squishyx Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 (edited) So, I do hold the men and the women to the same standard - it's not a concern of mine. Period. Not sure why you are anyone else assumed I didn't My first post in the thread was "Who cares, her kids aren't running for VP she is, her personal life is just that and is no concern to us. If she is a chronic liar about things in office fine, but under the roof topics should stay there." But somehow we drifted off and started talking about the kind of quality mother she was being by accepting VP when her family has a lot of "stuff" going on and suddenly my opinion of her being a lousy mother made me the scapegoat for female oppression in this country. we teach best what we most need to learn.... Yeah, I always tell people why they think the way they do and that their opinions are wrong Edited September 3, 2008 by squishyx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Not sure why you are anyone else assumed I didn't Because you were going on about it - and about her ambition, which you found so utterly distasteful. I still haven't figured out whether you believe she shouldn't try to be VP because of her family situation, or not - you didn't make that clear - just that you thought that the fact that she was a lousy mother didn't actually impact her ability to do the job. And, since you can't give me an analogous male in that situation (and you don't admit that Biden and his Senate seat would have fit the bill), because you don't want to admit that she's not the primary caregiver, her husband, is, I am supposed to believe that would hold a man whose politics you approve of to the same standard, but I don't don't have any actual proof to go on. Meanwhile, I can tell you, I don't expect any politician to think of their family before their career. Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Because you were going on about it - and about her ambition, which you found so utterly distasteful. I still haven't figured out whether you believe she shouldn't try to be VP because of her family situation, or not - you didn't make that clear - just that you thought that the fact that she was a lousy mother didn't actually impact her ability to do the job. And, since you can't give me an analogous male in that situation (and you don't admit that Biden and his Senate seat would have fit the bill), because you don't want to admit that she's not the primary caregiver, her husband, is, I am supposed to believe that would hold a man whose politics you approve of to the same standard, but I don't don't have any actual proof to go on.Meanwhile, I can tell you, I don't expect any politician to think of their family before their career. Ever. You can't quote me and not expect me to respond, I don't think that qualifies as going on and on. Under the same logic could I not make the counter argument that you are going on and on about Biden being the same case as Palin? Or that PK is going on and on with her vendetta against me? or that Lizdevil is going on and on about baby's with down syndrome being aborted? Anyway to be clear, I personally wouldn't run for VP in Palin's shoes, I would keep the job I had and scale back a bit to make sure I was there for my son or daughter. But that's just me, I'm not going to judge her decision to run and whether she should or not, I don't really feel it's my place to say what someone does with their own life. She has made the choice and I don't hold her family decisions against her in the terms of if she will be a good VP or not. I don't think that excludes me from being able to call her a bad parent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Anyway to be clear, I personally wouldn't run for VP in Palin's shoes, I would keep the job I had and scale back a bit to make sure I was there for my son or daughter. But that's just me, I'm not going to judge her decision to run and whether she should or not, I don't really feel it's my place to say what someone does with their own life. She has made the choice and I don't hold her family decisions against her in the terms of if she will be a good VP or not. I don't think that excludes me from being able to call her a bad parent. I hate to see what you would say if you were judging then. I think it's a little confusing because you're saying things don't really matter, that you won't judge, that it doesn't affect her status as VP but then you will talk about it as if it does, IMO. It's also a little confusing because you appear to believe this is a completely unique situation with nothing possibly being analogous when I don't think this choice is that unusual, as Sue pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Yawn, what am I claiming to know other then giving my opinion that Sarah Pilan is a bad mother? Pretty sure it's clear this is my opinion, and I have said as such. I can't say for a fact that she is a bad mother since good / bad mother has no real definition. It's been my opinion all along. This is why I think your posts are immature. There is indeed a real definition of a bad parent - mother or father. If you don't think so you're head is so far up your rump there's no helping you. Show me where I have praised Biden please. Annotated: I think Biden's case is drastically different because he ran for senate before the accident, he was left as a single parent and needed to support his surviving family and had trouble accepting the position even then. This last italicized section is editorializing in the