Monday, September 1, 2008

SARAH PALIN PART TWO

The news of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is disturbing at three levels. The children of the candidates are off limits -period. The Palins claim they were forced to go public to dispel the rumors that their Down syndrome son was really the son of Bristol. Only weasels of the lowest form of life would have promoted this rumor. What is truly disturbing is, if Sarah Palin were a Democrat the Family Values people would be foaming at the mouths in the same way these weasels on the Democratic side are using today’s news to their advantage. Children are not political pawns for either side.

Obama must denounce The Daily Kos for spreading this false rumor, or face the title King Scum Weasal.

First Sarah Palin decides she can handle the position of veep while having a 4 month old Down syndrome son at home. I do not doubt that her husband will be an incredible dad and will step up to the plate to support his wife’s ambitions. Then we learn that she will be on the campaign trail while her 17 year daughter is in her final months of pregnancy. Maybe I was raised differently. I remember my mother being their nearly 24/7 for my sister while she was pregnant, while in her 20's. The question is who will take the call at three in the morning from Bristol when she cannot make the baby stop crying?

This just reinforces in me that Sarah Palin is so blinded by her need for power that she cannot see the immediate needs of her family. To be fair, I have no doubt McCain, Biden, and Obama would act the same way as Sarah Palin. When it comes to a need for power the four of them leave me very disturb.

Finally, what does it say about McCain that for perceived political advantage he would ask Sarah Palin to make these sacrifices to her family? I truly fear people this obsessed with power, and so should you. I have lost all respect for McCain.

On a side not, during the debates someone must ask the candidates if they favor mandatory birth control education in the high schools. This was an issue before today, which must be addressed by the candidates.

Other side note - on the eve of Bush II's first election he was ordered to sit for a deposition related to claims he lied in an affidavit related to a civil rights lawsuit. His testimony was in conflict with that of state troopers. The state settled the lawsuit before Bush had to sit for deposition. What is it with Republican governors and state troopers?

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Obama must denounce DKOS? Has McCain denounced any conservative who has spread lies and falsehoods about Obama's religion, patriotism, et al.? No!! In fact he has repeatedly washed his hands of state and PAC organizations saying that they are beyond his control.. What a crock!!
If Obama's daughter's were older and found to be pregnant, the response would hardly be restrained!
What about Palin's association with the Alaska Independence Party in the '90's? They wanted to secede from the Union and forn their own country!! Country First says McCain..Is this what he meant by that?

Juan O'Leary

BobbyWC said...

Mr. O'Leary, while I appeciate your frustration I have never subscribed to the notion that just because my neighbor never punishes their child I should not punidh mine.

While it tells me a lot about McCain's character that he has not denounced the racists Hannity and Limbaugh (remember the Curious George comments), it also tells me a lot about Obama if he does not denounce The DailyKok.

I have no use for the enemies of humanity - Snollygosters

BobbyWC

Anonymous said...

Kumbaya!!!

J O'L

Anonymous said...

From an email memo meant for Republican insiders:

Please see the following points on Gov. Palin's family.
* Governor Palin and her husband Todd have a loving family and their children mean everything to them.
* This is a very personal matter for the family.
* The media should respect Bristol's privacy.
* (If pressed) The children of candidates do not choose to run for office and be thrust into the spotlight.

I wonder if Terri Schiavo and her family were given the same type of consideration?

Wile E. Coyote



http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/gops_internal_talking_points_f.php

BobbyWC said...

Wile,

what you are defining is Snollygosterism - there are no underlying principles here - just kill, kill, kill,

They have her off her game and avoiding the press - she needs to come out swinging like Hillary did what the Clintons first went to the White House

Talk about my children and I will castrate you.

The Repubs are making her look weak by keeping her silent. I personally want to see her sucker punch the Daily Kos.

Look her children are off limits - but how she manages her family is not.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

the real story developing around this is not about Palin--it's about the hip-shooting McCain making a decision on little evidence.

As far as her family life being off-limits, that flies in the face of the last twenty years of wing-nut behavior, which, red-faced as you might get with indignation and thoughts that there are enough actually decent people left in the country to form a counter to the monster we have created since 1980, well, the last two election cycles demonstrate pretty clearly that there are no bounds.

BobbyWC said...

Stan, from a historical perspective you are correct - but I am guided by my own moral compass and not that of snollygosters - children are off limits - period.

I just heard O'Reilly make two statements which lead me to believe he believes McCain has screwed up royally - [1] "in this country we do not get involved in the private decisions people make in their lives - such as having a baby" - I agree - but this goes against every thing Republicans have been preaching since 1980 - further O'Reilly is the biggest homophobe on talk radio - he has no credibility; and [2] he called a woman a loon because she argued that Bristol's pregnancy is evidence Palin's opposition to sex education is part of the problem

O'Reilly is truly concerned with Palin to be making such stupid statements.

On Bristol only a complete moron believes they have control over their 17 year old son or daughter -even if they are doing everything you are asking of them it is because they are choosing to follow the rules - not because you have control over them - this simple reality is why I believe it is time to bring cucumbers and condoms into the classroom.

The best parents in the world cannot control their child's actions on this issue. It is not a reflection on the parents - it is a reflection on reality.

Bobby WC

Mas Triste said...

BW,

I try not to sit in judgment too much and I am very socially liberal in any event.

However, as a political observer, I think it is interesting that what was shaping up as one of the biggest political blowouts in quite some time has not only become a race it has become a race because of good old fashioned soap opera material.

Obama should have picked Hillary and even he realizes it at this point. I am enjoying watching the morally righteous on both sides get a little thrown back at them.

I mean, didn't Obama make a speech or something a couple of days ago?

K

Anonymous said...

BWC,

By the way, good on you for resurrecting "snollygoster." I hope it takes. It's a very useful word, and not just in the political context.

As far as private moral compasses go, good luck with that. It's all we're left with once we've given up the rational commitment of the Enlightenment. It's all those private compasses that the wingnut media monsters keep spinning with their collection of "hot button" issues --throw out some red-meat term from abortion to gaiety and control a whole bunch of private moral compasses. Public morality must, by definition, be rationally defensible and account for known facts.

The last of my three sons is twenty-one now, and I know that there's no controlling all of their choices, but there is nonetheless the parental duty to educate and supervise, including educating on the realities of sexuality.

BobbyWC said...

I disagree with you about the moral compass issue because you are not moral by your words but by your actions.

I do not believe moral people lead by judgment, they lead by example. I do not believe moral people judge people's private behavior. A person's private behavior may inform me about a persons character, but that is not judgment.

For me moral people set out positive rules - they trust in their fellow man to act correctly -their is nothing moral or conservative with being obsessed with another's private behavior.

Social conservatives are 100% anti conservative. No true conservative believes you can regulate behavior with rules. True conservatives believe in allowing people to manage their own lives, unless it can be shown the person is acting in a way which injures society

Bobby WC