Chiding the First Children

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The woman should have resigned. She was out of line. Now, where are all those Dems who made worse comments about Palin's girls.

When you become reality tv "stars" you become a public figure. Any comments on them goes with the territory.

The littleones were tv stars?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is your point? She was not mocking, "chiding" or commenting on Malia. She was raising a hypothetical for the purposes of discussion.

Again, what is your point. Are you trying to suggest that AT should be canned or forced to resign? What are you suggesting.

What's my point?: Anyone who takes cheap shots at children who have done nothing to deserve it is being an asshole.

When Lauten did it, she was being an asshole. Same with Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Tantaros was doing the same thing with her crap about Bahamas vacations and the future decisions of a 14-year-old girl. Those comments added nothing to her substantive commentary, and she was just using Malia Obama as a punching bag, so she was being an asshole too. Certainly there people of other political stripes who similarly act like assholes. Bill Maher is a perfect (Libertarian?) example. And when he takes cheap shots at children, he too should be (and has been) dubbed an asshole.

Yes, it's a double standard that politicians of all stripes will point to their own children and their experience as parents to support their political positions. That's a morally gray area, IMHO. But no matter what you think about politicians using their own children as props, it never justifies taking a cheap shot at someone else's child.

What I'm finding pretty frustrating and offensive here is that some people are trying to justify these cheap shots by Lauten, Beck, Limbaugh, and Tantaros. Just acknowledge they each had an "asshole moment" for chrissakes, chalk it up to wine or hot temper or a bad joke, and then move forward. You make it worse when you try to justify their despicable behavior.

Do you find it frustrating that you don't even know the difference between "reporting" and political commentary? Because there really are vast differences.

You're the one beating the dead horse, we can move on whenever you'd like, but you want the President to soak up as many sympathy points as possible over one silly comment that cost a person her livelihood. Ok to move on yet?

[Anonymous]

She resigned. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/12/01/elizabeth-lauten-nbc-obama-girls/19730421/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is your point? She was not mocking, "chiding" or commenting on Malia. She was raising a hypothetical for the purposes of discussion.

Again, what is your point. Are you trying to suggest that AT should be canned or forced to resign? What are you suggesting.

What's my point?: Anyone who takes cheap shots at children who have done nothing to deserve it is being an asshole.

When Lauten did it, she was being an asshole. Same with Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Tantaros was doing the same thing with her crap about Bahamas vacations and the future decisions of a 14-year-old girl. Those comments added nothing to her substantive commentary, and she was just using Malia Obama as a punching bag, so she was being an asshole too. Certainly there people of other political stripes who similarly act like assholes. Bill Maher is a perfect (Libertarian?) example. And when he takes cheap shots at children, he too should be (and has been) dubbed an asshole.

Yes, it's a double standard that politicians of all stripes will point to their own children and their experience as parents to support their political positions. That's a morally gray area, IMHO. But no matter what you think about politicians using their own children as props, it never justifies taking a cheap shot at someone else's child.

What I'm finding pretty frustrating and offensive here is that some people are trying to justify these cheap shots by Lauten, Beck, Limbaugh, and Tantaros. Just acknowledge they each had an "asshole moment" for chrissakes, chalk it up to wine or hot temper or a bad joke, and then move forward. You make it worse when you try to justify their despicable behavior.

Don't taint Libertains with Bill Maher please, he is not one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is your point? She was not mocking, "chiding" or commenting on Malia. She was raising a hypothetical for the purposes of discussion.

Again, what is your point. Are you trying to suggest that AT should be canned or forced to resign? What are you suggesting.

What's my point?: Anyone who takes cheap shots at children who have done nothing to deserve it is being an asshole.

When Lauten did it, she was being an asshole. Same with Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Tantaros was doing the same thing with her crap about Bahamas vacations and the future decisions of a 14-year-old girl. Those comments added nothing to her substantive commentary, and she was just using Malia Obama as a punching bag, so she was being an asshole too. Certainly there people of other political stripes who similarly act like assholes. Bill Maher is a perfect (Libertarian?) example. And when he takes cheap shots at children, he too should be (and has been) dubbed an asshole.