positive, your stamp of chosen truthiness. How about this: if he had had any trouble he'd have resigned his seat and joined a local law practice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 (edited) Well I can't wait to see the people who used the National Enquirer for gospel with the Edwards situation explain this away as malicious slander... Enquirer story on Palin Edited September 3, 2008 by Hasan4978 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Well I can't wait to see the people who used the National Enquirer for gospel with the Edwards situation explain this away as malicious slander...Enquirer story on Palin Can you imagine a parent and child arguing? This is outrageous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 (edited) Can you imagine a parent and child arguing? This is outrageous! Well an attempted cover-up (while not new in politics) is a horse of a different color. I don't know if you read down to this blurb either: The ENQUIRER has also learned that Palin's family is embroiled in a vicious war that is now exposing her darkest secrets, threatening to destroy her political career.Palin's ongoing war with her ex brother-in-law Mike Wooten, a state trooper, has caused multiple sources to come forward with shocking allegations about the governor. Details of those allegations, the family feud, and Palin's attempt to cover up her teen daughter's pregnancy are in the new issue of The ENQUIRER. I'm not saying I believe there is substance to these 'shocking allegations' whatever they are, hell I don't really want to believe it - but the Repubs here were all too willing to take the Enquirer's word as gospel with Edwards, let's see them do that here too. And yes I know the Enquirer was 'right' about Edwards, but I'm not even sure they were the first ones on the story. Edwards was rumored for months to have had an affair, they just dug up the evidence. Edited September 3, 2008 by Hasan4978 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 I don't see how I can be shocked or upset over news I haven't read or seen yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 (edited) I'm not saying I believe it's true, hell I don't really want to believe it - but the Repubs here were all too willing to take the Enquirer's word as gospel with Edwards, let's see them do that here too. Well - it's actually been in all the papers as of last Thursday I read it up in New Haven. (about getting her ex-brother-in-law fired.) Edited September 3, 2008 by Pepperkorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 You can't quote me and not expect me to respond, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Well - it's actually been in all the papers as of last Thursday I read it up in New Haven. (about getting her ex-brother-in-law fired.) So in other words they piggybacked onto a story, added one or two details and called it an exclusive. There's a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 So in other words they piggybacked onto a story, added one or two details and called it an exclusive. There's a surprise. Hahaha! I didn't even think about that! I don't like the Enquirer -- It's so hurtful. I try to avoid seeing the headlines on the line at the grocery store - because all too often they are true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Well an attempted cover-up (while not new in politics) is a horse of a different color. I don't know if you read down to this blurb either:I'm not saying I believe there is substance to these 'shocking allegations' whatever they are, hell I don't really want to believe it - but the Repubs here were all too willing to take the Enquirer's word as gospel with Edwards, let's see them do that here too. And yes I know the Enquirer was 'right' about Edwards, but I'm not even sure they were the first ones on the story. Edwards was rumored for months to have had an affair, they just dug up the evidence. I have read it other places than the Enquirer (the Palin stuff - obviously, the Edwards stuff hit other places than the NE a while back). There are different versions. Not sure whether she's lawyered up, yet. And yes, potential abuse of power (if that is what it turns out to be) is absolutely fair game for inquiry for any candidate. Go to it, NE and all news outlets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 This is why I think your posts are immature. There is indeed a real definition of a bad parent - mother or father. If you don't think so you're head is so far up your rump there's no helping you. Annotated: This last italicized section is editorializing in the positive, your stamp of chosen truthiness. How about this: if he had had any trouble he'd have resigned his seat and joined a local law practice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetsGoDevils Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 Nice Youtube clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWP5ljQV79s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice dog Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 (edited) CBC footage...really bizzare. watch the other clips as well. very convincing evidence to a crazy family cover-up...wow. yeah, if she was 7 months pregnant, i'm bloody mickey mouse. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2UICmdTW74...feature=related love the creepy music in this one... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7eODe-WtWk...feature=related Edited September 18, 2008 by ice dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts