If McCain / Obama could pick new VP's without negative repercussion

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

People make mistakes and the mistakes of a 17 year old female should not be an issue in a Presidential election.

This is where the disconnect is from those on the right. The left aren't really bashing the mistakes of a 17 year old female.

They are bashing the actions (or lack thereof) of a 44 year old female that is running for Vice President of the United States. Her judgment in teaching abstinence only is what is in question. She enabled her daughter to be in this position by not allowing the options of birth control and/or contraceptives to be introduced as viable options in the extremely rare event that a teenage couple wouldn't be able to control their raging hormones.

It is that judgment that is being brought to light and her desire to have that same type of thinking pushed onto the rest of us.

I hope that this clears your view so that you can see around the strawman in front of you.

 

[ProfJohn]

The 90% thing is BS.

The VAST majority of votes in the Senate are unanimous.

Also, Obama voted with his party 96% of the time.
McCain voted with his party 88% of the time.

Yet McCain is painted as the guy towing the party line while Obama is the agent of 'change.'

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The 90% thing is BS.

The VAST majority of votes in the Senate are unanimous.

Also, Obama voted with his party 96% of the time.
McCain voted with his party 88% of the time.

Yet McCain is painted as the guy towing the party line while Obama is the agent of 'change.'

When your party's leader, the sitting president, has a record-low approval rating, that makes the new guy an agent of change. Not hard to figure that one out.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

People make mistakes and the mistakes of a 17 year old female should not be an issue in a Presidential election.

This is where the disconnect is from those on the right. The left aren't really bashing the mistakes of a 17 year old female.

They are bashing the actions (or lack thereof) of a 44 year old female that is running for Vice President of the United States. Her judgment in teaching abstinence only is what is in question. She enabled her daughter to be in this position by not allowing the options of birth control and/or contraceptives to be introduced as viable options in the extremely rare event that a teenage couple wouldn't be able to control their raging hormones.

It is that judgment that is being brought to light and her desire to have that same type of thinking pushed onto the rest of us.

I hope that this clears your view so that you can see around the strawman in front of you.

Can you prove that she never talked to her daughter about condoms or anything else??

Or are you taking her public stance and assuming it applies to what she tells her daughters??

One of the key things about abstinence education is that it allows parents to control whether their children are taught about condoms and birth control instead of having the public school system teach them.

I'd like to see proof that Palin never told her daughter a thing about birth control.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

People make mistakes and the mistakes of a 17 year old female should not be an issue in a Presidential election.

This is where the disconnect is from those on the right. The left aren't really bashing the mistakes of a 17 year old female.

They are bashing the actions (or lack thereof) of a 44 year old female that is running for Vice President of the United States. Her judgment in teaching abstinence only is what is in question. She enabled her daughter to be in this position by not allowing the options of birth control and/or contraceptives to be introduced as viable options in the extremely rare event that a teenage couple wouldn't be able to control their raging hormones.

It is that judgment that is being brought to light and her desire to have that same type of thinking pushed onto the rest of us.

I hope that this clears your view so that you can see around the strawman in front of you.

Can you prove that she never talked to her daughter about condoms or anything else??

Or are you taking her public stance and assuming it applies to what she tells her daughters??

One of the key things about abstinence education is that it allows parents to control whether their children are taught about condoms and birth control instead of having the public school system teach them.

I'd like to see proof that Palin never told her daughter a thing about birth control.

Are you insinuating that she is a hypocrite and is telling the country that abstinence only is the way to go but living a completely different lifestyle (one of a social liberal) in her own home? Why, that'd be down right hypocritical.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

People make mistakes and the mistakes of a 17 year old female should not be an issue in a Presidential election.

This is where the disconnect is from those on the right. The left aren't really bashing the mistakes of a 17 year old female.

They are bashing the actions (or lack thereof) of a 44 year old female that is running for Vice President of the United States. Her judgment in teaching abstinence only is what is in question. She enabled her daughter to be in this position by not allowing the options of birth control and/or contraceptives to be introduced as viable options in the extremely rare event that a teenage couple wouldn't be able to control their raging hormones.

It is that judgment that is being brought to light and her desire to have that same type of thinking pushed onto the rest of us.

I hope that this clears your view so that you can see around the strawman in front of you.

If you really think a 17 year olds decision to disregard her mothers instructions equates to failing of the mother. A mother can only do so much.

