OT- Governor Palin will resign July 25, 2009.

[surveyor]

sophistry

Hey, Brian, I hate to break it to you but just because my daughter engages in pre-marital sex and then has a baby out of wedlock, and i’m helping her out does not mean I stop advocating for family values or upstanding moral character.

It’s BECAUSE that happened that I would be more in favor of those values because look how hard it is when you don’t adhere to it.

That scenario does not make one a hypocrite. There is precious little one can do to control children. You can’t run their lives for them.

Now your argument of hypocrisy would make more sense if Palin herself was unwed and became pregnant outside of marriage. Applying her standards to her children is not the same.

Still, I find all the Sarah bashing here interesting. Remember that she and McCain were catching up to Obama and were virtually in a neck to neck race. It was only after the economic crisis started dominating the news that their ticket started trending down.

On a side note, it’s also interesting watching all this negative coverage of Palin because it reminds me of this dateline story. They had a father in a restaurant and the kids were running wild. Most of the people in the restaurant disapproved of the father and the way he was letting them run around, but most did not say anything. The same scenario but they had the mother there instead. More restaurant patrons confronted the mother about the kids than the father.

I see that same exact behavior going on here. It wasn’t that the father was more lenient or the mother more strict. Basically that the mother was being held to a higher standard. Hardly fair. Much like the press coverage.

[briansd1]

[quote=surveyor]
Hey, Brian, I hate to break it to you but just because my daughter engages in pre-marital sex and then has a baby out of wedlock, and i’m helping her out does not mean I stop advocating for family values or upstanding moral character.

It’s BECAUSE that happened that I would be more in favor of those values because look how hard it is when you don’t adhere to it.

That scenario does not make one a hypocrite. There is precious little one can do to control children. You can’t run their lives for them.
[/quote]

That’s a pretty twisted way of looking at it.

It would be like saying that just because your daughter steals and burglarizes doesn’t mean that you don’t value property rights and safety.

Sarah Palin was a bad “executive” in that she wasn’t effective in passing on her values to her own kids, either through effective education or leading by example.

I would say that Palin was a bad (at least ineffective) mother who didn’t raise her daughter properly. A well bred young person understands the consequences of actions before she commits them.

Bristol Palin engaged in sex when she was a minor. She then had the baby as an adult.

What if Bristol committed theft or burglary? Sarah Palin would be responsible, in my view.

[quote=surveyor]
Still, I find all the Sarah bashing here interesting. Remember that she and McCain were catching up to Obama and were virtually in a neck to neck race. It was only after the economic crisis started dominating the news that their ticket started trending down.
[/quote]

Sounds like you’re claiming that the Sarah bashing is what threw the ticket in favor Obama. Absent the economic crisis, and absent the Palin bashing, McCain/Palin would have won.

If that were the case, then the Palin bashing was absolutely a marvel of political strategy by the Democrats.

Politics is a contact sport and the Democrat conducted an effective political campaign against the opposition.

The Republicans should not have picked someone so easily “bashable” only to complain about it.

What goes around comes around.

I think that laughing at Palin was not just a democratic thing. Everyone was doing it because she’s so fun to poke at.

[quote=surveyor]
On a side note, it’s also interesting watching all this negative coverage of Palin because it reminds me of this dateline story. They had a father in a restaurant and the kids were running wild. Most of the people in the restaurant disapproved of the father and the way he was letting them run around, but most did not say anything. The same scenario but they had the mother there instead. More restaurant patrons confronted the mother about the kids than the father.

I see that same exact behavior going on here. It wasn’t that the father was more lenient or the mother more strict. Basically that the mother was being held to a higher standard. Hardly fair. Much like the press coverage.[/quote]

Are you claiming that Democrats and the press are sexist?

While I didn’t see the show, I think that the Dateline experiment is flawed. Those stunts are hardly scientific.

In my opinion, the restaurant patrons disapprove of both father and mother equally.

These were apparently “low class” parents who couldn’t control their kids. It’s much easier to say something to a woman than to an apparently uneducated man. That man may punch you in the face and start a brawl.

Women also are more likely to talk to other women about their kids.

Man generally don’t care to interfere with other people’s kids. They are more likely to live and let live.

There are certain behaviors that apply more to men and women. It’s not sexist to recognize that.

BTW, if you go to conservative areas of San Diego County, you will see more children out of control than in the progressive areas.

There are also more teenage pregnancies in the bible belt.

[briansd1]

[quote=surveyor]
Hey, Brian, I hate to break it to you but just because my daughter engages in pre-marital sex and then has a baby out of wedlock, and i’m helping her out does not mean I stop advocating for family values or upstanding moral character.

It’s BECAUSE that happened that I would be more in favor of those values because look how hard it is when you don’t adhere to it.

That scenario does not make one a hypocrite. There is precious little one can do to control children. You can’t run their lives for them.
[/quote]

That’s a pretty twisted way of looking at it.

It would be like saying that just because your daughter steals and burglarizes doesn’t mean that you don’t value property rights and safety.

Sarah Palin was a bad “executive” in that she wasn’t effective in passing on her values to her own kids, either through effective education or leading by example.

I would say that Palin was a bad (at least ineffective) mother who didn’t raise her daughter properly. A well bred young person understands the consequences of actions before she commits them.

Bristol Palin engaged in sex when she was a minor. She then had the baby as an adult.

What if Bristol committed theft or burglary? Sarah Palin would be responsible, in my view.

[quote=surveyor]
Still, I find all the Sarah bashing here interesting. Remember that she and McCain were catching up to Obama and were virtually in a neck to neck race. It was only after the economic crisis started dominating the news that their ticket started trending down.
[/quote]

Sounds like you’re claiming that the Sarah bashing is what threw the ticket in favor Obama. Absent the economic crisis, and absent the Palin bashing, McCain/Palin would have won.

If that were the case, then the Palin bashing was absolutely a marvel of political strategy by the Democrats.

Politics is a contact sport and the Democrat conducted an effective political campaign against the opposition.

The Republicans should not have picked someone so easily “bashable” only to complain about it.

What goes around comes around.

I think that laughing at Palin was not just a democratic thing. Everyone was doing it because she’s so fun to poke at.

[quote=surveyor]
On a side note, it’s also interesting watching all this negative coverage of Palin because it reminds me of this dateline story. They had a father in a restaurant and the kids were running wild. Most of the people in the restaurant disapproved of the father and the way he was letting them run around, but most did not say anything. The same scenario but they had the mother there instead. More restaurant patrons confronted the mother about the kids than the father.

I see that same exact behavior going on here. It wasn’t that the father was more lenient or the mother more strict. Basically that the mother was being held to a higher standard. Hardly fair. Much like the press coverage.[/quote]

Are you claiming that Democrats and the press are sexist?

While I didn’t see the show, I think that the Dateline experiment is flawed. Those stunts are hardly scientific.

In my opinion, the restaurant patrons disapprove of both father and mother equally.

These were apparently “low class” parents who couldn’t control their kids. It’s much easier to say something to a woman than to an apparently uneducated man. That man may punch you in the face and start a brawl.

Women also are more likely to talk to other women about their kids.

Man generally don’t care to interfere with other people’s kids. They are more likely to live and let live.

There are certain behaviors that apply more to men and women. It’s not sexist to recognize that.

BTW, if you go to conservative areas of San Diego County, you will see more children out of control than in the progressive areas.

There are also more teenage pregnancies in the bible belt.

[briansd1]

[quote=surveyor]
Hey, Brian, I hate to break it to you but just because my daughter engages in pre-marital sex and then has a baby out of wedlock, and i’m helping her out does not mean I stop advocating for family values or upstanding moral character.

It’s BECAUSE that happened that I would be more in favor of those values because look how hard it is when you don’t adhere to it.

That scenario does not make one a hypocrite. There is precious little one can do to control children. You can’t run their lives for them.
[/quote]

That’s a pretty twisted way of looking at it.

It would be like saying that just because your daughter steals and burglarizes doesn’t mean that you don’t value property rights and safety.

Sarah Palin was a bad “executive” in that she wasn’t effective in passing on her values to her own kids, either through effective education or leading by example.

I would say that Palin was a bad (at least ineffective) mother who didn’t raise her daughter properly. A well bred young person understands the consequences of actions before she commits them.

Bristol Palin engaged in sex when she was a minor. She then had the baby as an adult.

What if Bristol committed theft or burglary? Sarah Palin would be responsible, in my view.

[quote=surveyor]
Still, I find all the Sarah bashing here interesting. Remember that she and McCain were catching up to Obama and were virtually in a neck to neck race. It was only after the economic crisis started dominating the news that their ticket started trending down.
[/quote]

Sounds like you’re claiming that the Sarah bashing is what threw the ticket in favor Obama. Absent the economic crisis, and absent the Palin bashing, McCain/Palin would have won.

If that were the case, then the Palin bashing was absolutely a marvel of political strategy by the Democrats.

Politics is a contact sport and the Democrat conducted an effective political campaign against the opposition.

The Republicans should not have picked someone so easily “bashable” only to complain about it.

What goes around comes around.

I think that laughing at Palin was not just a democratic thing. Everyone was doing it because she’s so fun to poke at.

[quote=surveyor]
On a side note, it’s also interesting watching all this negative coverage of Palin because it reminds me of this dateline story. They had a father in a restaurant and the kids were running wild. Most of the people in the restaurant disapproved of the father and the way he was letting them run around, but most did not say anything. The same scenario but they had the mother there instead. More restaurant patrons confronted the mother about the kids than the father.

I see that same exact behavior going on here. It wasn’t that the father was more lenient or the mother more strict. Basically that the mother was being held to a higher standard. Hardly fair. Much like the press coverage.[/quote]

Are you claiming that Democrats and the press are sexist?

While I didn’t see the show, I think that the Dateline experiment is flawed. Those stunts are hardly scientific.

In my opinion, the restaurant patrons disapprove of both father and mother equally.

These were apparently “low class” parents who couldn’t control their kids. It’s much easier to say something to a woman than to an apparently uneducated man. That man may punch you in the face and start a brawl.

Women also are more likely to talk to other women about their kids.

Man generally don’t care to interfere with other people’s kids. They are more likely to live and let live.

There are certain behaviors that apply more to men and women. It’s not sexist to recognize that.

BTW, if you go to conservative areas of San Diego County, you will see more children out of control than in the progressive areas.

There are also more teenage pregnancies in the bible belt.

[briansd1]

[quote=surveyor]
Hey, Brian, I hate to break it to you but just because my daughter engages in pre-marital sex and then has a baby out of wedlock, and i’m helping her out does not mean I stop advocating for family values or upstanding moral character.

It’s BECAUSE that happened that I would be more in favor of those values because look how hard it is when you don’t adhere to it.

That scenario does not make one a hypocrite. There is precious little one can do to control children. You can’t run their lives for them.
[/quote]

That’s a pretty twisted way of looking at it.

It would be like saying that just because your daughter steals and burglarizes doesn’t mean that you don’t value property rights and safety.

Sarah Palin was a bad “executive” in that she wasn’t effective in passing on her values to her own kids, either through effective education or leading by example.

I would say that Palin was a bad (at least ineffective) mother who didn’t raise her daughter properly. A well bred young person understands the consequences of actions before she commits them.

Bristol Palin engaged in sex when she was a minor. She then had the baby as an adult.

What if Bristol committed theft or burglary? Sarah Palin would be responsible, in my view.

[quote=surveyor]
Still, I find all the Sarah bashing here interesting. Remember that she and McCain were catching up to Obama and were virtually in a neck to neck race. It was only after the economic crisis started dominating the news that their ticket started trending down.
[/quote]

Sounds like you’re claiming that the Sarah bashing is what threw the ticket in favor Obama. Absent the economic crisis, and absent the Palin bashing, McCain/Palin would have won.

If that were the case, then the Palin bashing was absolutely a marvel of political strategy by the Democrats.

Politics is a contact sport and the Democrat conducted an effective political campaign against the opposition.

The Republicans should not have picked someone so easily “bashable” only to complain about it.

What goes around comes around.

I think that laughing at Palin was not just a democratic thing. Everyone was doing it because she’s so fun to poke at.

[quote=surveyor]
On a side note, it’s also interesting watching all this negative coverage of Palin because it reminds me of this dateline story. They had a father in a restaurant and the kids were running wild. Most of the people in the restaurant disapproved of the father and the way he was letting them run around, but most did not say anything. The same scenario but they had the mother there instead. More restaurant patrons confronted the mother about the kids than the father.

I see that same exact behavior going on here. It wasn’t that the father was more lenient or the mother more strict. Basically that the mother was being held to a higher standard. Hardly fair. Much like the press coverage.[/quote]

Are you claiming that Democrats and the press are sexist?

While I didn’t see the show, I think that the Dateline experiment is flawed. Those stunts are hardly scientific.

In my opinion, the restaurant patrons disapprove of both father and mother equally.

These were apparently “low class” parents who couldn’t control their kids. It’s much easier to say something to a woman than to an apparently uneducated man. That man may punch you in the face and start a brawl.

Women also are more likely to talk to other women about their kids.

Man generally don’t care to interfere with other people’s kids. They are more likely to live and let live.

There are certain behaviors that apply more to men and women. It’s not sexist to recognize that.

BTW, if you go to conservative areas of San Diego County, you will see more children out of control than in the progressive areas.

There are also more teenage pregnancies in the bible belt.

[briansd1]

[quote=surveyor]
Hey, Brian, I hate to break it to you but just because my daughter engages in pre-marital sex and then has a baby out of wedlock, and i’m helping her out does not mean I stop advocating for family values or upstanding moral character.

It’s BECAUSE that happened that I would be more in favor of those values because look how hard it is when you don’t adhere to it.

