southsider2k5 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 31, 2008 -> 01:09 PM) John Kerry on Stephanoplous: The exact samething could have been said about Obama. He could have actually chosen a VP who was for "change", instead he took a Washington insider with ties to big banking, and the messes in bankruptcy and mortgage. He was a slave to the left who had to address Baracks foreign policy vaccuum. He picked John McCain to be his running mate. Ironic, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 31, 2008 -> 01:09 PM) John Kerry on Stephanoplous: Kerry didn't pick his first choice, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Bad timing for the convention, but good timing for Sarah Palin who just announced that her 17 year old daughter is pregnant. I heard it on Fox News but can't find it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 10:14 AM) Bad timing for the convention, but good timing for Sarah Palin who just announced that her 17 year old daughter is pregnant. I heard it on Fox News but can't find it yet. No doubt a Spears fan. ETA: Jim just told me that he heard she isn't, but that there are rumors that she was and the little one that Palin claims is her son is really her grandson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Steff @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 09:18 AM) No doubt a Spears fan. ETA: Jim just told me that he heard she isn't, but that there are rumors that she was and the little one that Palin claims is her son is really her grandson. Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin and husband Todd are talking directly about their 17-year-old daughter's pregnancy. In a joint statement released by the McCain campaign, the Palins say their daughter will keep the baby and marry the father. Full statement: We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us. Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support. Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family. We ask the media to respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates. Link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 11:57 AM) Link. Not related to the rumors Jim heard. But good for her for being responsible (the 17 year old) with this pregnancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Steff @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 10:01 AM) Not related to the rumors Jim heard. Actually, it appears that you can relate it to those rumors. Different link. Bristol Palin, a senior in high school, is about 5 months along, in her second trimester, according to the aide. The aide said they decided to reveal this information now because of rampant Internet rumors that Sarah Palin’s four month old baby, who has Down’s Syndrome, was actually Bristol’s. “In the course of correcting that, we needed to get the truth out,” said the McCain aide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 11:03 AM) Actually, it appears that you can relate it to those rumors. Different link. 2 different kids, 2 different pregnancies, one is a rumor, one is a fact. I see the looong stretch, but I wouldn't relate one to the other. Hopefully she has a happy healthy pregnancy and gets left alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Steff @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 10:06 AM) 2 different kids, 2 different pregnancies, one is a rumor, one is a fact. I see the looong stretch, but I wouldn't relate one to the other. Hopefully she has a happy healthy pregnancy and gets left alone. Here's the key, if the rumors are that the 4 month old baby actually belonged to the daughter, but the daughter is 5 months pregnant with another child, then the 4 month old can't possibly belong to the daughter. The daughter would have to have been 1 month pregnant at the time that she gave birth to the other kid for that to work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Shotgun wedding FTW. First off, for the record I'd like to clarify that I believe this has no bearing whatsoever on the presidential race, Palin's personal character, or anything like that, and that it's the business of her family and her family only. Now, having said that, it's my personal belief that getting married just because you're knocked up is a terrible idea. You're either meant to be married to someone or you aren't (and I don't believe in soul mates btw but that's another subject), and having a baby is NOT going to automatically make it work. However, I do hope it works out for her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 12:10 PM) Shotgun wedding FTW. First off, for the record I'd like to clarify that I believe this has no bearing whatsoever on the presidential race, Palin's personal character, or anything like that, and that it's the business of her family and her family only. Now, having said that, it's my personal belief that getting married just because you're knocked up is a terrible idea. You're either meant to be married to someone or you aren't (and I don't believe in soul mates btw but that's another subject), and having a baby is NOT going to automatically make it work. However, I do hope it works out for her. You are absolutely right lostfan. This has no bearing on anything. Her daughter isn't running for anything. And in the end, it really doesn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 12:08 PM) Here's the key, if the rumors are that the 4 month old baby actually belonged to the daughter, but the daughter is 5 months pregnant with another child, then the 4 month old can't possibly belong to the daughter. The daughter would have to have been 1 month pregnant at the time that she gave birth to the other kid for that to work out. Yea.. Having just had one, I'm pretty up to date on how the baby thing works... So obviously the rumor is bulls*** which is why I wouldn't relate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 12:10 PM) Shotgun wedding FTW. First off, for the record I'd like to clarify that I believe this has no bearing whatsoever on the presidential race, Palin's personal character, or anything like that, and that it's the business of her family and her family only. Now, having said that, it's my personal belief that getting married just because you're knocked up is a terrible idea. You're either meant to be married to someone or you aren't (and I don't believe in soul mates btw but that's another subject), and having a baby is NOT going to automatically make it work. However, I do hope it works out for her. Agree 100000%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 My only interest is if McCain knew this when he selected her as his running mate. On first glance, I think I would be impressed if he knew. If he didn't, it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when he received the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Texsox @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) My only interest is if McCain knew this when he selected her as his running mate. On first glance, I think I would be impressed if he knew. If he didn't, it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when he received the news. No one ever reads my links... McCain was aware of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy before he chose her mother for his running mate, the aide said. “Senator McCain knew this and felt in no way did it disqualify her from being vice president,” said the aide. “Families have difficulties sometimes and lucky for her she has a supportive family.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 11:39 AM) No one ever reads my links... LOL, I was just finishing that. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 For a far more accurate portrayal about how I and probably all of the people on here feel, this is from talkingpointsmemo.com JUST REALLY ODD We haven't touched it. But you probably know there have been internet-based rumors claiming that Sarah Palin's newborn son Trig is actually the son of her 17 year old daughter, Bristol. In an effort to knock down these rumors, Palin and the McCain camp have now put out a statement claiming that Bristol Palin is currently five months pregnant with child, which she plans to keep and that she will soon marry the father. I really do not know what to make of this story. But we wanted to keep you up on the latest and particularly the McCain/Palin statement. Late Update: I'll note also that the McCain campaign is lashing out at 'liberal bloggers' for this story coming to light and even perhaps the Obama campaign. I think we can chalk that down as another intemperate falsehood emanating from their campaign. I will note this. Vetting works in a fairly established way with most campaigns. The standard procedure in a case like this would have been for the campaign to have gone to a trusted reporter -- and by that I don't mean a hack but someone the campaign knew would deal with the story in an appropriate way -- and given them the story about the family drama the Palins are going through, how the daughter is planning to have the baby, how it confirms the family's values, etc. In an ideal world, the daughter's life would be her own business. But in the world we live in the best for all concerned would be to give it a respectful airing on day one or two and take it off the table rather than have it come out in some more jagged and painful way. We don't care about Palin's daughter. Her life is her own. She's not running for anything. What this does show is much more confirmation of what Republican operatives and pols are saying loquaciously off-the-record: that they don't think there was any real vetting of Palin. Acting out from the McCain camp will not change that. (ed.note: In the original version of this post, I wrote that "Bristol Palin is currently five months pregnant with another child, which she plans to keep ..." The meaning of another was to distinguish this pregnancy from the rumor that she carried Palin's son Trig. Several readers read this as an insinuation that this was Bristol's second pregnancy. That wasn't the intention and that doesn't strike me as a logical reading. But to avoid any misunderstanding, I revised.) I didn't link it because this was on the left side comments by the editors/writers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 This is pretty much Tom Eagleton II. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 naw, this shouldn't matter. Troopergate might. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco72 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 01:42 PM) naw, this shouldn't matter. Troopergate might. I've been reading and lurking for awhile as I've tried to make up my own mind on the Palin VP pick. I disagree with Bmags on this... there seems to be a lot of discussion on troopergate (lol at the 'gate'-ization of it already), but I really do not see it as a major issue. Worst case, it is one firing (it does not make it right, but it is not a systematic process of firing a group of people) of an individual that, if the facts are true, deserved to get fired. However, since Palin was brought on as a social conservative, as I believe she was, then there are certainly some 'family values' implications of her daughter's pregnancy. It will not affect my vote, but I can see it being a bigger issue for some than the so-called troopergate. (Note: Just before I posted this, I did post in the "read and acknowlegde" thread for the 'buster) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 01:42 PM) naw, this shouldn't matter. Troopergate might. No, doesn't matter in the least. Abstinence-only education really really really works. Honest. And even though Palin is rabidly anti-choice and doesn't believe in choice, she and the rest of the McCain camp are going to try to score political points by stating how proud they are of Bristol Palin's "choice" to have the baby and to mary the unnamed father. A 1985 DUI for Palin's husband doesn't matter. This will matter, and should matter, even though I agree I'd like to see Bristol Palin's privacy respected as much as it could be. But, before we as a country elect officials who are going to be instrumental in the legislation of our so-called morality and are going to decide whether abstinence-only education is going to continue, let's see how well all that morality and abstinence preaching is working out for the Palins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 03:14 PM) No, doesn't matter in the least. Abstinence-only education really really really works. Honest. And even though Palin is rabidly anti-choice and doesn't believe in choice, she and the rest of the McCain camp are going to try to score political points by stating how proud they are of Bristol Palin's "choice" to have the baby and to mary the unnamed father. A 1985 DUI for Palin's husband doesn't matter. This will matter, and should matter, even though I agree I'd like to see Bristol Palin's privacy respected as much as it could be. But, before we as a country elect officials who are going to be instrumental in the legislation of our so-called morality and are going to decide whether abstinence-only education is going to continue, let's see how well all that morality and abstinence preaching is working out for the Palins. Maybe it will, but no, it shouldn't. Not because abstinence-only education works, but because its failure in one case does not prove anything -- just as the failure of one sex-ed educated hs'er to use a condom doesn't prove that sex-ed is worthless. Abstinence-only is laughable completely on its own, with or without Bristol Palin's pregnancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (Disco72 @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 08:02 PM) I've been reading and lurking for awhile as I've tried to make up my own mind on the Palin VP pick. I disagree with Bmags on this... there seems to be a lot of discussion on troopergate (lol at the 'gate'-ization of it already), but I really do not see it as a major issue. Worst case, it is one firing (it does not make it right, but it is not a systematic process of firing a group of people) of an individual that, if the facts are true, deserved to get fired. However, since Palin was brought on as a social conservative, as I believe she was, then there are certainly some 'family values' implications of her daughter's pregnancy. It will not affect my vote, but I can see it being a bigger issue for some than the so-called troopergate. (Note: Just before I posted this, I did post in the "read and acknowlegde" thread for the 'buster) It wasn't one firing, it was pressure from the governor's office to fire a trooper, and then that person refused and was fired. I doubt the governor cared so much about that person's performance to start a purge in the office, especially since the subsequent hiring had a sexual harassment case against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Sep 1, 2008 -> 08:14 PM) No, doesn't matter in the least. Abstinence-only education really really really works. Honest. And even though Palin is rabidly anti-choice and doesn't believe in choice, she and the rest of the McCain camp are going to try to score political points by stating how proud they are of Bristol Palin's "choice" to have the baby and to mary the unnamed father. A 1985 DUI for Palin's husband doesn't matter. This will matter, and should matter, even though I agree I'd like to see Bristol Palin's privacy respected as much as it could be. Okay, I note your point. BUt this girl is going to be pushed into the spotlight when undoubtedly she did not want this attention. It was probably hard enough for her to get taken out of her schooling and kept like a secret,, now she's the fodder for a political fight. If McCain-Palin don't politicize it, then this side shouldn't either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 FWIW, in response, Obama said that people's families are off limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts