Liberals aren't going to like this

[dhyatt]

Turns out Rep VP nominee Sarah Palin's 17-yr old daughter is pregnant, she's keeping the baby and marrying the father. Doing the right thing instead of having an abortion is reaallly going to piss them off. And it's especially going to get under the skin of the uber-leftist DailyKos crowd who will now be thoroughly depressed that Gov. Palin's 5th child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)

Look out. And Dharma, you said you listened to Rush last week. Seems to me like he nailed the left's response cold.

[Icorpse]

So I guess both inexperience and family values are then off the table for the McCain/Palin camp? I am so happy! We can start talking about real issues now.

You know that when every Tom, Dick or Rove Republican goes around screaming what a brilliant choice this was picking Palin as VP, it is bound to turn out to be a disaster.

The McCain camp thought that all Hillary supporters would turn and run in the other direction after the pick. The numbers show that this has not been the case. Like most politicians and pollsters they assumed that the average citizen is stupid. Throw them a meaty bone and they would be happy.

The more I think about this nomination, the angrier I get at McCain. He has lost all respect before my eyes thanks to this gimmick and my vote as a result. BTW, he has lost the support of my wife as well, who is a moderate pro-lifer.

Good riddance.

[dhyatt]

So I guess both inexperience and family values are then off the table for the McCain/Palin camp? [snip]

How does keeping a family, instead of aborting one, marrying and taking responsibility, instead of taking the easy way out, take family values off the table? Seems to me that it puts them front and center where they belong.

[Dharma]

Turns out Rep VP nominee Sarah Palin's 17-yr old daughter is pregnant, she's keeping the baby and marrying the father. Doing the right thing instead of having an abortion is reaallly going to piss them off. And it's especially going to get under the skin of the uber-leftist DailyKos crowd who will now be thoroughly depressed that Gov. Palin's 5th child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)

Look out. And Dharma, you said you listened to Rush last week. Seems to me like he nailed the left's response cold.

Funny, I never heard him say all the liberals are going to be pissed because her 17 year-old daughter is pregnant and is marrying the father (or anything like that).

What I heard him say was: that all the ugly liberal women already hate Palin because she's beautiful (for the record, I think she's prettier than me and I don't hate her). Rush did go down the abortion road and said that liberals are going to attack Palin for NOT aborting Trig because he has Down Syndrome.

THAT PISSED ME OFF, Hyatt. I am PRO-choice. Pro-choice means that I support other women on whatever reproductive choice they make. If a woman is pregnant with a child who has Down Syndrome and she CHOOSES to continue with that pregnancy and love that child for the rest of her life, I find it to be a FABULOUS choice! I'm pretty sure the rest of us "liberals" feel the same way.

Rush makes up controversy by the minute. Everything that comes out of his mouth is "liberals say this", "liberals think that", "liberals want to take over this country". I heard it ad nauseum on Friday and I cannot fathom how somoene I hold in high regard (you) find him to be worthy of repeating.

This country is made up of people who have many different beliefs and we all think in shades of gray, not black and white.

If you want to continue with a discussion about Bristol's pregnancy, we can. If she's choosing to have the baby, I'm all for it! Yeah! However, I wonder if her Mom ever spent any time discussing birth control methods with her? Because, wouldn't it be better to PREVENT the pregnancy to begin with (until she's completed her education and married)?

[Dharma]

So I guess both inexperience and family values are then off the table for the McCain/Palin camp? [snip]

How does keeping a family, instead of aborting one, marrying and taking responsibility, instead of taking the easy way out, take family values off the table? Seems to me that it puts them front and center where they belong.

Uh, don't even go down the family values pathway anymore, Hyatt. The Republican slogan is worn out by those Republicans who have molested children, cheated on their wives, preached about gays yet hired male prostitutes, (including someone in the WHite House who hired Jeff Gannon). Running on family values is out for you guys. Find something new.

Democrats believe, just as much as anybody else, that if a 17 year-old gets pregnant and wants to keep the baby, that she is entitled. However, children of liberals get sex education and access to birth control so the pregnancy, hopefully, doesn't occur until they are ready.

It seems to me to be a "family value" when couples marry because they love each other and not because they're teenagers and forced to. Don't ya think?

[Dharma]

So I guess both inexperience and family values are then off the table for the McCain/Palin camp? [snip]

How does keeping a family, instead of aborting one, marrying and taking responsibility, instead of taking the easy way out, take family values off the table? Seems to me that it puts them front and center where they belong.

Just one more thing about "family values".

I'm not sure what kind of a "family value" it is to be a self-centered womaniser who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to ‘play the field’ and then finally settled on a rich young heiress for financial reasons. BTW, this candidate's family values is so strong that he doesn't even speak to the three kids from his first marriage.

Oh wait. The young heiress he married? Well, it seems she has a half-sister she has never even acknowledged. Fancy that?

Yea, you may not want to go down that "family values" road, Hyatt.

[Belle]

You know, even if he doesn't have my vote, I would like to have dinner with this well-mannered fellow. A very decent move is reported by the New York Times:

"Mr. Obama, in his first remarks on the matter, raised his voiced when asked whether his campaign or other Democratic operatives were working to advance rumors surrounding the Palin family.
“Our people were not involved in any way in this and they will not be,” Mr. Obama snapped. “And if I ever thought there was somebody in my campaign that was involved in something like that, they’d be fired, OK?”
Mr. Obama said the pregnancy “has no relevance to Governor Palin’s performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president.” He added that, “my mother had me when she was 18. How family deals with issues and teen-age children – that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics.”
“So,” he added, “I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories.”"

[dhyatt]

[quote=dhyatt;45497][snip]

How does keeping a family, instead of aborting one, marrying and taking responsibility, instead of taking the easy way out, take family values off the table? Seems to me that it puts them front and center where they belong.

[snip]

You didn't answer the question. re: Rush - He totally predicted that the left would go after Palin for having the nerve to actually keep a Down's Syndrome baby. Actually, check that, they've been worse than what he predicted. At least Obama himself has a little class.

[dhyatt]

[snip]

Just one more thing about "family values".

I'm not sure what kind of a "family value" it is to be a self-centered womaniser who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to ‘play the field’ and then finally settled on a rich young heiress for financial reasons. BTW, this candidate's family values is so strong that he doesn't even speak to the three kids from his first marriage.

Oh wait. The young heiress he married? Well, it seems she has a half-sister she has never even acknowledged. Fancy that?

Yea, you may not want to go down that "family values" road, Hyatt.

Kinda' like "Obama, I am my brother's keeper" half bother in the hut I guess. I must be confused, I didn't think Kerry was running this time around.

[dhyatt]

So I guess both inexperience and family values are then off the table for the McCain/Palin camp? [snip]

How does keeping a family, instead of aborting one, marrying and taking responsibility, instead of taking the easy way out, take family values off the table? Seems to me that it puts them front and center where they belong.

Uh, don't even go down the family values pathway anymore, Hyatt. The Republican slogan is worn out by those Republicans who have molested children, cheated on their wives, preached about gays yet hired male prostitutes, (including someone in the WHite House who hired Jeff Gannon). Running on family values is out for you guys. Find something new.

Democrats believe, just as much as anybody else, that if a 17 year-old gets pregnant and wants to keep the baby, that she is entitled. However, children of liberals get sex education and access to birth control so the pregnancy, hopefully, doesn't occur until they are ready.

It seems to me to be a "family value" when couples marry because they love each other and not because they're teenagers and forced to. Don't ya think?

Yea - I can imagine it's quite threatening to actually have a woman walk the walk when most of the men just talk.

[Belle]

[
Yea - I can imagine it's quite threatening to actually have a woman walk the walk when most of the men just talk.

Two thoughts:

1)In politics if you want anything said, ask a man. If you want anything done, ask a woman.
-Margaret Thatcher

2) Family values matter. There is a stark contrast between a man who will allow born children to die for political gain, and a woman who will risk everything she has gained politically to allow a child to live.

[chaboard]

child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)


The hypocrisy here is amazing. Last month you felt the parentage of a private civilian's baby was of paramount importance and even said that the civilian should release private medical records merely to satisfy your base lust for scandal.

