http://www.politico.com/static/PPM103_ethics2222.html

Here’s the Cliff Notes.

1) Palin didn’t do anything wrong.

2) If you want to weasel it and say she “may have given the improper appearance or hint of having done something wrong”, you can kindly go f*ck yourself. Wooten was a danger to the entire public (not just the Palins), and police authorities were NOT effectively addressing the problem.

ILC, I just hope for Bristol’s case that she isn’t marrying the father of her child simply because he is the father of her child (or for any other reason than what marriage is supposed to be about). Because, if that was the case, that would be a big mistake as well.

Regards,
Peter H.

1) They like kids.
2) They don’t like abortions.
3) They like marriages.
4) They don’t like premarital sex, true, but that is an AFTERTHOUGHT to (1), (2) and (3).

Bristol Palin is having a kid, not having an abortion, and getting married. That’s 3 out of 4. And it’s the most important 3 out of 4… making the 4th forgivable. Not hypocrisy… you just have to TAKE THE TIME TO KNOW the people you are blathering about.

Now Obama has said, “If my girl makes a mistake, I don’t want her punished with a child”… or, presumably, a husband. In other words, he’d take her for an abortion. Such a girl would be 0-for-4, on the ERW scale.

The reason that conservatives “attack” unwed motherHOOD is because it’s bad for society, bad for the mothers, and bad for kids.

In far too many cases, the unwed mother and her kids become wards of the state and the kids, for the most part, do not do well (see numerous studies). The welfare state relieves the “fathers” of any responsibility whatsoever. That’s what I have a problem with.

IMHO, Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy is unfortunate as most people would agree. The difference here is that the baby’s father and the mother’s family are stepping up to the plate to make sure the baby is welcomed into a family – accepting the responsibility and doing the best they can.

Watching the loons on the left decompensate over this tells me that McCain made a brilliant choice. On purpose or by accident, I don’t know.

The reason that conservatives “attack” unwed motherHOOD is because it’s bad for society, bad for the mothers, and bad for kids.

In far too many cases, the unwed mother and her kids become wards of the state and the kids, for the most part, do not do well (see numerous studies). The welfare state relieves the “fathers” of any responsibility whatsoever. That’s what I have a problem with.

IMHO, Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy is unfortunate as most people would agree. The difference here is that the baby’s father and the mother’s family are stepping up to the plate to make sure the baby is welcomed into a family – doing the best they can.

Watching the loons on the left decompensate over this tells me that McCain made a brilliant choice. On purpose or by accident, I don’t know.

That would be because her daughter admits it was a bad decision, is carrying the baby to term, and is marrying the father.

Quite different than the liberal teens who have promiscuous sex and just abort the consequences — over and over and over again.

And the issue here is that gay Democrats say it’s perfectly acceptable to attack families. Since Obama endorses and supports Barney Frank as well, we now have the Obama campaign endorsing and supporting attacking candidates’ families.

- Palin is a lifelong registered Republican. This is documented from Alaska voter registration records.

- Palin’s husband is a partly a native, racial minority – one of the Eskimo branches – and belonged to the AIP during the time when it was more mainstream, or focused on getting the federal government off Alaskans’ backs.

- If Obama married a part-Hawaiian who had been involved with a Hawaiian nativist party a few years, no one would care. Again this goes to double standards.

Obama’s line toward Palin consists of deriding her as inexperienced and, in the process, ignoring her gubernatorial experience. He’ll talk about her mayoral experience and you’d never know that she was Governor of anything, or that her Governor experiences totally outclasses his pathetic Senate experience.

Also, note that The Snob called the scenario of one of his daughters getting pregnant as a “mistake.” Yet Sarah’s statement called Bristol’s pregnancy a “blessing.”

Does that mean that Michelle Obama made 2 mistakes?

Go figure.

Regards,
Peter H.

Bruce/Dan – atencion por favor.

Regards,
Peter H.

Isn’t it interesting that libtards are always looking to find “hypocrisy” among conservatives, and they think that when something pops up (like Bristol Palin’s blessed event), that somehow all of conservatism is also tainted.

To explain the obvious to the libtards, here goes – we do have standards, we have values and we are human beings who violate them. We are not perfect, and we know it.

That’s why libtards are so out of whack. They think perfection in either a country or an individual is possible, provided they’re the ones in the driver’s seat. And they think we’re sitting here all judgmental when someone messes up – whether it’s John Edwards, Bill Clinton or even The SnObama.

I will be the first to confess that I’m judgmental when people make bad decisions that are destructive to the things that I hold dear. That’s why I jump all over posters who knowingly spew the lies they picked up from DailyKaka or DemonicUnderwear.

All I can say to the lower-case-libtards is that the desire that you have to find out some way that we can be shown as hypocrites and say that this disqualifies Sarah Palin, is just a waste of everybody’s time – and it also demonstrates to us just exactly what type of person you are.

Old Asian proverb: never complain about your neighbor’s front yard when your own is unclean.

Regards,
Peter H.