Yes, it's a double standard that politicians of all stripes will point to their own children and their experience as parents to support their political positions. That's a morally gray area, IMHO. But no matter what you think about politicians using their own children as props, it never justifies taking a cheap shot at someone else's child.

What I'm finding pretty frustrating and offensive here is that some people are trying to justify these cheap shots by Lauten, Beck, Limbaugh, and Tantaros. Just acknowledge they each had an "asshole moment" for chrissakes, chalk it up to wine or hot temper or a bad joke, and then move forward. You make it worse when you try to justify their despicable behavior.

Don't taint Libertains with Bill Maher please, he is not one.

Libertarians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The woman should have resigned. She was out of line. Now, where are all those Dems who made worse comments about Palin's girls.

When you become reality tv "stars" you become a public figure. Any comments on them goes with the territory.

I would agree. Chelsea is also open to public opinion now that she is on TV and an adult. If they choose to stay out of the public eye except when their dad's job requires them to be there, give them a pass.

[Anonymous]

When you become reality tv "stars" you become a public figure. Any comments on them goes with the territory.

They were not reality starts when Palin was running.

[Anonymous]

Also, Mahlias' skirt was short but with the tights I think it was OK. There was a discussion on another board about the length of the Holton girls skirts and people mentioned about having shorts underneath. I've seen the Holton girls without tights. Perhaps both had shorts underneath their outfits. Anyway, I do think someone (grandma/mom) should speak to the girls about being conscious of their facial expressions when they are on camera.

[Anonymous]

If I was her boss I would have asked for her resignation as well, not because of what she said, but because I would expect: 1. my Director of Communications to know why you don't post something like that on social media, and 2. how to draft an apology that will not make the problem bigger.

People seem to already be digging into the staffer's life and are posting unfavorable information, so resigning is probably the best thing she can do to get her name out of the news cycle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

When you become reality tv "stars" you become a public figure. Any comments on them goes with the territory.

They were not reality starts when Palin was running.

I did not hear the Obama campaign commenting on the Palin girls. This thread is about a GOP staffer, not some snarky media personality.

Also, I find it ironic that the Republicans rallied around an unwed mother. I guess there's a first for everything. Regrettably, attacking black people who rise above their allotted place on the social ladder is nothing new at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When you become reality tv "stars" you become a public figure. Any comments on them goes with the territory.

They were not reality starts when Palin was running.

I did not hear the Obama campaign commenting on the Palin girls. This thread is about a GOP staffer, not some snarky media personality.

Also, I find it ironic that the Republicans rallied around an unwed mother. I guess there's a first for everything. Regrettably, attacking black people who rise above their allotted place on the social ladder is nothing new at all.

When and where did anyone accuse the Obama campaign? Oh wait, the media often could be confused with the Obama campaign.

Nobody rallied around young Ms. Palin, we're just pointing out your hypocrisies.

[Anonymous]

Aaaannnndd Elizbeth Lauten was arrested when she was 17, for shoplifting.

Is anyone really surprised at her hypocrisy though?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/Elizabeth-Lauten-arrest-786543

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When you become reality tv "stars" you become a public figure. Any comments on them goes with the territory.

They were not reality starts when Palin was running.

I did not hear the Obama campaign commenting on the Palin girls. This thread is about a GOP staffer, not some snarky media personality.

Also, I find it ironic that the Republicans rallied around an unwed mother. I guess there's a first for everything. Regrettably, attacking black people who rise above their allotted place on the social ladder is nothing new at all.

When and where did anyone accuse the Obama campaign?

Well then the comparison is really apples and oranges. This thread is about the comments of a GOP staffer, not TMZ or People Magazine.

[Anonymous]

Regrettably, attacking black people who rise above their allotted place on the social ladder is nothing new at all.

So, you are going to make this about race?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Regrettably, attacking black people who rise above their allotted place on the social ladder is nothing new at all.

So, you are going to make this about race?

Absolutely. When you add up the many criticisms about the Obamas public appearance, it ads up to a coordinated campaign to say "those people do not look like they belong in the White House ". Go back and read the posts on this site.