Here, less than a month later, you are trying to claim the the parentage of an honest-to-god Presidential ticket member's baby is *not* any of our business and that merely raising the same kinds of questions you delighted in last month is now "stupid" and "hateful". I'm, shocked - shocked! - I must say that you did not demand that Ms. Palin kill the story by releasing her medical records. And I'm absolutely floored - floored! - that you did not state that failure to do so was tantamount to an admission of guilt. Surely you have not completely revamped your entire moral philosophy and standards in the last three weeks without letting us in on the process? ;)

Those of us who consistently think *both* attacks were irrelevant and immoral invasions of the private sphere can only boggle at the sheer hypocrisy and lack of moral standards in those who think it's ok to go after one and not the other. No matter which side they come from.

Kharma's a bitch, ya know.



Oh, and as for today's announcement regarding Ms. Palins daughter's predicament? Again, I think it is almost entirely none of our business....the only slight exception I see being the slight connection to Ms. Palin's lack of judgement evidenced in her endorsing the sheer stupidity that is abstinence-only education as public policy. Contrary to your thought on the matter I don't think this is going to anger much of anyone on the left. You forget that WE are the ones who generally think these kinds of decisions are best made in the privacy of the home and not from the keyboards of strangers across the continent.

[Dharma]

You didn't answer the question. re: Rush - He totally predicted that the left would go after Palin for having the nerve to actually keep a Down's Syndrome baby. Actually, check that, they've been worse than what he predicted. At least Obama himself has a little class.

Okay, Can I buy a vowel? Maybe it's because it's a holiday weekend and I haven't read many blogs but WHAT LIBERALS are attacking Palin for not aborting her baby?

[Dharma]

child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)


The hypocrisy here is amazing. Last month you felt the parentage of a private civilian's baby was of paramount importance and even said that the civilian should release private medical records merely to satisfy your base lust for scandal.

This actually is hilarious as I read a reader's comment as per the Palin pregnancy story and and one nut said he wanted to see the DNA evidence to prove the baby was really hers!! I laughed because even the left has a few WupTdo's and BenPs.

Someone digs into the private life of another and decides they must prove to the rest of us that a story is NOT true. WTF?

There is a reason why the press never went after the personal lives of officials prior to Bill Clinton. We've been circling the drain ever since.

[dhyatt]

child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)


The hypocrisy here is amazing. Last month you felt the parentage of a private civilian's baby was of paramount importance and even said that the civilian should release private medical records merely to satisfy your base lust for scandal.

[snip].

Huh? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. (Not necessarily denying it, just don't recognize your assertion.)

[Dharma]

child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)


The hypocrisy here is amazing. Last month you felt the parentage of a private civilian's baby was of paramount importance and even said that the civilian should release private medical records merely to satisfy your base lust for scandal.

[snip].

Huh? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. (Not necessarily denying it, just don't recognize your assertion.)

Of course you don't.

Let me refresh your memory: http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/65199

BTW, could you please tell me what liberals have said Palin should have aborted her Down Syndrome baby. I went looking for such allegation and haven't been able to find it.

[Icorpse]

So I guess both inexperience and family values are then off the table for the McCain/Palin camp? [snip]

How does keeping a family, instead of aborting one, marrying and taking responsibility, instead of taking the easy way out, take family values off the table? Seems to me that it puts them front and center where they belong.

The responsible thing to do would have been to say no thanks as per the "family value" camp or use protection. Let us call this what it is -- a failure to exercise proper judgment by a 17 year old. Anyway, I could care less about what the Palin family is doing to cope with the situation (it is their personal business), but as pointed out by Dharma already, the abstinence only policy preached by the right and Palin all of a sudden sounds really hollow.

[Icorpse]

[
Yea - I can imagine it's quite threatening to actually have a woman walk the walk when most of the men just talk.

Two thoughts:

1)In politics if you want anything said, ask a man. If you want anything done, ask a woman.
-Margaret Thatcher

2) Family values matter. There is a stark contrast between a man who will allow born children to die for political gain, and a woman who will risk everything she has gained politically to allow a child to live.

Let us cut the pompous rhetoric out. What exactly is the point of your post?

[chaboard]

child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)


The hypocrisy here is amazing. Last month you felt the parentage of a private civilian's baby was of paramount importance and even said that the civilian should release private medical records merely to satisfy your base lust for scandal.

[snip].

Huh? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. (Not necessarily denying it, just don't recognize your assertion.)

Don Hyatt, 7-23-08:


If Edwards provides the results of paternity test that show he's not the father then this goes away quickly and I simply shake my head as to how he could have allowed this kind of perception to happen. Otherwise....


