Fair question: Given her political position on teen pregnancy, how to reduce its prevalence, and given that she was part of the reason your tax dollars were allocated to teach abstinence to public school students (and in other governmentally funded ways), is her 17 year old daughter's pregnancy not relevant to the political debate and 'fair game' as a topic of discussion? Here's a good summary of this line of reasoning: By Bonnie Bucqueroux September 1, 2008 Sorry, George, Bristol's pregnancy does matter Please remember that Mother Palin wants to impose her religious views on matters of choice and family values on us. And, as an advocate of abstinence education, Palin expects us to pay for programs that express her narrow views -- yet her own family shows us how ineffective such efforts often prove to be. I want my tax dollars used to give young girls information on birth control. Sarah wants families to handle such matters, but clearly she didn't do a good job of teaching her daughter how to avoid a teenage pregnancy. Or doesn't she believe in birth control? I also think it's outrageous that Mrs. Palin accepted the offer to become vice president knowing that this would put her daughter into the spotlight at what must be a difficult time for this young girl. Why didn't Sarah "just say no"? It isn't the media who thrust Bristol into the spotlight - it was her mother. I thought conservatives believed in putting family first?
Excellent post. Just more of the "Do as I say, not as I do" hypocrisy of the right. They can't control themselves or their kids, but for some insane reason they think they should be able to control everybody else. What a bunch of tools.
What a phoney conclusion. How do you know that her daughter wasn't abstinence. And this was a PLANNED pregnecy. 17 year old girls in love do stranger things. Also , It is likely that birth control is the current form of education in the schools. Abstinence has not become accepted by the unionized liberal teachers of the country. So again this highlights another failure of teachers.
You appear to be one confused dude spinning completely out of control. First you suggest the pregnancy was PLANNED by Bristol, then you blame the teachers? Too freaking funny...
Are you insane? The girl was knocked up and this is clearly an un-intended pregnancy. Mccain voted against sex education in schools. So does Palin. Palin not only does NOT want sex education in schools, she obviously actively DOES NOT teach this important topic at home either. She is a poor mother and a poor leader to boot. Barely out of managing a hick-town of 8000, she apparently epitomizes the pinnacle of conservative leadership (gag). Back to the sanity issue. Most of you conservative fuck-turds are clearly deranged. Right on par with the Afghan Taliban, their Hijab and their book burning sessions. The only difference is you turds have access to nuclear weapons. A clear threat to human civilization.
Given the fact that you started a thread the other day calling her a "bitch", why would anything be off bounds to you? You have already illustrated in that thread, and other threads, that you have no sense of propriety. Frankly, I'm not certain that she believes that federal tax dollars should be used to teach abstinence. But if she does, certain that would be within the public area, and open to discussion. What is not relevant is to a public election is her daughter's unplanned pregnancy. There are large numbers of unplanned pregnancies in the US, and none of these have to be discussed specifically to have a discussion about unplanned pregnancy and what to do about it, if that's what you want to do. But let's face it, you and other scumbuckets are going to discuss her pregnancy, and spread all manner of other unsubstantiated rumors while you're at it. It's what the so-called liberal media and blogger relish in. It's what their fans, like you, relish in as well. So have at it. You simply illustrate to thinking people your inner character. OldTrader
Why are you complicating matters by making ad hominem attacks? ad ho·mi·nem âadjective attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument. That aside, you are essentially claiming that it is not fair to debate Palin's record on intelligent and efficient allocation of tax resources in matters such as abstinence education? In other words, Palin has immunity from being subject to that debate because she now has a personal brush with it (via her 17 year old daughter)?
LOL. You mean you'd just as soon not discuss the fact that you called Palin a "dumb bitch"? What I did is termed an "ad hominem attack" and as such is not proper? But you got no problem with calling someone a "dumb bitch"? I knew you were an idiot...I just didn't understand how big an idiot. Aside from that, you need to re-read my post carefully. I have no problem discussing Palin's political beliefs, to include her beliefs on abstinence education, and whether it ought to be paid for by tax dollars, federal or otherwise. I think Palin's daughter specifically is off-limits. You don't need to discuss HER daughter, or any other young woman's misfortune, specifically. You can generally discuss unplanned pregnancy, and astinence, without having to specifically discuss any young girl, to include Palin's daughter. Surely you're intelligent enough to understand that distinction. Go back and read my post. There's nothing there putting Palin's ideas off-limits. Her daughter's specific experience ought to be off-limits. OldTrader
I agree with you that referring to someone as a "bitch" is absolutely wrong. Having said that, her daughter's experience is relevant in the context of sex education, Palin's support for abstinence only sex education, and perhaps most importantly of all McCain's vetting process and management skills.
Come on big dave. Think about it. Are you saying that if Palin's daughter only got abstinence only education, that obviously that type of education doesn't work because it didn't work in the daughter's specific case? Dave, I think you're better than that. You could go get statistics regarding abstinence only education, and how many unplanned pregnancies resulted. But one specific case doesn't prove anything. Or are you saying that if abstinence only education in Palin's daughter case obviously failed, and therefore, since Palin is a believer in that type of education that she is obviously not qualified for VP? LOL. Gotta tell you dave, if failings as a parent disqualify one for office... that's going to disqualify a whole lot of people. Using a specific case like the daughter's doesn't generalize anything about abstinence only education. Unless of course you and other liberals believe that if you receive the education, that no one should ever get pregnant. LOL. Look, if you don't want to vote for Palin, I got no problem with that. I don't think that we need to bring the daughter into though in a specific way. Neither by the way does Obama. OldTrader