree to disagree. My hope for you is that you rationalize your decisions and fully understand the audience for which you write and come to grips with those you may lose.
I see what you're getting at. But maybe I didn't make what I was getting at entirely clear (and maybe you will still disagree).
The kool-aid crew are ideologues. So much so that they stick to it despite how these notions will actually affect their lives. As long as they believe that politician X believes and lives and dare I say looks as they do they will vote for them.
The ultra religious and conservative right wants a candidate with a certain belief set, anything else (issues, etc) doesn't matter.
Romney is no good, because he's a mormon. Forget the fact that he actually is in line with alot of the issues that are important to them. Obama is no good, he's a muslim, he's foreign from Hawaii or whatever the slur of the month is. Hillary is no good, she's married to that cheating Bill, she's not a good mother. Kerry was no good, he was too smart they wouldn't want to have a beer with him, he windsurfed, he was an elitist, he didn't get shot enough in Vietnam, etc etc etc.
I think that if you show them that their candidate of choice is not really who they are pandering to be, i.e a religious, moral conservative, then they will walk away from them. There is already anecdotal evidence that this is true. Remember Giuliani the 9/11 hero, they couldn't have him, he had too many wives, there were pics of him in a dress, he was 'gasp' Catholic. And already all over the intertubes there is the clucking of teeth from conservative moms about Palin...how she should be home with her baby, how she should have been paying more attention to Bristol, they are saying they will just stay home...these are the same people who screamed for Britney Spear's little sister to have her TV show canceled because she got knocked up.
And you are absolutely right, the goal of our site is to encourage dialogue and openness. I wish we could do so civilly like you and I are talking right now, but sadly the volume is so high right now that we have to shout to be heard.
In short, I submit to you that there may be no reconciling differences with people that make monkey Obama T-shirts or who claim despite the evidence that Obama is a muslim (like that would matter anyway) or a terrorist. With a good portion of these folks there is only winning the election to ensure that their vision of America is not forced upon us all.
look, parents can only do so much, by the time a kid is 15 or older their generallly making their own decisions. The behavior of someone in their mid to late teen is not a reflection on the parent, REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION!!!
Parents can only do so much, but part of that 'so much' is actually being there for your children when they need you. She chose a career with a high time requirement and large travel requirement around the most impressionable part of her life especially when your spouse is an executive with similar time and travel requirements.
That's not to say what she is doing wouldn't have happened if they were fully invested in their children but there is a good chance it wouldn't.
Irrelevant. If this was a man, this issue would not be as "big". Will the high time and travel requirements be made an issue for Obama as a father?
[quote=saraht43]According to Wikipedia---Obama's "squeeky clean" wife in 1993 was the EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR--- for the Chicago office of Public Allies, a non-profit group that ENCOURAGES---- YOUNG PEOPLE to work on social issues in non-profit groups and government agencies TO PROMOTE COMMUNISM.
=======================
I would like to PUBLICLY apologize to the folks on this thread. The above quote was indeed on Wikipedia Wednesday morning (but has since been EDITED AGAIN by someone and deleted) BUT I DID NOT REALIZE that any idiot can access the information on those pages and edit them at will. I thought Wikipedia, which is a self-proclaimed online Encyclopedia, was like Britannica, that the information on the site was actual proven facts and could not be altered by just anyone. I WILL NO LONGER CONSIDER WIKIPEDIA A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR ANY INFORMATION. It was never my intention to dig up dirt on Michelle Obama-----I was doing research on all of the women involved in this years Presidential election ie, Cindy McCain, Sarah Palin, Michelle Obama, Jill Biden and even Hillary Clinton. I merely wanted basic background information ie; where/when born, parents, schooling, jobs, political positions etc.
Oh and Red Phone guy---your not the "Chief of Gotham City" next time you want to read and answer posts turn off your BatMan movie. I NEVER SAID I THOUGHT THE US OR ITS AGENCIES WERE COMMUNIST. I AM QUITE WELL AWARE THE US AND ITS GOVERNMENT IS A DEMOCRACY. Nor did the quote actually it was talking about the Young People in the Public Allies Organization----not the government agencies.
One question... were these photos of Bristol palin's drunken binge taken before she got knocked, after she got knocked up, or the night she got knocked up?
And, where were Mom & Dad? Out giving speeches at radical anti-choice "abstinence-only" fundraisers? Perhaps?
Irrelevant. If this was a man, this issue would not be as "big".
Ah the old vagina card. I figured it would come up. Man or woman it doesn't matter someone needs to be there for a child especially at that age. While equal blame can be dolled out on the father, he isn't running for office.
Oh and don't get me wrong sometimes a family needs two incomes to make ends meet. You got to do what you got to do, but when two parents make top 10% incomes that flies out the window.
stirred wrote:
Will the high time and travel requirements be made an issue for Obama as a father?
Had he not had another parent being there for the children then yes I would take issue with it but since the mother has drastically scaled back her work to be with the children full-time.
You know what's great? If these pics were of the child of a Democratic candidate, they would be in rotation 24/7 and splashed everywhere, the judgement of the parent who was the running would be questioned (regardless of gender), the story would be grossly exaggerated and Karl Rove would be having a field day. But that's all ok, that's fine. This is yet another example of "we can dish it out but we can't take it." The Republicans and the American masses are the ones who have chosen to disregard the issues and turn elections into "character" debates, not the Dems. So too bad, so sad when their own tactics blow up in their faces and sorry if I'm not feeling particulary remorseful about it.
You are so Right. If these pictures were of - lets say, Chelsea Clinton during her father's presidency - the Conservatives and Fox News would be all over it relentlessly and will keep digging and digging to quench their bloodthirst.
At least Bush's daughters were smart enough to not let somebody take pictures of them grazing over hard liquor with a big fat smile on their faces.
)