Bristol Palin: Abstinence ‘Is Not Realistic At All’
Bristol Palin: Abstinence ‘Is Not Realistic At All’
In 2006, as a gubernatorial candidate, Sarah Palin filled out a questionnaire emphasizing her support for abstinence education. She wrote that “the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.” Alaska does not require sex ed to be taught in schools; Anchorage schools teach “Abstinence Plus,” which emphasizes abstaining from sex.
Palin’s views came under fire when it was revealed that her then-17-year-old daughter Bristol was pregnant. In her first public interview, Bristol told Fox News’ chief Palin cheerleader Greta Van Susteren last night that abstinence is “not realistic at all”:
VAN SUSTEREN: I don’t want to pry to personally, but I mean, actually, contraception is an issue here. Is that something that you were just lazy about or not interested, or do you have a philosophical or religious opposition to it or…
BRISTOL: No. I don’t want to get into detail about that. But I think abstinence is, like — like, the — I don’t know how to put it — like, the main — everyone should be abstinent or whatever, but it’s not realistic at all.
Watch it:
When Van Susteren asked Gov. Palin, who joined the interview, about abstinence, she seemed similarly dismissive of her former views on abstinence, admitting, “It sounds naive.” Bristol added, “I just — I hope that people learn from my story and just, like, I don’t know, prevent teen pregnancy, I guess.”
Yet despite its record of failure, conservatives continue to beat the drum for abstinence-only education. Last week, Republicans were angry that “essential” abstinence education funding had been “eliminated” from Obama’s recovery and reinvestment bill. A Republican report on the bill expressed its concern “that while abstinence education receives only $176 million annually…contraceptives and family planning already receive $1.6 billion of federal funding.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Congratulations, failed veep nominee and mother. You’ve like raised a kid who knows more about life than you do.
February 17th, 2009 at 9:49 amSo Bristol was on FNC and the Gov dragged out her daughters on the campaign with her.
BUT … If this were ABC, the story would be that the liberal media is beating up on poor, poor Sarah Palin and her family.
I thought her family was off limits??
February 17th, 2009 at 9:51 amI have to admire the purity of the hypocracy of the GOOP. They claim that the Dems either didn’t properly vet cabinet post selections or decided to overlook transgressions, while just months earlier they selected someone under active investigation for abuses of power and misuse of public funds to be second on their presidential ticket.
They rally around the teaching of abstinence only, and provide funding only to groups who adhere to their policies, while running a Veep candidate with an underage knock-up daughter.
They look into the faces of hurting Americans still murmuring “Yes we can!” and shout back “Oh no you can’t!” claiming fiscal conservative ideology after never questioning a doubling of the national debt.
They’ve decided to go all in on betting that Obama, and by association, America will fail in the next two year, just to attempt to regain power.
Yes, there is a purity to their motives. An evil purity. Just like Adolph Hitler.
PEACE
February 17th, 2009 at 9:51 amBristol, Bristol, (sigh) the republicans aren’t interested in taking advice from someone their policies affect directly. It intrudes on their fantasy world they’ve created where people just do as they say (not as they do). Just remember even though you now have a child don’t let it interfere with your career or money-making abilities because your mother, as a conservative, is trying to make sure there is no safety net for people like you.
February 17th, 2009 at 9:51 am“I guess, like, you know, like, well, I don’t know, but maybe if, like, I guess maybe if I had learned something like, um, more than just, you know, like how to text and stuff…”
February 17th, 2009 at 9:53 amDuh…..
February 17th, 2009 at 9:57 amOK, my pet peeve with “journalists”. Quit giving multiple choice questions (Is that something that you were just lazy about or not interested, or do you have a philosophical or religious opposition to it or…). Ask open ended questions, without leading the interviewee or providing the person with an easy answer that in many cases houses the interviewer’s bias.
February 17th, 2009 at 9:58 amSpensersmomsez: …while just months earlier they selected someone under active investigation for abuses of power and misuse of public funds to be second on their presidential ticket.
the choice of Palin was as cynical a ploy to throw an election without having to look like they were throwing an election as you are ever likely to witness. and they still got 46% of the vote…
it’s truly scary…
February 17th, 2009 at 10:02 amBrave girl.
But whatever her views, I do wish the media would leave her alone.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:05 amOK, stooopid GOP: One more time,
NO sex education = No birth control
NO birth control = pregnancy
Go it?
*crickets chirping*
Didn’t think so.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:06 amPLC, Greta isn’t much of a journalist. I haven’t seen it yet, but I’ve noticed when an interviewer does that more often than not the ‘answer’ is used in the promo-mercials.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:07 amshes… giving… an… interview…
February 17th, 2009 at 10:08 amBristol is about as articulate in the English language as her mama. Except you can forgive a teenager.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:11 amI’m getting a real charge out of the “Exclusive” caption in the Faux Snooze video. This was so exclusive to them that Bristol was also on NBC’s Today Show this morning peddling the same sorry tale…
Just one more “who cares” story pushed by the so-called MSM; the Today Show this morning also covered the octuplet mother (for about the three thousandth time) and had KKKarl Rove on discussing the “just say no” campaign amongst the repukes. So the Today Show this morning was 3-for-3 on stories involving people who are yesterday’s news…
February 17th, 2009 at 10:12 am“Congratulations, failed veep nominee and mother. You’ve like raised a kid who knows more about life than you do.”
Um, maybe – but just barely. Catch that last line in the video clip?
Bristol: “You should just wait ten years. …it’d just be so much easier.”
Uh, huh. Now that’s a realistic, informed point of view. Sheesh: worked well for Bristol, eh?
PS: Married yet? Hmm… didn’t think so.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:13 amLike, oh my gawd!
Seriously, even tho she speaks “valley”, it appears she has more common sense than her almost vice president mom.
Reality check for those with an (R) affixed after their name:
February 17th, 2009 at 10:15 amWe the general population of the United States of America have no problem with abstinence education. Nor do we have a problem with sex education. Nor with any other education associated with the subject. As long as they are taught TOGETHER! It’s when you attach the “only” part that makes us critical. I don’t want my children knowing only one side of the story. That’s not how I was raised, and that’s not how they are being raised.
GOP, quit your beyatching! Why would we want to continue funding a failed program? Wasn’t it just a few weeks ago you all were shouting “fiscal responsibility”? Well, billions of dollars to a abstinence only education is NOT fiscal responsible.
Duh!
I wonder how Eric Cantor will try to frame this one. Yippie-Ky-A Cowboy…and don’t forget that hat…
February 17th, 2009 at 10:16 amOne knocked up fundie teen is not going to convince the American Taliban that abstinance only does not work. These are the same people who believe that Obama is a Muslim and Chimpy McFlightsuit personally saved the world by only letting three airliners crash into occupied US buildings on 9/11. If Palin runs in 2012 this will be ignored by the wingers faster than Newt’s affairs and Vitter’s escapades in the whore house(s)
February 17th, 2009 at 10:17 amWell she could of took the advice of my dad “Just keep your dick in your pants.”…oh wait…
February 17th, 2009 at 10:18 amFrom the point of view of a teenager, if you’re abstinent, you can’t have sex! Where’s the fun in that?
Seriously, any responsible sex ed teacher already will emphasize that abstinence is a responsible choice for a teenager to make. It is important to reinforce that for those who do choose to be abstinent. It also helps remove the stigma for those who find themselves abstinent.
However, if teenagers choose to have sex they should be encouraged to use safe sex practices. Denying the value of contraception and condoms is counter productive if you want to reduce teen pregnancies and abortions. Using scare tactics about STDs can be counter productive since it can undermine your entire message once teenagers get the real information.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:18 amDumb Fox the Average Golfer Says:
Brave girl.
But whatever her views, I do wish the media would leave her alone.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:05 am
I wish her mom would leave her alone — I’ll bet you $1 that it wasn’t Bristol’s idea to give that interview.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:19 amdeebaser Says:
shes… giving… an… interview…
Er, yeah. I get it, and yes it all looks innocent enough.
What Bristol probably doesn’t realize is that every time she’s on teevee, her interviews are being recorded and she will be used as a political football as her mother advances her career.
Just my opinion, but she doesn’t need this. At least not at this point in her life.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:19 amI see Bristol got the gene for using way too many, like, you know, extra words in her, I don’t know, sentences, you betcha.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:20 amZooey Says:
I wish her mom would leave her alone — I’ll bet you $1 that it wasn’t Bristol’s idea to give that interview.
Indeed, thing is I don’t really know where you draw the line between Caribou Barbie and Greta van Softball, it all seems to be a single seamless PR operation.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:23 amPoor girl. A little too late – now she’s Levi’s baby mama! This shyte is too sad. Everytime I see Gov. Palin I want to just slap her face for not paying attention to what was going on with her daughter. She should’ve been ‘paling’ around with her daughter.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:23 ampaleolib Says:
One knocked up fundie teen is not going to convince the American Taliban that abstinance only does not work. These are the same people who believe that Obama is a Muslim and Chimpy McFlightsuit personally saved the world by only letting three airliners crash into occupied US buildings on 9/11. If Palin runs in 2012 this will be ignored by the wingers faster than Newt’s affairs and Vitter’s escapades in the whore house(s)
February 17th, 2009 at 10:24 am“““““““““““““““““““““““““““““`
I thought I’d add to the reich wing list of myths:
1-President Obama’s birth certificate if fake.
2-President Obama is the anti-Christ.
3-9/11 was President Clintons fault.
4-Tax cuts create jobs and stimulate the economy.
5-Ronny Raygun single handedly destroyed the Soviet Union.
6-Ronny Raygun is Gawd.
St. Sarah is becoming irrelevant even in her own party but this won’t stop the “Liberal media” and herself from continuous media coverage and self promotion. Not only is she the star of the fundies on the reich but she is a ratings star for the “Liberal media” and we all know hom much the media loves their ratings.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:28 amShe should know.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:28 amConcerning contraception were you:
1)lazy
2)not interested
3)philosophically opposed
4)religiously opposed
That would be 1 and /or 2 obviously not 3 and/or 4, otherwise she wouldn’t have gotten pregnant.
Other options:
Too drunk to make a rational decision
Too horny to make a rational decision
Bristol is fortunate that
February 17th, 2009 at 10:28 ama) sex at that age is legal in Alaska
b) she has a quite well-off family to provide support
so let me understand the stooopid logic of these KKKristianist cult repuglican WaSILLYians teeny boppers
you shouldn’t expect kids to abstain from sex but you should give it try…..and you should wait ten years before having a baby but since you can’t expect this to happen, you still should expect kids to get pregnant but heaven forbid that you talk or educate them about the use of birth control.
so like, that makes, like a lot of, like sense…..riiiiiiiiiight?
oh! and Praize Jeebus!
February 17th, 2009 at 10:28 amMy apologies, I thought you were blaming ‘the media’ for going after the daughter. Yeah, SarahPAC Palin probably talked her into keeping the family name in the newscycle to attone for her harlotry and earn mommy’s love.
Unless Bristol’s writing a book… (too many punchlines. ill abstain)
February 17th, 2009 at 10:29 amTake the instinct whose power is second only to breathing (the urge to procreate), and ask teens, who have yet to develop impulse control, to ignore it and what do you expect?
Then when the inevitable happens, pour shame over the poor kids.
This long standing (thousands of years?) insanity has been directed mostly to women.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:30 amIt’s time we abandon this misogynistic, counter productive practice and just teach safe sex.
“Dad, what are the birds and the bees?”
“Huh? I dunno, birds are big enough to shoot, and bees are something to spray bug killer on… hand me that spark plug wrench, willya?”
“Mom, what are the birds and the bees?”
“Huh? Go ask yer Dad honey, I gotta run, I’ve got a meeting with the oil companies, doncha know… be a good girl and go get your momma those red pumps, willya?”
February 17th, 2009 at 10:31 amSee I was told if you just wore that cheesey clothes that KMart was hawking, abstinence would work
February 17th, 2009 at 10:37 amdeebaser @ 33
No problem – I should have been more specific that it is Fox that should be leaving Bristol Palin alone, whilst still recognizing that Fox is part of the Palin Project.
If you recall when Palin was introduced as McCain’s co-pilot, they had the whole family on stage – and Bristol was holding a baby with a blanket strategically placed over her bump. It’s just horrible, Palin “family values” means making sure your kids are at optimal risk of humiliation in serving as political props.
This is all part of the same theme, and it is cravenly brutal.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:39 amBristol is insghtful when she says “everyone should be abstinent or whatever, but it’s not realistic at all.”
Only problem is that the right wing isn’t interested in what’s realistic. Why should they be beholden to the Reality-Based Community™?
If a problem can’t be solved by adhering to their Christianist values or free market fundamentalism, then they’d rather it didn’t get solved, so at least they could blame liberals.
Hence their hold-their-breath-until-they-turn-blue obstructionism in the stimulus debate.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:42 amI think all of us except the most delusional hard-core fundies can accept that comprehensive sex education does more to curb teen pregnancy and STDs than abstinence-only does. But all the sex education in the world still doesn’t adequately arm the average teen to deal with our sex-obsessed culture (well, maybe it does on a logical level, but certainly not on an emotional one).
Consider what signals teens get regarding their sexuality on a more or less constant basis from television, magazines, advertisements of all kinds, etc.
Girls are taught that their entire worth lies in being “hot”. They must look hot, act hot, and dress like tarts in order to be sexually attractive to boys — the only objective they should have, apparently. If they fail in this objective, they are losers.
Boys are taught that their main goal is to get laid. From the time they are old enough to comprehend the signals Madison Avenue fires at them, they learn that they must drink the right beer, drive the right car, wear the right jeans — even eat the right fast food burgers in order to attract females. And they are taught that their social status depends on attracting females — the hotter the better (see above paragraph). If they fail in their objective to be studly, they are losers.
The constant bombardment of “your-entire-worth-lies-in-your-sexual-desirability” messages is relentless and overwhelming — even for teens with parents dedicated to the idea of countering such messages. And as long as our culture beats this drum (all too often merely to sell stuff), the debate over sex education only addresses part of the problem.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:49 amWell said, Miss Molly — right to the heart of the matter.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:52 amnellre Says
February 17th, 2009 at 10:30 am
This long standing (thousands of years?) insanity has been directed mostly to women.
__________________________________________________________
True — I’ve never seen “abstinence pants” for teen boys.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:52 amWhere is her son?http://www.palindeception.com/blog/
February 17th, 2009 at 10:55 amDr. Hussein Matt Says:
The media would have eaten Obama alive if he had a 17 year old, unwed pregnant daughter. The issue would have been brought up at every interview, every debate, every presser…
110% correct. The media would have been all over this faster and thicker than flies on shit.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:56 amOnce again, misshusseinmolly comes through with the definitive post.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:58 amI do hope that Bristol avoids any further limelight for her own sake, but given how politicians in general use their kids as props,
and how the press finds them useful for their emotional impact,
and given the degree to which Palin used her children during the campaign and her political ambitions,
and given Greta’s professional dependence on stories about Caucasian teenagers, Bristol is facing a lot of potential pressure.
After all for the near future she;s going to be dependent on her mother to a significant degree, and if her mother thinks their is some value to be had in Bristol maintaining a media presence surely it would be hard for her to refuse.
Still, as Bristol has just shot down the ‘abstinence’ bullshit,it sounds like she has a firmer grip on reality than her mother.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:03 amI wish her and her husband all the best.
Matt and Fester. Progressives have their own myths (9/11 is an inside job?)
Are you ready to strike this one off your list: Sarah Palin’s son is actually Bristol’s?
February 17th, 2009 at 11:04 amthe TODAY SHOW did a short on this also… and i’m guessing more people saw that than gretta’s piece…
but there was NO mention of PREVENTING teen pregnancy… and i got the impression that bristol was being raised as a standard bearer of sorts…
all the bobbles had great praise for her young motherhood… but not a word about PREVENTING TEEN PREGNANCY.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:09 amWhere is Bristol Palin’s child?
No one has seen a photo of the child. Not even family members have claimed to have seen this child. This child has been shielded from the press more carefully, more thoroughly than can be believed.
Where’s the baby?
February 17th, 2009 at 11:17 ambackup: Show us all a photo of this child.
Show us the birth certificate. Show us proof that she gave birth to this kid.
Show us the DNA tests of Palin’s son and Palin herself proving it’s HER child. Until then, it’s all hot air. Nobody knows except these people.
And I’ll never trust them. Ever.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:18 amuh b-cup, you do realize not all progressive believe in the 9/11 conspiracy, don’tcha?
And questions were brought up about the inconsistencies of Sarah’s youngest child, but there never was “a conspiracy”, per se.
You completely leapfrogged the entire topic of the thread to hurl the “crazy liberal conspiracy” crap.
C’mon. You can do better.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:23 ammissmolley. you’re right. But, I’m not sure this is really the root cause.
I believe that for most of human history, people started mating at younger ages. In reality, humans start becoming reproductive at 14, 15,16 years old. And even if we look to the past that we may believe to be a less sexually charged time – people still got married and started a family earlier. I believe women became wives early 15, 16 years old. There wasn’t any time for a young woman to be promiscuous and labeled with a scarlet letter. She was already married.