I don't see you demanding Palin release her ob/gyn records to show maternity nor do I see you turning the fact that a "perception" exists out there against her against her.

Pretty clear double standard. What few differences there are here all point to the Palin case being *more* in the public sphere than the Edwards case.


(Though I'll remind you that some of us are consistent enough to hold that BOTH are a bottom none of our **** business.)

[chaboard]

There is a reason why the press never went after the personal lives of officials prior to Bill Clinton. We've been circling the drain ever since.

Never is a strong word. They took out the Dems best hope in 1984 - or was it (Donna Rice/Gary Hart) '88? I forget. All those godawful Reagan Nightmare years run together. ;)

[dhyatt]

child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)


The hypocrisy here is amazing. Last month you felt the parentage of a private civilian's baby was of paramount importance and even said that the civilian should release private medical records merely to satisfy your base lust for scandal.

[snip].

Huh? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. (Not necessarily denying it, just don't recognize your assertion.)

Of course you don't.

Let me refresh your memory: http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/65199

BTW, could you please tell me what liberals have said Palin should have aborted her Down Syndrome baby. I went looking for such allegation and haven't been able to find it.

No wonder it didn't register. I cared ONLY because he lied about it and tried to cover it up. He's still doing so IMO.

re Palin: This is the first one I saw:

on DailyKos (no surprise there)


"humbled_opinion" 1000+ posts Fri Aug-29-08 03:36 PM

"She should have aborted the tissue and moved on with her life... Stupid is as stupid does." Of course, that was before Obama had the good sense to tell his army of bloggers to stop and that's all the help you're going to get from me because it makes me sick to my stomach.

[dhyatt]

child is, in fact, hers. (I'm not going to repeat the unbelievably stupid and hateful details here)


The hypocrisy here is amazing. Last month you felt the parentage of a private civilian's baby was of paramount importance and even said that the civilian should release private medical records merely to satisfy your base lust for scandal.

[snip].

Huh? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. (Not necessarily denying it, just don't recognize your assertion.)

Don Hyatt, 7-23-08:


If Edwards provides the results of paternity test that show he's not the father then this goes away quickly and I simply shake my head as to how he could have allowed this kind of perception to happen. Otherwise....
I don't see you demanding Palin release her ob/gyn records to show maternity nor do I see you turning the fact that a "perception" exists out there against her against her.

Pretty clear double standard. What few differences there are here all point to the Palin case being *more* in the public sphere than the Edwards case.


(Though I'll remind you that some of us are consistent enough to hold that BOTH are a bottom none of our **** business.)

Aside from the fact that one is a grown man lying through his teeth and the other is a young woman who obvious made a mistake, I say hell, let's go all the way with it then.

Palin's daughter had Trig then turned right around and got pregnant again!!!! In less than a year. Her mother should have put her on the pill at 16! How stupid can you get! blah... blah... blah...

Discussion over.

[Dharma]

on DailyKos (no surprise there)


"humbled_opinion" 1000+ posts Fri Aug-29-08 03:36 PM

"She should have aborted the tissue and moved on with her life... Stupid is as stupid does."
That's all the help you're going to get from me because it makes me sick to my stomach.

OMG. That's all you've got??? So one reader's response on Daily Kos constitutes "the left"?

DHyatt wrote:

You didn't answer the question. re: Rush - He totally predicted that the left would go after Palin for having the nerve to actually keep a Down's Syndrome baby. Actually, check that, they've been worse than what he predicted. At least Obama himself has a little class.

The left?

Have you ever taken a look at the reader's reponses on ABC, WRAL, and all the right winger's sites?

There were MANY, MANY, MANY hellacious reader's comments on the right wing sites when a woman who worked for KBR got raped!!! There were about 1200 comments and more 300 of them said she deserved to be raped. I wanted to puke when I read all those hoorific comments. Yet I never posted on here that Republicans or the right launched an attack on that poor woman. I saw it for what it was, hateful people who just happened to belong to a certain ideology.

If all you can come up with is a few reader's comments, you really are over the top on this one, Hyatt.

Give Rush a rest, will ya.

[Belle]

[
Yea - I can imagine it's quite threatening to actually have a woman walk the walk when most of the men just talk.

