Let's Talk about Sarah Palin!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Let me revisit my original point - "Sarah Palin and her poor parenting and the direct and indirect results of that!"

Sarah couldn't tell that something was not quite right with her daughter's boyfriend's mother? If that's the case, she's even dumber that I thought.

That's right. That's always the first thing I do when my dd dates someone is I call up the kid's parents and meet with them and interview them and their neighbors and employers so I can determine whether they have a drug problem, are declaring bankruptcy, or have a sexual fetish. Then I tell my child whether she can date that kid or not.

Let me be clear: I CANNOT STAND SARAH PALIN. But it is INSANE to hold her responsible for this woman's behavior.

[Anonymous]

I agree that Sarah Palin can't be held responsible this, but my beef is that she is sort of an absolutist when it comes to making statements (eg. through policy) about the personal issues of others. She is awfully black-and-white for someone whose own life has so many shades of grey...

[Anonymous]

My beef is that she did not TEACH her DAUGHTER to have better judgment of potential dates/ boyfriends/ fathers of out-of-wedlock babies. Of course Sarah is not responsible for Mrs. Johnston's "activities," but she should have had the sense to teach that airhead daughter of hers that boys like Levi are not suitable partners. Now Bristol is tied to him for life, whether or not she wants to be. He was the local hottie hockey player, very appealing when you're 16 or 17 years old. Where were her parents to give her a more long-term view of life?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that Sarah Palin can't be held responsible this, but my beef is that she is sort of an absolutist when it comes to making statements (eg. through policy) about the personal issues of others. She is awfully black-and-white for someone whose own life has so many shades of grey...

8:36 again. Good point, pp!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My beef is that she did not TEACH her DAUGHTER to have better judgment of potential dates/ boyfriends/ fathers of out-of-wedlock babies. Of course Sarah is not responsible for Mrs. Johnston's "activities," but she should have had the sense to teach that airhead daughter of hers that boys like Levi are not suitable partners. Now Bristol is tied to him for life, whether or not she wants to be. He was the local hottie hockey player, very appealing when you're 16 or 17 years old. Where were her parents to give her a more long-term view of life?

When I was 17 I didn't give two figs for my parents POV when the hormones were raging in the back seat They taught me fine, but that didn't always matter, KWIM. There but for the grace of God go I... And if my BF was the hottie hockey player it might have been worse!

I have zero problems with critiquing Palin's policies, experience, political past or future, etc. However it is beneath supposed adults to be engaging in this kind of character assassination on such flimsy associations.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone smell another Palin setup??

[Anonymous]

Explain please, 12:49.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:she should have had the sense to teach that airhead daughter of hers that boys like Levi are not suitable partners. Now Bristol is tied to him for life, whether or not she wants to be.

Poor Levi. How come no one told him that girls like Bristol are not suitable partners?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:she should have had the sense to teach that airhead daughter of hers that boys like Levi are not suitable partners. Now Bristol is tied to him for life, whether or not she wants to be.

Poor Levi. How come no one told him that girls like Bristol are not suitable partners?

LOL

[Anonymous]

Interesting Op Ed from the WSJ

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122999917373529125.html

Who knew Sarah Palin was #4 in the Time list for Person of the Year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that Sarah Palin can't be held responsible this, but my beef is that she is sort of an absolutist when it comes to making statements (eg. through policy) about the personal issues of others. She is awfully black-and-white for someone whose own life has so many shades of grey...

Pregnancy happens. The problem is that SP is so morally opposed to abortion that she's putting her teenage daughter through a shotgun marriage that will surely (mark my words) end in divorce in a few years. And it's this shotgun marriage that brought on the relationship with the unsavory future mother-in-law of Bristol.

I don't think it's fair to attack SP's (or any politician's) kids for their imperfect behavior, but I do think it's fair to criticize SP for being a bad parent in light of her fundamentalist religious views about moral behavior. So, now is it OK for fundie teenagers to have sex, as long as they get married if a pregnancy results? And what about birth control? Don't fundies automatically oppose any form of sex education that includes basic information about birth control? If SP's daughter had no information or access to birth control because of policies SP supports, isn't it therefore partly SP's fault that her daughter got pregnant?

I worry about criticizing a woman for putting her career before her family (don't men do that?), yet when Palin tries to pass herself off as having a "normal" family and touts her "family values" I think scrutinizing the results of the choices she's made and the policies she supports is fair game. I know several women with high-powered careers who have teenage daughters who have turned out fine -- no shotgun teenage marriages, no embarrassing in-laws. These women apparently know something SP does not.

[Anonymous]

PP, you act as if BP and SP are upset about this pregnancy. Think outside the beltway. This is common in many communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, you act as if BP and SP are upset about this pregnancy. Think outside the beltway. This is common in many communities.

This is actually a very good point.

As I think outside the beltway I believe the pregnancy could possibly be an act of rebellion, too. What better way to slam your own fundamentalist parent? As difficult as child rearing is, for teens, it's an act of emancipation.

[Anonymous]

I have a difficult time with the equation articulated by 12/24/2008 00:18 that fundamentalist religious beliefs = bad parent.

This is not the way I raise my children, and clearly not the way 12/24/2008 00:18 plans to or is raising his/her children, but different in my mind does not equal bad.

This is the kind of absolutist judgment that the left equates with fundamentalism, isn't it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a difficult time with the equation articulated by 12/24/2008 00:18 that fundamentalist religious beliefs = bad parent.

This is not the way I raise my children, and clearly not the way 12/24/2008 00:18 plans to or is raising his/her children, but different in my mind does not equal bad.

This is the kind of absolutist judgment that the left equates with fundamentalism, isn't it?

Well, then, correct me if I'm wrong. But in a fundamentalist family, aren't women subservient to their husbands? If that's the case, then Palin clearly is not a fundamentalist in the true sense of the word. So you're right in saying that in Palin's case, fundamentalist religious beliefs do not necessarily translate into bad parenting.

She's just a bad parent.