If we are going to put these people on trial for the failures of their children and or the systems they instruct. The whole damn nations have problems. From abstience only to pro-contraceptive, the system doesnt work all the time. I heard a stat this morning 750,000 17 year olds have children in this country. Obama's effing mother was 17 when she was pregnant with Obama.

The dirt the left is tossing at this women's child is disgusting. Really below the belt stuff.

Troopergate is legit, this is not.

 

[ProfJohn]

Something interesting for those of you who want to educate yourself on Palin and where she stands.
link

It is a candidate questionnaire from her run for governor.
Go through and look at her answers and see if you notice a pattern.
Just the answers:

Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught.

No, again, parents know better than government what is best for their children.

Within Alaska law, I support parents deciding what is the best education venue for their child.

Creating an atmosphere where parents feel welcome to choose the venues of education for their children.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

People make mistakes and the mistakes of a 17 year old female should not be an issue in a Presidential election.

This is where the disconnect is from those on the right. The left aren't really bashing the mistakes of a 17 year old female.

They are bashing the actions (or lack thereof) of a 44 year old female that is running for Vice President of the United States. Her judgment in teaching abstinence only is what is in question. She enabled her daughter to be in this position by not allowing the options of birth control and/or contraceptives to be introduced as viable options in the extremely rare event that a teenage couple wouldn't be able to control their raging hormones.

It is that judgment that is being brought to light and her desire to have that same type of thinking pushed onto the rest of us.

I hope that this clears your view so that you can see around the strawman in front of you.

If you really think a 17 year olds decision to disregard her mothers instructions equates to failing of the mother. A mother can only do so much.

If we are going to put these people on trial for the failures of their children and or the systems they instruct. The whole damn nations have problems. From abstience only to pro-contraceptive, the system doesnt work all the time. I heard a stat this morning 750,000 17 year olds have children in this country. Obama's effing mother was 17 when she was pregnant with Obama.

The dirt the left is tossing at this women's child is disgusting. Really below the belt stuff.

Troopergate is legit, this is not.

Once again, you can't see the cornfield because of the strawman!

What happened to this girl is irrelevant to the topic of Palin's insistence on a program that will make the problem (teen pregnancy) worse.

The fact that Obama's mother was preggers at 17 is also irrelevant. You are trying to compare two different eras and claim that the information, knowledge and teachings of the youth is comparable. You are flat-out wrong. During the 50s - 60s, there was no such things as sex education in schools. There wasn't an internet to find everything under the sun. A lot of the mistakes were made because of trial and error. Also, most people were getting married at that age. People today are getting married later and later and have access to all the resources and information that they need to make informed decisions.

Well, except in the "Bible Belt" where stupidity...err...policies like this one are the norm. And where teen pregnancy rates are some of the highest and the divorce rates are the highest also.

But they are too blind to see the field b/c of the strawmen in their way also.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

People make mistakes and the mistakes of a 17 year old female should not be an issue in a Presidential election.

This is where the disconnect is from those on the right. The left aren't really bashing the mistakes of a 17 year old female.

They are bashing the actions (or lack thereof) of a 44 year old female that is running for Vice President of the United States. Her judgment in teaching abstinence only is what is in question. She enabled her daughter to be in this position by not allowing the options of birth control and/or contraceptives to be introduced as viable options in the extremely rare event that a teenage couple wouldn't be able to control their raging hormones.

It is that judgment that is being brought to light and her desire to have that same type of thinking pushed onto the rest of us.

I hope that this clears your view so that you can see around the strawman in front of you.

If you really think a 17 year olds decision to disregard her mothers instructions equates to failing of the mother. A mother can only do so much.

If we are going to put these people on trial for the failures of their children and or the systems they instruct. The whole damn nations have problems. From abstience only to pro-contraceptive, the system doesnt work all the time. I heard a stat this morning 750,000 17 year olds have children in this country. Obama's effing mother was 17 when she was pregnant with Obama.

The dirt the left is tossing at this women's child is disgusting. Really below the belt stuff.

Troopergate is legit, this is not.

Once again, you can't see the cornfield because of the strawman!

What happened to this girl is irrelevant to the topic of Palin's insistence on a program that will make the problem (teen pregnancy) worse.

But they are too blind to see the field b/c of the strawmen in their way also.

Oh give me a break. Suddenly teen pregnacy is high on democrats lists of things to get to work on? Abstinence only or a more pro-contraceptive approach only gives them the tools. What they(kids) do with it is their own doing.

Where has your outage been at the millions of teen women inpregnated year after year after going through our sex education classes in public schools? These sex education classes taught both abstinence and contraceptives.

Dont lecture me on only seeing what I want to see. This would be a non-issue to you if it was a democrat who taught her kid about contraception. Then promptly disregarded mom's advice and got knocked up.

Because it is a near non-issue to you for the other three quarters of a million kids in this country who are going through the same situation.

The fact that Obama's mother was preggers at 17 is also irrelevant. You are trying to compare two different eras and claim that the information, knowledge and teachings of the youth is comparable. You are flat-out wrong. During the 50s - 60s, there was no such things as sex education in schools. There wasn't an internet to find everything under the sun. A lot of the mistakes were made because of trial and error. Also, most people were getting married at that age. People today are getting married later and later and have access to all the resources and information that they need to make informed decisions.

You are right and they do have internet up in Alaska. Are you now admitting her daughter while being taught at home abstinence only could easily find out about contraceptives elsewhere?

The whole argument is dumb. Like complaining cigarette packs dont have big enough labels and that is why people continue to smoke and die of lung cancer. As if we arent saying the msg loud enough. She knows about contraceptives if she owns a TV.

Well, except in the "Bible Belt" where stupidity...err...policies like this one are the norm. And where teen pregnancy rates are some of the highest and the divorce rates are the highest also.

Please, some of the highest incidence of teen pregnancy and illegitimate children are in the slums of this country. Controlled by the party you support blindly. NOLA with Nagin as the mayor has a 67% rate of illegitimate children.

 

[lupi]

Gee look, the hacks have turned this into another baby palin thread.

 

[351Cleveland]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The 90% thing is BS.

The VAST majority of votes in the Senate are unanimous.

Also, Obama voted with his party 96% of the time.
McCain voted with his party 88% of the time.

Yet McCain is painted as the guy towing the party line while Obama is the agent of 'change.'

When your party's leader, the sitting president, has a record-low approval rating, that makes the new guy an agent of change. Not hard to figure that one out.

And the new guy's current elected seat (well the body he serves in) has an approval rating of approximately 1/3 of what that shitty President has... yeah. Arguing approval numbers doesnt help you. Given the President or Congress, based on approval ratings, 3 times more people would take the President. Shocking I know... but telling.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The 90% thing is BS.

The VAST majority of votes in the Senate are unanimous.

Also, Obama voted with his party 96% of the time.
McCain voted with his party 88% of the time.

Yet McCain is painted as the guy towing the party line while Obama is the agent of 'change.'

When your party's leader, the sitting president, has a record-low approval rating, that makes the new guy an agent of change. Not hard to figure that one out.

And the new guy's current elected seat (well the body he serves in) has an approval rating of approximately 1/3 of what that shitty President has... yeah. Arguing approval numbers doesnt help you. Given the President or Congress, based on approval ratings, 3 times more people would take the President. Shocking I know... but telling.

And yet, even with Congress getting low approval ratings, Republicans are getting the brunt of the blame from the voting public. How else can you explain the net gains the Democrats are almost guaranteed to make in the Senate/House come November?

 

[Lemon law]

Two things to say.

My guess, if Obama and McCain could redo their VP pick tomorrow without consequences, Obama would still pick Biden and McCain would drop Palin in a heartbeat. But I don't speak for either Obama or McCain, and besides, the no consequences argument does not now apply once the die is cast.

And secondly, Obama's mother may have been in the same boat Bristol Palin is now in. But Obama's grandmother on the daughters side was not running for Vice President at the time, so its more of another 95% bullshit argument coming from Non Prof John. Maybe the Bristol Palin son or daughter may turn out to be Presidential timber, but the odd are not great regardless of birth circumstances.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

And secondly, Obama's mother may have been in the same boat Bristol Palin is now in. But Obama's grandmother on the daughters side was not running for Vice President at the time, so its more of another 95% bullshit argument coming from Non Prof John.

Holly gumby factor trying to reach your delusions of grandeur there skippy.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Palin is like Wright on steroids, i really despise everything she stands for.

Any true liberal will agree on that, even conservative liberals.