Two thoughts:

1)In politics if you want anything said, ask a man. If you want anything done, ask a woman.
-Margaret Thatcher

2) Family values matter. There is a stark contrast between a man who will allow born children to die for political gain, and a woman who will risk everything she has gained politically to allow a child to live.

Let us cut the pompous rhetoric out. What exactly is the point of your post?

Fair enough on pompous, so my apologies. Just trying to be brief. Thank you for asking me to explain.

Point one was to agree with Don about such a woman being threatening. I think that Obama offers many empty words, but has no substantive record. Sarah Palin gets things done and doesn't sit around *talking* about getting things done. Margaret Thatcher noted that this seems to be common between politicians/genders.

Point two is that I think "Family Values" should should start with how a person treats children, and on this Obama stinks.

He voted against a bill that protected newborns while in the Illinois Senate for no possible purpose but political. An identical bill passed in Senate 98-0, to show how much of a no-brainer it was. You don't have to be pro-life to know that it is wrong to leave a living child to die on purpose. That's not above anyone's pay grade.
(http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647)

Sarah Pallin values all children, born and unborn, in practice and policy. And this a position she has lived out in spite of any negative personal and professional consequences that may have followed.

I think it's a stark contrast. Two ends of the continuum. Just an observation.

[chaboard]

Aside from the fact that one is a grown man lying through his teeth and the other is a young woman who obvious made a mistake, I say hell, let's go all the way with it then.


1) She's 44 years old. And the accusation - the one YOU denounced - didn't involve "a mistake" but a lie.

2) At the time you made your comment on each matter NEITHER had enough evidence in any form to characterize as a lie or as truth. You CHOSE - based on nothing - to believe one was a lie and disbelieve that the other was. Which reinforces my point that you are being very conveniently flexible with your "standards".




Palin's daughter had Trig then turned right around and got pregnant again!!!!


Wait a minute. Edwards denied it - you refused to believe him and demanded medical records. The ONLY evidence you have that the daughter is pregnant now is word from Palin's camp itself - yet you decide to believe it despite and do NOT call for medical records.

Again - your double standard is crystal clear.

(And again, - just to make sure we're clear -*I* don't think either of them is your (or my) business. I think it was immoral to badger/harass/accuse Edwards about it and I think it's immoral to badger/harass/discuss Palin and or daughter about it. And in neither case does the allegation become our business even IF true. )



Discussion over.

Yeah, I can see how being caught in such a flagrant embarrassing contradiction would kill your desire to discuss. Going quiet doesn't change the fact that you were busted, though.

[dhyatt]

[snip]



Discussion over.Yeah, I can see how being caught in such a flagrant embarrassing contradiction would kill your desire to discuss. Going quiet doesn't change the fact that you were busted, though.

Can't help it with Edwards. I met him in person at an IBM function and he was too smooth by half for me. After he lied about some outsourcing stats to a bunch IBM managers, I stopped trusting him on the spot. He's done nothing but reinforce my initial feelings about him ever since. He's about as slimy and low as it gets as far as I'm concerned.

[dhyatt]

[snip]
There were MANY, MANY, MANY hellacious reader's comments on the right wing sites when a woman who worked for KBR got raped!!! There were about 1200 comments and more 300 of them said she deserved to be raped. I wanted to puke when I read all those hoorific comments. Yet I never posted on here that Republicans or the right launched an attack on that poor woman. I saw it for what it was, hateful people who just happened to belong to a certain ideology.

If all you can come up with is a few reader's comments, you really are over the top on this one, Hyatt.

Give Rush a rest, will ya.

Well, they suck too. And I can't help the fact you overlooked the opportunity.

[chaboard]

Can't help it with Edwards. I met him in person at an IBM function and he was too smooth by half for me. After he lied about some outsourcing stats to a bunch IBM managers, I stopped trusting him on the spot. He's done nothing but reinforce my initial feelings about him ever since. He's about as slimy and low as it gets as far as I'm concerned.

Fair enough. As long as you're willing to admit that your personal feelings about him caused you to act in ways that - when applied to someone else - you yourself called "stupid" and "hateful". Admitting you have a double standard takes all the fun out of pointing out your double standard. ;)

[Dharma]

[snip]
There were MANY, MANY, MANY hellacious reader's comments on the right wing sites when a woman who worked for KBR got raped!!! There were about 1200 comments and more 300 of them said she deserved to be raped. I wanted to puke when I read all those hoorific comments. Yet I never posted on here that Republicans or the right launched an attack on that poor woman. I saw it for what it was, hateful people who just happened to belong to a certain ideology.

If all you can come up with is a few reader's comments, you really are over the top on this one, Hyatt.

Give Rush a rest, will ya.

Well, they suck too. And I can't help the fact you overlooked the opportunity.

I didn't "overlook" anything. I thought better of posting it here as it's unfair to call 300 posters "the right".

Also, in both cases, those posters were talking amongst themselves - especially on DailyKos. None of them were pundits working for FOX NEWS. You went LOOKING for such a reader's comment on a site you wouldn't normally read. These posters are not mouthpieces or representatives of the Democrat party. They are just individuals voicing their (however bad) opinions.

One place where your blinders seem to be held securely is that the right has vicious talking heads on every station (even a network of their very own) and every media outlet. Let's see: Rush, Michael Savage, Michelle Malkin, Bill O'Reilly, Matt Drudge, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Charles Krauthammer, David Brooks, Bill Krystol and the Weekly Review, all the Fox News idiots, Joe Scarborough, Glenn Beck, Robert Novak...

They regularly launch attacks with violent rhetoric on Democratic politicians and/or anybody who speaks out about the current administration. Oftentimes, they all use the very same words and rhetotic - as if they were all sent a memo from Karl Rove.

All of the above aformentioned were frothing at the mouth over the John Edwards affair. Bill O'Reilly said that "money must've changed hands to keep that quiet" (funny since he paid over $8 million in hush money to the woman he sexually harassed).

Also, ANYBODY can post on those reader's responses. There was one guy posting on Think Progress who was very odd. Everything he wrote was radically left and seemed auspicious. Someone decided to check his IP address and found the guy was working for one Jonah Goldberg (son of the now infamous LuciAnne Goldberg of the Clinton sex scandal fame).

The next time you and your idol, Rush, accuse "the left" of an attack, please make sure it's not just a few individuals responding to each other on their own website - as opposed to 25 talking heads who all say the same thing to discredit someone that Karl Rove told them to.

[dhyatt]

[snip]

The next time you and your idol, Rush, accuse "the left" of an attack, please make sure it's not just a few individuals responding to each other on their own website - as opposed to 25 talking heads who all say the same thing to discredit someone that Karl Rove told them to.

I think thou dost protest too much ;-) I thought about using Alan Colmes as an example but as he is a Fox News pundit, I figure you'd just say it was a set up. Obama did the correct think in telling them all to lay off Palin's family. I'm sure he doesn't want more publicity about his own. We'll see how long they follow his orders.

[Icorpse]

Point two is that I think "Family Values" should should start with how a person treats children, and on this Obama stinks.

He voted against a bill that protected newborns while in the Illinois Senate for no possible purpose but political. An identical bill passed in Senate 98-0, to show how much of a no-brainer it was. You don't have to be pro-life to know that it is wrong to leave a living child to die on purpose. That's not above anyone's pay grade.
(http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647)

Sarah Pallin values all children, born and unborn, in practice and policy. And this a position she has lived out in spite of any negative personal and professional consequences that may have followed.

I think it's a stark contrast. Two ends of the continuum. Just an observation.

I am not aware of this bill and will do my research into it. However, almost no bill today is a simple black-or-white deal but rather somewhere in between. Maybe there was something in it that he did not like?

You know just being pro-life (or pro-choice) does not qualify someone to become VP or President. But for whatever reason, we seem to forget that. Do you think the Russians or Jihadis would give two hoots about whether Palin or Obama is pro-life or pro-choice?

[dhyatt]

[snip]

You know just being pro-life (or pro-choice) does not qualify someone to become VP or President. But for whatever reason, we seem to forget that. Do you think the Russians or Jihadis would give two hoots about whether Palin or Obama is pro-life or pro-choice?

Russians won't care. Jihadists might, but they would be pro-life at least for the first 5-6 years - after all, the kids have to grow enough to be able to carry 40lbs of explosives prior to blowing themselves up :-/

[Icorpse]

[snip]

You know just being pro-life (or pro-choice) does not qualify someone to become VP or President. But for whatever reason, we seem to forget that. Do you think the Russians or Jihadis would give two hoots about whether Palin or Obama is pro-life or pro-choice?