My point is this. The bombardment of sexual messages makes the ‘problem’ more difficult. But, maybe just as difficult, is the expectation in the first place.
We have decided as a culture to fight sexuality. We’ve decided that sex before 18 is wrong. We’ve decided that sex out of marriage is wrong. Those are natural states of human existence. They are restrictions that have been imposed by our forefathers.
Because we have imposed that artificial restriction and pushed abstinence, instead of a much more realistic pregnancy and disease prevention, we (primarily conservatives) all too commonly enable situations like Bristol’s.
I don’t think we should fault culture, instead I think we should be more realistic about sex in general.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:26 ammisshusseinmolly @42 “Girls are taught/Boys are taught…”
Well, there are genetic evolutionary factors involved too, it’s not ‘nurture’ over ‘nature’….
BUT
I’m guessing ‘nurture’ is predominant over ‘nature’ because of the variability for survival and success humans are afforded courtesy of the sophistication of the human brain.
If only raw nature were involved we’d all look ‘gorgeous’ which would mean we’d all look the same and then due to the lack of variation we’d all either have died out long ago or else we’d all be sequestered in smaller numbers in some isolated environment (like Madagascar lemurs).
However we aren’t so flexible and highly evolved as to resist the need to create some order and collective consciousness as to how the world works so there is a pressure to simplify things and then exaggerate those simplifications. I guess this is “the human condition”—being in a state of constant tension and conflict between non-variation and variation.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:28 amTherein lies the difference between conservatives and progressives
backup thinks we care what he thinks.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:29 amJust imagine how the reich wing media would respond if President Obama had a teenaged daughter who gave birth while not being married.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:30 amWhen IS the wedding?
February 17th, 2009 at 11:31 amAside from the abstinence issue,
It is a sad comment on the state of our education in America when a high school senior cannot form a complete sentence without repeated use of the word “like”. As our former president once stated “childrens do learn.”
February 17th, 2009 at 11:31 amCapn Sternfirst sez…”Therein lies the difference between conservatives and progressives”
That’s why the conservatives are still whacking off in the Monkey House at the zoo, while the progressives are reading, writing and ‘rithmaticking.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:31 amOops, I quoted the wrong poster, sorry, 5th estate.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:32 ambackup Says:
February 17th, 2009 at 11:34 amIn reality, humans start becoming reproductive at 14, 15,16 years old.
““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““
Well this would explain backups unmarried, single, teenaged, pregnant sister/girlfriend.
When the republicans run everything in the dark, when everything is a secret…..yes, we suspect them and have every reason to suspect them and little reason to not….
Don’t blame people for not knowing the truth. blame the people who think it is ok to keep secrets from us….
February 17th, 2009 at 11:34 amI didn’t mind, Nevar :)
February 17th, 2009 at 11:38 ambackup Says:
Matt and Fester. Progressives have their own myths (9/11 is an inside job?)
Are you ready to strike this one off your list: Sarah Palin’s son is actually Bristol’s?
*
it was never on mine.
*
do you want your straw man back?
***
February 17th, 2009 at 11:40 amDRxJ
take a look at Fester post around #27 and Matt’s post around #34. Who’s hurling the crazy conspiracy tags? I don’t think you were concerned that they had leapfrogged the thread.
And if you think there wasn’t or isn’t a conspiracy surrounding the birth of Palin’s son (there was) you ought to convince Daddy-0.
And my post around #57 is how I feel about the topic. Young people (especially young girls) are placed in a position to meet an unhealthy, unrealistic expectation about sex. Abstinence doesn’t work and it’s a only a roadblock to implementing pregnancy and disease prevention education and measures that could. Conservatives are wrong on the issue.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:41 amGotta love the total hypocrisy of the GOOP (Grand Old Obstructionist Party); on one hand, they flog that old, stinky dead horse ‘abstinence only’ relentlessly…
And on the other, they turn an unwed, pregnant teenager into a paragon of ’sainted motherhood.’
Masters of Doublespeak.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:42 ammisshusseinmolly, I do agree that teenagers and adults are bombarded with sexual innuendos and messages. But for some reason, America has always been “hush hush” about sex. It’s the scarlet letter. We certainly can advertise it discreetly, but we sure as hell can’t have an open discussion about it.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:46 amNo wonder it so damn confusing.
I, for one, have never held back regarding sexuality (I know, that comes as a surprise to ya’ll here). It’s normal. It’s fun. It’s a striving biological fact that engulfs us (some more, some less). Where I feel that the taboo of discussion becomes problematic is that teenagers (and adults) are not fully prepared for the emotional aspect of sex.
Example:
Men usually have sex because it feels good.
Women usually have sex because it’s associated with love.
Can you see how the above could cause confusion and problems for pubescent teenagers as they approach adulthood?
I’m beginning to think he can’t.
I’m late to the party, I know.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:47 ambackup Says:
You completely leapfrogged the entire topic of the thread to hurl the “crazy liberal conspiracy” crap.
DRxJ
take a look at Fester post around #27 and Matt’s post around #34. Who’s hurling the crazy conspiracy tags? I don’t think you were concerned that they had leapfrogged the thread.
And if you think there wasn’t or isn’t a conspiracy surrounding the birth of Palin’s son (there was) you ought to convince Daddy-0.
And my post around #57 is how I feel about the topic. Young people (especially young girls) are placed in a position to meet an unhealthy, unrealistic expectation about sex. Abstinence doesn’t work and it’s a only a roadblock to implementing pregnancy and disease prevention education and measures that could. Conservatives are wrong on the issue.
*
shouldn’t it read,
“Conservatives are wrong on the issue my friend.”?
*
remember how you big you use to
be on your “my friend” rejoinder?
*
does the conservative failure on this
issue upset you? or did you just wake up
on the wrong side of the bed this morning?
*
February 17th, 2009 at 11:48 ambackup, how about that open and honest energy policy from the bush admin. how about that secret torturing until it couldn’t be hidden any more and now they are defending the indefensible because they are caught.
they have breed an enviornment that makes everything they did suspect…..they then attempt to do what you so cowardly did here this morning……cry conspiracy nuts…..problem is, too much of what they did is becoming public and undeniable, why else would they defend torture, because they can no longer deny that they did torture….
February 17th, 2009 at 11:49 amVery kind of you to ask, joe, but I suspect b-cup has got lots of ‘em, just waiting to be stuffed and paraded about.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:50 amb-cup, I kind of understand where you’re coming from, but Uncle Fester and Dr. Matt continued their right wing myth list from this poster’s sentence:
One knocked up fundie teen is not going to convince the American Taliban that abstinance only does not work.
Which does pertain to the thread.
That being said, your post in response to misshusseinmolly was well thought out and intelligent. Thank you. And to be honest, the points you brought up I could not agree more!
February 17th, 2009 at 11:51 amralph the wonder llama Says:
joe cantwell Says:
backup Says:
Matt and Fester. Progressives have their own myths (9/11 is an inside job?)
Are you ready to strike this one off your list: Sarah Palin’s son is actually Bristol’s?
*
it was never on mine.
*
do you want your straw man back?
Very kind of you to ask, joe, but I suspect b-cup has got lots of ‘em, just waiting to be stuffed and paraded about.
*
backup -
he’s haughty, he’s patronizing,
he’s a putz.
(that’s a yiddish word.)
*
February 17th, 2009 at 11:55 amAnyone seen Daryll or bit today. I think they might have some interesting insights on this topic…
February 17th, 2009 at 11:55 amAlways look at the outcome, not what they say:
The GOP says they are against teen pregnancy, but their polices are intended to increase the numbers of pregnant teens. And look at how Bristol was celebrated by the GOP for having a baby out-of-wedlock while still a teenager.
The GOP actually loves unwed teens, despite their lies saying otherwise.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:56 amDRxJ. That’s fair. I would be better off to take a pass on the partisan headbutts and stick to the topic of the threads. I could have done it better.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:59 amThe whole Sarah Palin “strategy” was to announce the candidacy of a relative unknown and then watch as all hell broke loose. Yes, there was some shoddy reporting in the days after her announcement, but that was kind of the point! I don’t know to what extent the stories were genuine and to what extent they were seeded by the McCain campaign, but I’d give everyone a break on things that were reported in the week between the conventions.
For every story that wasn’t true there was another story that was. Sure, Sarah Palin really was pregnant, but she also was apparently on a plane while in labor. Sure, it’s not her daughter’s child, but her daughter really was pregnant, out of wedlock, and under age. You can see how the kernel of truth from one story got twisted into another story.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:00 pmbackup “squeegee” – that IS you, isn’t it!?!
and Daddy-O – not sure which baby you are referring to above, but i saw bristol’s baby on the today show… unless is was a stand-in…
February 17th, 2009 at 12:02 pmjoe.
I believe I’ve spoken out about it several times in the past. It would take a while, but I could find the posts for you, if you want. Or you could just trust me.
If you decide you want to be friends, you know I’m here for you.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:06 pmbackup Says:
does the conservative failure on this
issue upset you?
joe.
I believe I’ve spoken out about it several times in the past. It would take a while, but I could find the posts for you, if you want. Or you could just trust me.
If you decide you want to be friends, you know I’m here for you.
*
you don’t destroy your e-mails?
what kind of republican are you?
*
February 17th, 2009 at 12:10 pmAnd Daddy-O. They did show a picture of Sarah’s child (obviously with Down’s) and Bristol’s together in the interview last night.
The idea that there is some conspiracy about the births, just isn’t credible.
But, the truth in the situation, is probably as great a blow to abstinence only proponents, as any of the conspiracies.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:11 pmAnd I’m hoisting the strawmen?
February 17th, 2009 at 12:16 pmIsn’t this kid’s life screwed up enough without being dragged out on Faux Noise? While the message is important, abstinence has been shown to be unrealistic from other sources. This is just sensationalism typical of Faux Noise.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:21 pmbackup: We’ve decided that sex out of marriage is wrong. Those are natural states of human existence. They are restrictions that have been imposed by our forefathers.”
“Because we have imposed that artificial restriction and pushed abstinence, instead of a much more realistic pregnancy and disease prevention, we (primarily conservatives) all too commonly enable situations like Bristol’s”
There’s sensible and appropriate nuance in you arguments, backup, but some confusion too.
Which forefathers? All of them? Or just those of the last century or two?
And past impositions can be thrown-off by future generations.
Artificial restriction? That’s a semantic phrase, not worth using. Where life-spans are short and life is simple ‘early’ procreation can make economic sense. In the modern world it doesn’t.
“we (primarily conservatives)”
That would be ALL self-identifying Conservatives and Republicans as a political group. I can’t think of one conservative Democrat at the national level who seeks to prevent sex-education and/or punish teen-pregnancy, regardless of “artificial restrictions”.
As a self-identifying conservative, you don’t sound too happy about Bristol Palin’s situation and what it represents, and you certainly seem sympathetic. So I wonder if as your general conservatism fails you in this regard on a matter that affects not only slightly more than half the population but its future generations, what other issues might you be able to view differently as a matter of practical reality rather than through the lens of a dogmatic intellectual construct that appears to have developed a crack?
Please ponder that.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:22 pmWe appreciate your stab at wit there, b-cup, but you should recognize the difference between a straw man (which wikipedia defines as an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position) and a simple grasping of the opportunity to mock another.
I thought it was quite clever, but then I am a fan of joe’s work.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:24 pmI wish someone would / could fuse her labia so there are no more opportunities for Caribou Barbie’s genes to continue polluting the gene pool.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:24 pmbackup Says:
you don’t destroy your e-mails?
what kind of republican are you?
And I’m hoisting the strawmen?
*
just a question my friend.
not a straw man.
:)
February 17th, 2009 at 12:24 pmSpeaking of conspiracies, has there been a paternity test that establishes Levi as the daddy? One would think it’s in the young man’s best interest.
Because like, you know, Bristol also kinda uses types of language that makes me, uh, think she might kinda just make stuff up as she talks more, you betcha.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:31 pmwell, ok then, squeegee…
February 17th, 2009 at 12:32 pmglad you’re keeping up with your studies here.
5th Estate. good points. I’m not arguing that we need procreation at younger ages. Our lifespans and society has changed quickly and outpaced our individual human evolutionary capability to adapt. The sexual drives are still there early, even though the later stage reproduction makes more sense. That’s reality.
I disagree with conservatives on gay rights, reproductive rights, some energy issues, religious issues, and I’m sure some others. Wayne Schneider recommended a political placement self test. I was only slightly right (.62) of center on the scale. And significantly libertarian (-5.13)
Take the test. It’s interesting:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
February 17th, 2009 at 12:40 pmjoe.
check it out, and let me now if you think it’s interesting.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
February 17th, 2009 at 12:42 pmShayne says;
Whatever b-cup thinks is irrelevant.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:56 pmbackup, I’ll give it a shot, and come back with my results. The libertarian score you mention makes sense to me. Anyway, back in a sec….
February 17th, 2009 at 12:58 pmralph. I’m hazy on the idea of straw man. I see your point.
But, joe accuses me of the straw man in around #68 in a response to #50.
If my position is that abstinence doesn’t work, is what I bring up around #50 really a straw man or just an attempt to communicate that conservatives aren’t the only ones propagating conspiracy?
February 17th, 2009 at 1:03 pmUncle Ho Says:
Shayne says;
Whatever b-cup thinks is irrelevant.
*
amen.
but he’s good at charades,
not answering questions
and, of course, the straw man
technique of false debate.
*
February 17th, 2009 at 1:24 pmPoster Teen for the Republican Party. Bristol had her second child as a teenager and now wants to talk. The barn door is open and the horse is gone and you can’t get it back. Bristol is still not married and is only doing the interview because she needs the money. Bristol had her second child over 300 days from the birth of her first child. Sarah covered up the first baby by saying it was her’s because of the medical treatment needed. Sarah had no idea Bristol was having a second child. Levi might be the Father of the first but he isn’t the Father of the second child. The kids at Bristol’s school said that but the Media couldn’t report it. Now Levi’s Family went along with the lie and Levi’s Mom will get her charged of selling drugs dropped or she will spill the truth. Sarah is showing her other girls to lie and even get their kids to lie in the future. First Dude is just a drunk and Mr. Mom.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:27 pmjoe. okay. maybe you can help me.
How is my comment in #50 a straw man, if my position is that abstinence doesn’t work?
February 17th, 2009 at 1:28 pmLet em try to deconstruct, b-cup:
Your post as quoted above makes no mention of your position regarding abstinence. It simply seeks to excoriate liberals for myths of “their own”.
The straw man is that neither of the myths you mention are exactly bedrock ideology among liberals. You set them up as arguments… it’s a little hazy, actually, what argument you’re making with the above post, but I suspect it’s something along the lines of “conservatives who believe in abstinence-only are okay, because liberals believe in their own myths”.
Yet conservatives do strongly support abstinence-only education (your own exception duly noted) as a policy position, but mainstream liberals do not profess the easily-dismissed (hence, “straw man”) positions you attribute to them.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:39 pmralph. you’ve done a good job.
My point, if I failed to make it before is this: There are conservatives that believe in less than enlightened conspiracies. But, there are also progressives guilty of the same.
Conservatism shouldn’t be painted with broad brush of being conspiratorial. Neither should progressivism.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:48 pmbackup Says:
joe. okay. maybe you can help me.
How is my comment in #50 a straw man, if my position is that abstinence doesn’t work?
*
i can’t help you backup.
i can’t help jk.
i can’t help trace.
i can’t help proud.
i can’t help daryll/rap ready
or his friend, keltoi.
i can’t help the entire community of trolls.
*
help must come from within backup.
look into the mirror and say to yourself,
“yes, i am a man. but what kind of
a man am i?”
*
good luck.
•
February 17th, 2009 at 2:13 pmSarah palin was hammered because she was with mc cain, and whole media supports democrats, stay away from media sarah , you can not handle them, they control whole world
February 17th, 2009 at 2:26 pmYes! I think I get it now. Sarah Palin has become so boring that in order to land an interview she has to bring a prop.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:27 pmyoutube Says:
Sarah palin was hammered because she was with mc cain, and whole media supports democrats, stay away from media sarah , you can not handle them, they control whole world
*
sound advice.
*
February 17th, 2009 at 2:27 pmjoe. you can help me very simply.
you accuse me of using a straw man argument. you could back up the accusation, with an explanation of how it applies. I will listen.
I am a man that believes that abstinence as policy to prevent unwanted pregnancy and disease, is misguided.
If you take exception with that position, we should talk about it. Otherwise, I don’t understand your objections.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:30 pmbackup, here’s my score from your link:
Economic Left/Right: -6.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.74
There’s a vast amount of bollocks in this survey though and its horribly disorganized and artfully restrictive–it doesn’t allow for ambivalence due to the respondent genuinely not having an opinion (or ‘value’) or due to the respondent disagreeing with the fundamental supposition of the question.
Examples:
Governments should penalize businesses that mislead the public.
Where are the corollaries that the public should penalize government for being misled, or that the public should penalize business for being mislead ( are we to assume that business and government are distinct?)
A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies.
What is a “genuine free market?” There is surely no such thing. Consider the diamond industry which restricts supply to manage demand and thus prices, or the the armaments and military supply industry which is utterly dependent on government (which is dependent on convincing the public that all its contracts are necessary).
Abortion, when the woman’s life is not threatened, should always be illegal.
What if a woman is threatened with death for giving birth to a child outside wedlock? What if a single mother is consigned to rejection by society as a result independent birth, such that she will be denied social and medical support (due to having a bastard child) that will lead to her untimely death?
Schools should not make classroom attendance compulsory.
Schools don’t make classroom attendance compulsory, governments do. And that compulsion includes organized religions, which are a form of government.
A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system.
A one-party state is inherently undemocratic as it permits no variation in its structure or its electorate.
Finally, from the website link you provided:
We can show, for example, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot, with their commitment to a totally controlled economy, on the hard left.
BULLSHIT!
No ’show’ actually provided, but the essence of the statement is that these’ Communist’, politically ‘Left’ regimes, asserted control over and restriction of mass, distributed personal, individual enrichment. True enough, but so have the political Right–the Catholic Church, the British Monarchy, every Emperor you can think of…Hitler….
BOTH are in fact authoritarian in practice and decidedly ‘anti–libertarian’.
It appears to me that most ‘Libertarians’ in the US, invariably lacking a viable candidate given the political landscape, usually vote Republican on the basis of the described economic precepts from which social improvement is then supposed to flow by default–despite historical evidence to the contrary.
As I see it ‘Libertarianism’ suffers from a seriously flawed philosophy that assumes a meritocracy that isn’t practical. The progressive Left can be guilty of this too, but the difference lies, I think, in how much leeway is provided to the individual to make mistakes or to what degree the individual is given sympathy for circumstance.
On the whole I think Libertarians ought to have more in common with Democrats than with Republicans (lately anyway).
So there you go.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:44 pmLTdan Says:
SHE WOULD MAKE A PERFECT DEMOCRAT
No she is a perfect repug. Lack of education; mooseyak’s two older children haven’t passed the 12th grade. typical repugs.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:51 pm5th estate. I had difficulty answering the questions of the first few sections, because of the ambiguity you describe. It got easier for me in later sections.
I did come away with a question. Why do we identify ourselves as either Left vs. Right, but not Authoritarian vs. Libertarian?
And I’ve always thought it was interesting that Democrats and Republicans both claim to be the champions of liberty, but both fall short on individual issues. (ie. conservatives on reproductive issues, liberals on gun rights, conservatives on separation of church and state, liberals on taxation, etc.)
Thanks for taking the time to take the test.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:56 pmbackup Says:
joe. you can help me very simply.
you accuse me of using a straw man argument. you could back up the accusation, with an explanation of how it applies. I will listen.
I am a man that believes that abstinence as policy to prevent unwanted pregnancy and disease, is misguided.
If you take exception with that position, we should talk about it. Otherwise, I don’t understand your objections.
*
engage the following comment from
ltdan with your thoughts, i will listen.
*
LTdan Says:
SHE WOULD MAKE A PERFECT DEMOCRAT
*
good luck.
*
February 17th, 2009 at 3:01 pmbackup: Why do we identify ourselves as either Left vs. Right, but not Authoritarian vs. Libertarian?
Because that’s the vocabulary we’ve been dealt (for decades)? Because that’s how the political parties identify each other?
Personally I can see myself as a ‘libertarian’(small ‘L’) but in national political terms I’m obliged to call myself a Democrat because on the whole the Democratic Party satisfies how I understand and see the world, how it best serves so many common interests. As such I can’t be a Libertarian because its an identity that has been aligned for a long time with a world view and a political political Party (the GOP) with which I find no practical common ground (especially lately).
25 years ago, coming from a different social and political experience, I thought that Republicans and Democrats were essentially indistinguishable. I’ve learned that they are not, and that the divide between them I think has instigated more by the Republican establishment than the Democratic
February 17th, 2009 at 3:18 pmAnd that the Democrats have consistently delivered more to general liberty to the majority whilst the Republicans have only delivered select liberty to a minority, in particular to their own.
LTdan. she’s not a perfect democrat or a perfect republican. She is a perfect human. She (and Levi) have been given the perfect human urges to reproduce. The same urges responsible for all of our existence. For our genesis.
The problem is not that she had a baby out of wedlock, but that she was not given the readily available information, contraception and understanding that would have prevented the unplanned pregnancy.
Trying to persuade people to abstain from having sex, is about as reasonable (and as moral) as persuading them not to breath.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:19 pm5th estate. I don’t think either party can stake claim to liberty, but I am confused about the conservatives getting the lion share of the libertarian support. In terms of taxation (which is important) I see it. But, in terms of social liberty, conservatives are definitely lacking.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:23 pmAbstinence is a religious position. It makes no sense biologically or socially.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:30 pmmillions of teens give birth each year, this chick is nothing special. why are they wasting airtime on her?
February 17th, 2009 at 3:54 pmduuuhhhh abstinance doesn’t work…just wait ten years. dumbass contradicted herself in a 35 second clip. she’s a palin through and through
joe. check my response to LTdan in #115. What do you think?
February 17th, 2009 at 4:13 pmTP says: A Republican report on the bill expressed its concern “that while abstinence education receives only $176 million annually…contraceptives and family planning already receive $1.6 billion of federal funding.”
That’s because contraception education demonstrably WORKS, whereas abstinence education demonstrable does NOT.
And if folks want the government to force a religious-based theme into the public schools, those folks are allowing the government to make laws establishing at least one facet of religion. . .non-Constitutional to the max.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:19 pmNevar Says:
“I guess, like, you know, like, well, I don’t know, but maybe if, like, I guess maybe if I had learned something like, um, more than just, you know, like how to text and stuff…”
Be nice, Nevar. It’s not Bristol’s fault who her mother is. Had soccermom bothered to put her family’s welfare above her “community involvement” and ego trips, she might have been able to give Bristol some self-esteem and adult characteristics.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:22 pmDr. Hussein Matt Says:
Considering OSarah bin Palin is always whining about the media, her and her family sure spend a lot of time giving media interviews. Hypocrites or just stupid? I report, You decide.
I’ll vote hypocrite for the mom [and prolly the dad], but I’ll defend the daughter. She has more honesty, dignity, courage, and reality than her parents.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:27 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
Ask open ended questions, without leading the interviewee or providing the person with an easy answer that in many cases houses the interviewer’s bias.
If the interviewer is a rethug, I’d say that in ALL cases the questions house the interviewer’s bias. And you forget that rethugs NEED prompting, else they might have to THINK.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:29 pmVAN SUSTEREN: I don’t want to pry to personally, but I mean, actually, contraception is an issue here. Is that something that you were just lazy about or not interested, or do you have a philosophical or religious opposition to it or…
Young Palin didn’t answer the question, nor did Van Susternen mention the reason so many young women get pregnant in spite of of sex education that teaches birth control. Young Palin was probably embarrassed, looking back, as to the reason she didn’t use birth control.
And what, sage bit, is the most likely reason for young Palin’s, and many other teens’, lack of protection during their illicit sexual encounters? Birth control is not spontaneous, which means it’s not romantic or exciting. Isn’t that what the first love is about, romance and excitement?
Romance and excitement is what young women expect in a relationship, not paraphernalia.
Isn’t the importance of “proper paraphernalia” taught in the non-abstinence base sex education classes? bit’s opinion is that most modern young woman won’t let anything interfere with their emotional expectation of what young love should be. Surprise. Surprise.
If we, our society, can’t teach our kids that the safest sexual expression is always one man one woman forever, we’re simply cheating them out of the best future they could have.
Ann Coulter’s article “Secondhand Children” of Feb04, says a study by Georgia State economist Benjamin Scafidi puts the cost to taxpayers of single motherhood at $112B a year.
To bit’s knowledge, no one has been able to add up the emotional costs as of yet.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:49 pmbit. She could have been on birth control. She would not have gotten pregnant.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:34 pmbitblt Says
February 17th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
If we, our society, can’t teach our kids that the safest sexual expression is always one man one woman forever, we’re simply cheating them out of the best future they could have.
________________________________________________________
Nobody is saying that we, our society, can’t teach our kids that abstinence (ACTUAL abstinence, not just “good intentions” abstinence) has a lower pregnancy rate (zero) than any other method of birth control, and that it also has a lower rate of STD transmission.
What we are saying is that it should also be accompanied by factual information on all forms of birth control. Hitting them over the head with the “abstinence” cudgel and making them sign pledges to the exclusion of all other sex education clearly isn’t working.
Like it or not, some teens will have sex. No matter how much you hope and pray they don’t. No matter how much you threaten them and scare them. No matter how much you beg, wheedle, and cajole them. And that’s nothing new — it was that way in my day, in my parents’ day, in my grandparents’ day, and probably everybody’s day — as long as teens have had hormones.
Telling a teen that condoms are no good because they have a failure rate does them a disservice. This just means that when teens can’t say no to sex, they won’t bother using a condom because “it doesn’t work anyway” — dramatically increasing the chance of pregnancy and/or STD transmission.
Can we tell teens that no sex carries less risk of pregnancy than sex with a condom? Of course. But let’s also be honest about all other information instead of lying to fulfill an agenda.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:41 pmmissmolly. That’s right on. Especially the point that teens won’t use condoms because the have been told they won’t work anyway. That is a disservice.
The answer is more information and less browbeating.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:45 pmShe should know. So should her mother. They were both pregnant before marriage. The fact is abstinence only does not work. And the church and government sponsored kind of conventions that invite the young for INDOCTRINATION has a built in fallacy.
At those meetings lies are told and rings of purity are exchanged. And the feedback says that the pledges usually last six months on average. They are told that condoms don’t work. And they are given prayer instead of decent birth control information. Given the last administration and the evangelical aversion to sexuality it is not surprising it does not work.
Although why it is better to bring a child into the world that is neither wanted, or with parents who are too young to function without help is beyond me. The sin is not sex, it is the lack of knowledge to protect themselves and the children they end up bringing into the world. Ignorance is sin.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:52 pm“Please, somebody needs bible camp.”
You mean like the Jesus Camp Ted Haggard ran?
February 17th, 2009 at 7:53 pmAt least no one needs to worry about getting pregnant.
LOL
I’m certain Bristol Palin wishes she had known about paraphernalia, bitty…
February 17th, 2009 at 7:54 pmCould it be the case the TP has an agenda, since young Palin had more to say than ” Abstinence ‘Is Not Realistic At All’?” ABC quotes Governor Palin as having made the remark about abstinence.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2009/02/bristol-palin-s.html
Bristol Palin Speaks Out
February 16, 2009 11:51 PM
February 18th, 2009 at 10:10 am
“And I have absolutely no idea now, other than the ones my mom puts in my head.” she continued.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:21 amoh, good morning bit.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:25 amDid you have a point to make with your expansion of the Palin interview? Or an agenda for the day?
The more you share with us, the more you illustrate your shallow fantasies.
I agree with Bristol, abstinence is best. She makes a great argument that if she could have waited, things would be a lot better. The other thing is, she’s not typical. She has tons of support. Most of these silly girls have nothing and they raise up the next generation of criminals and deviants.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:29 amBut Bristol said abstinence isn’t real…
February 18th, 2009 at 11:33 amI guess Sarah will do just about anything to keep herself in the public eye.
February 18th, 2009 at 4:34 pmSarah, a bit of advice. You had your moment unwarranted as it was. Its time to fade away.