That scenario does not make one a hypocrite. There is precious little one can do to control children. You can’t run their lives for them.
[/quote]

That’s a pretty twisted way of looking at it.

It would be like saying that just because your daughter steals and burglarizes doesn’t mean that you don’t value property rights and safety.

Sarah Palin was a bad “executive” in that she wasn’t effective in passing on her values to her own kids, either through effective education or leading by example.

I would say that Palin was a bad (at least ineffective) mother who didn’t raise her daughter properly. A well bred young person understands the consequences of actions before she commits them.

Bristol Palin engaged in sex when she was a minor. She then had the baby as an adult.

What if Bristol committed theft or burglary? Sarah Palin would be responsible, in my view.

[quote=surveyor]
Still, I find all the Sarah bashing here interesting. Remember that she and McCain were catching up to Obama and were virtually in a neck to neck race. It was only after the economic crisis started dominating the news that their ticket started trending down.
[/quote]

Sounds like you’re claiming that the Sarah bashing is what threw the ticket in favor Obama. Absent the economic crisis, and absent the Palin bashing, McCain/Palin would have won.

If that were the case, then the Palin bashing was absolutely a marvel of political strategy by the Democrats.

Politics is a contact sport and the Democrat conducted an effective political campaign against the opposition.

The Republicans should not have picked someone so easily “bashable” only to complain about it.

What goes around comes around.

I think that laughing at Palin was not just a democratic thing. Everyone was doing it because she’s so fun to poke at.

[quote=surveyor]
On a side note, it’s also interesting watching all this negative coverage of Palin because it reminds me of this dateline story. They had a father in a restaurant and the kids were running wild. Most of the people in the restaurant disapproved of the father and the way he was letting them run around, but most did not say anything. The same scenario but they had the mother there instead. More restaurant patrons confronted the mother about the kids than the father.

I see that same exact behavior going on here. It wasn’t that the father was more lenient or the mother more strict. Basically that the mother was being held to a higher standard. Hardly fair. Much like the press coverage.[/quote]

Are you claiming that Democrats and the press are sexist?

While I didn’t see the show, I think that the Dateline experiment is flawed. Those stunts are hardly scientific.

In my opinion, the restaurant patrons disapprove of both father and mother equally.

These were apparently “low class” parents who couldn’t control their kids. It’s much easier to say something to a woman than to an apparently uneducated man. That man may punch you in the face and start a brawl.

Women also are more likely to talk to other women about their kids.

Man generally don’t care to interfere with other people’s kids. They are more likely to live and let live.

There are certain behaviors that apply more to men and women. It’s not sexist to recognize that.

BTW, if you go to conservative areas of San Diego County, you will see more children out of control than in the progressive areas.

There are also more teenage pregnancies in the bible belt.

[Zeitgeist]

Probably because you are the party that kills babies. You are also the racist party. It took the Republicans in Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights act. Lincoln was a Republican.

[Zeitgeist]

Probably because you are the party that kills babies. You are also the racist party. It took the Republicans in Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights act. Lincoln was a Republican.

[Zeitgeist]

Probably because you are the party that kills babies. You are also the racist party. It took the Republicans in Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights act. Lincoln was a Republican.

[Zeitgeist]

Probably because you are the party that kills babies. You are also the racist party. It took the Republicans in Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights act. Lincoln was a Republican.

[Zeitgeist]

Probably because you are the party that kills babies. You are also the racist party. It took the Republicans in Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights act. Lincoln was a Republican.

[briansd1]

[quote=Zeitgeist]Probably because you are the party that kills babies. Put your money where your mouth is.[/quote]

I’m a registered Republican. But when the Republicans put idiots on the ticket you can only laugh at them.

I’ve donated money to orphanages overseas. Is that good enough for you?

[briansd1]

[quote=Zeitgeist]Probably because you are the party that kills babies. Put your money where your mouth is.[/quote]

I’m a registered Republican. But when the Republicans put idiots on the ticket you can only laugh at them.

I’ve donated money to orphanages overseas. Is that good enough for you?

[briansd1]

[quote=Zeitgeist]Probably because you are the party that kills babies. Put your money where your mouth is.[/quote]

I’m a registered Republican. But when the Republicans put idiots on the ticket you can only laugh at them.

I’ve donated money to orphanages overseas. Is that good enough for you?

[briansd1]

[quote=Zeitgeist]Probably because you are the party that kills babies. Put your money where your mouth is.[/quote]

I’m a registered Republican. But when the Republicans put idiots on the ticket you can only laugh at them.

I’ve donated money to orphanages overseas. Is that good enough for you?

[Author]

Posts