Russians won't care. Jihadists might, but they would be pro-life at least for the first 5-6 years - after all, the kids have to grow enough to be able to carry 40lbs of explosives prior to blowing themselves up :-/

I think we can all agree for the moment that Palin's greatest qualification is her "like-ablility" factor. As you foam in the mouth trying to defend her, I suspect that your "gut instinct" is telling you that we will have disaster on our hands if she had to pick up the telephone at 3 am a year into McCain's presidency.

There was also speculation that McCain was going to announce his whole cabinet at the RNC. Why would that be necessary? Could it be because???

[JoeCiulla]

[snip]

You know just being pro-life (or pro-choice) does not qualify someone to become VP or President. But for whatever reason, we seem to forget that. Do you think the Russians or Jihadis would give two hoots about whether Palin or Obama is pro-life or pro-choice?

Russians won't care. Jihadists might, but they would be pro-life at least for the first 5-6 years - after all, the kids have to grow enough to be able to carry 40lbs of explosives prior to blowing themselves up :-/

I think we can all agree for the moment that Palin's greatest qualification is her "like-ablility" factor. As you foam in the mouth trying to defend her, I suspect that your "gut instinct" is telling you that we will have disaster on our hands if she had to pick up the telephone at 3 am a year into McCain's presidency.

There was also speculation that McCain was going to announce his whole cabinet at the RNC. Why would that be necessary? Could it be because???

FWIW, I think the whole "3am" thing is over-blown. I thought it was over-blown when Hillary was running those ads against Obama, and same now.

If that phone does ring, the president doesn't just say "Nuke 'em!" and go back to sleep. The president has a whole staff of advisors to review all options and discuss appropriate (if any) actions.

What I find disgusting is that both parties seem to be focusing so much spin and/or venom on babygate and abortion rights.

As far as our economy goes, it is 3am right now. Same for energy, same for foreign policy. I am pro-choice, but the country as a lot more pressing problems than a debate on abortion rights.

[dhyatt]

[snip]

I think we can all agree for the moment that Palin's greatest qualification is her "like-ablility" factor. As you foam in the mouth trying to defend her...

[snip]

Slightly overstated I think.

[Icorpse]

[snip]

I think we can all agree for the moment that Palin's greatest qualification is her "like-ablility" factor. As you foam in the mouth trying to defend her...

[snip]

Slightly overstated I think.

Very slightly then.

Joe -- Your point about the economy is well taken. I agree that too much emphasis is being placed on baby-gate and such. What baffles me is that after 20 odd years of pro-life presidents in office, coupled with a Supreme Court and agreeable elected officials in place, Roe V Wade has not been overturned. And yet in every election this becomes a major issue. Why? Should we not be talking about real issues (economy, deficit, wars) instead of family values, gay marriage and the right to life?

[Dharma]

Should we not be talking about real issues (economy, deficit, wars) instead of family values, gay marriage and the right to life?

In a word, YES. When we change the argument to these issues, the Republicans don't stand a chance. But as long as they keep the conversation on the BS family values, they believe they will win.

Like a dummy, I always engage in the abortion arguments because I fear that if RvW is overturned, women will resort to coat hangers--just as they did prior to RvW. Repugs only fight for life when it's in the womb. They don't give a mouse's butt about women dying and poor babies once they're here.

Now...back to economy (which REPUBLICANS HAVE ROYALLY MESSED UP), deficit (which Republicans have caused to go higher than anytime in history) and wars (see first 2).

[chaboard]

If that phone does ring, the president doesn't just say "Nuke 'em!" and go back to sleep. The president has a whole staff of advisors to review all options and discuss appropriate (if any) actions.


You might want to go back and take a look at McCain's intemperate reaction to the Georgia thing. He flew right off the handle and made really dumb statements (including calls for immediate action that he presumably would've taken if in the opposition to do more than make calls ) IMMEDIATELY that he later had to walk back. Ideally, it's supposed to work like you describe. But when the man at the top is a lifelong hothead with a history of impulsive risk-taking (Palin, anyone?) and a compulsive gambler to boot? Not a chance we should be taking, imo.

[Belle]

What is still nagging at me is why some are not bothered about Obama's lack of experience but will blow themselves out talking about how inexperienced they think Palin is.

Yeah, she MIGHT be picking up the phone at 3am - but why put a man with no experience in there where he WILL be picking it up?

I would really like to know: Is experience really the issue?
McCain has it in spades over Obama. How do you reconcile this?

[Dharma]

I would really like to know: Is experience really the issue?
McCain has it in spades over Obama. How do you reconcile this?

Even though I am a leftie, I would have voted for McCain in 2000. However, the issue for me is that he is now poised to continue with the terrible Bush policies of the last 8 years. We may have called him a "maverick" 10 years ago but he has changed every decision and vote he made then to align with Bush now. All of those policies are written and powered by the neocons and the corporations.

So, for me, it's not experience. It's pure HOPE that Obama can change the direction. If Sarah Palin appeared to be one who had the ability to veer sharply from Bush policies, I would be happy for her to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. But I don't think she could stand up to Dick Cheney and Co.

By the way, I wonder how she'll address this problem now. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/palin_slashed_funding_to_help.html?hpid=artslot

[JoeCiulla]

If that phone does ring, the president doesn't just say "Nuke 'em!" and go back to sleep. The president has a whole staff of advisors to review all options and discuss appropriate (if any) actions.


You might want to go back and take a look at McCain's intemperate reaction to the Georgia thing. He flew right off the handle and made really dumb statements (including calls for immediate action that he presumably would've taken if in the opposition to do more than make calls ) IMMEDIATELY that he later had to walk back. Ideally, it's supposed to work like you describe. But when the man at the top is a lifelong hothead with a history of impulsive risk-taking (Palin, anyone?) and a compulsive gambler to boot? Not a chance we should be taking, imo.

Fair enough, the man has a track record of poor anger management going back a long time. But I still don't think he does anything in the situation without involving the staff.

On the subject, I do think there is a Russian agenda to reclaim some or all of the states which claimed independence, and the Putins of the world don't seem to respond to negotiation. WWOD (What Would Obama DO)?

[Belle]

By the way, I wonder how she'll address this problem now. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/palin_slashed_funding_to_help.html?hpid=artslot

First, thank you for the insight. In a larger media sense it would be nice to see that kind of reasoning and honesty.

Regarding the drop in funding the Covenant house teen pregnancy program from $50K to $25K last year, from what I've read, it is being addressed with two points:
1) The program serviced 12 teenage moms last year.
2) $50K represented a three-fold increase over the previous year's allocation

Funny thing, I wonder if she had "increased" funding recently, if she would have been called out by some for supporting causes too close to home.

[Dharma]

By the way, I wonder how she'll address this problem now. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/palin_slashed_funding_to_help.html?hpid=artslot

First, thank you for the insight. In a larger media sense it would be nice to see that kind of reasoning and honesty.

Regarding the drop in funding the Covenant house teen pregnancy program from $50K to $25K last year, from what I've read, it is being addressed with two points:
1) The program serviced 12 teenage moms last year.
2) $50K represented a three-fold increase over the previous year's allocation

Funny thing, I wonder if she had "increased" funding recently, if she would have been called out by some for supporting causes too close to home.

This is a case where I did NOT do my research. I read the initial article but never followed up to see WHY she reduced funding. (I gotta be on top of this kind of stuff as nearly all the members are well informed and ready to pounce at just the smell of misinformation). :-)

BTW, welcome to CP.
Even if we may not be ideologically aligned, you appear to be very open minded to everybody's views.
Dharma

[Jackie]

Pro-choice means that I support other women on whatever reproductive choice they make. If a woman is pregnant with a child who has Down Syndrome and she CHOOSES to continue with that pregnancy and love that child for the rest of her life, I find it to be a FABULOUS choice! I'm pretty sure the rest of us "liberals" feel the same way.

I've known writers with children with special needs. Know of an actor or two. But not since Roy Rogers and Dale Evans has someone this high profile had a young 'un with Trisomy 21. Selfishly.... I'm hoping there will be some productive discussions about Down syndrome. Maybe a chat or two about health insurance and coverage of therapies for children with special needs.

UCP offers state rankings on Medicaid funding of community based services (http://www.ucp.org/medicaid/index.cfm?thisPage=states&thisState=AK). Alaska ranks very high.

Jackie