Pot, Meet Kettle
I’m so not writing this because of how much I adore Sarah Palin. I’m writing this because I cannot stand double-standards. UPDATED!
This morning, while perusing my usual favorite sites–as well as ones that I loathe to read because of the filth they spew, yet still do because I want to see what the left wingnuts are saying–I ran across one that just makes me shake my head. It’s not that I don’t like what the person writes. Typically, even though she’s severely liberal, she usually makes a lot of sense.
Today? Not so much. Hence the “Pot, meet Kettle” title.
If you’d like to read what she wrote, here is Froma Harrop’s article Don’t They Have Birth Control up in Alaska?
So, let’s break this down paragraph by paragraph.
First off, she claims that she’s eaten dinner with a Republican-leaning independent who was despondent over McCain’s choice in Palin. OK. Not a big deal. I can see that, especially if the person she ate dinner with is especially religious and disagrees with Sarah’s seventeen year-old daughter being pregnant. Hopefully, this person doesn’t have a daughter of their own, or if they do, she’s well past her teen years. Otherwise, they might get a new perspective on what teenagers think about and do. I mean, according to the Guttmacher Institute, nearly half of all 15-19 year-olds in the US have had sex at least once. True, at 15, only 13% have done the deed, but by the time they reach age 19, seven in ten have engaged in sexual intercourse.
IMO, that means that, by age 19, nearly seventy percent have done this. Truth be told, I was one of that seventeen percent. No, I’m not proud of it, because I know how it’s affected my life–I sooo wish I had waited until I had gotten married. But, that’s one horse you can’t put back in the barn.
Also, truth be told, this is one reason why I really don’t want to have daughters. I’d rather have “the enemy” than deal with “the enemy.” But, alas, this is most likely not to be.
She had been looking forward to supporting McCain as a fiscal conservative with a deep understanding of foreign relations. But all she could now see was that picture of Palin’s pregnant 17-year-old looking defiant and stupid as she held mom’s fifth baby.
I’m assuming she’s talking about this picture, but I could be mistaken. It’s one of two I could find of Bristol holding Trig.
In the first one, I don’t see either defiant or stupid in her face. I see a teenager holding a sleeping baby, while listening to someone speak. Or maybe watching a football–or possibly more appropriately in her case, hockey–game. She’s got a Mona Lisa smile on her face, as well as looks a little tired, IMO. I see neither defiance on her face nor stupidity.
And on a side note, calling her “stupid” is, well, stupid. I mean, imagine what Froma would say if someone said Chelsea looked stupid in this picture? And I wonder what Obama has to say to her about the use of this word whenever it comes to another candidate’s child?
Or can I be taking this completely the wrong way, and you’re upset over the fact that she has five children? Do you know how many people in this nation have waaaaayyyy more than five children? I can’t tell you how many foster children we’ve helped that had ten, eleven, fifteen siblings! Right now, including our two sons, we have five children in our home.
And if that’s a crime, you need to talk to Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who also has five children.
Pot, meet Kettle.
Many religious conservatives are jubilant. The regard Palin as a swell choice because her high-schooler was going to have the baby.
Um. No. The fact that her high-schooler is having the baby has nothing to do with why we love Palin so much. Are we happy that Bristol is having the baby? Yes. She made the right choice, and is dealing with the consequences of her actions. But are we jubliant over the fact that she’s pregnant? Not so much. Religious conservatives–well, all of them that I know, and considering that I go to a fairly conservative, very large church, that’s more than just a few–all believe the same thing: sex outside of marriage is wrong. I mean, He tells us over and over and over that sex outside of marriage is wrong, that it’s immoral. He does condone sex, though. I mean, there’s a whole book on it in the Bible–Song of Solomon. Plus, He tells us to do it in Genesis–be fruitful and multiply. But he tells us to flee sexual immorality (1 Corinthians 6:18). So to say that we’re jubilant that she’s having the baby is true, from a certain point of view. But that’s not why we love Palin so much.
Besides, Obama’s mother had him when she was only eighteen. In fact,
There she met Barack Obama, Sr., a graduate student from Kenya and the school’s first African student, in a Russian class. When they became engaged, both sets of parents opposed the marriage, with Barack, Sr.’s father in particular objecting. Nevertheless, the couple married on February 2, 1961 in Maui, Hawaii, after discovering she was pregnant.
Pot, meet Kettle.
“Don’t they have birth control up in Alaska?” she asked.
What an odd question to ask. And not one that the rest of the nation is asking. Well, the rest of the level-headed, clear-thinking nation, anyway. We know they do. Unfortunately, it appears that this person does not know that, when you exclude abstinance, the most effective birth control method (the male condom–I say that, because there’s a female condom now) is only up to 98% effective. The female version is up to 95% effective. Spermicide is up to 82% effective. Fertilitity awareness? Up to 97% effective. Diaphragm and Cervical Cap? 94%. (Statistics provided by the McKinley Health Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.) So, maybe they used birth control and it failed?
Barack Obama’s recent pandering toward the Clinton holdouts didn’t do the Democrat a fraction of the good that McCain is doing him.
We shall see–especially after last night’s speech by Palin.
Plus, looking back at all the missteps that Obama’s camp has done over the past year–Michelle’s gaffe about “for the first time in her life” being proud of the United States, Obama throwing countless people under the bus to save his sorry butt, etc.–I would be surprised if some of that didn’t help McCain.
Pot, meet Kettle.
After all, McCain is a deficit hawk.
And Obama isn’t? How is he going to jumpstart the economy? Provide $25 billion to State Growth Funds and $25 billion to Jobs and Growth Funds. Jobs? Invest $150 billion to advance the next generation and create five million new “green” jobs, among other “investments” for other jobs. Paid leave from said jobs? He’s going to invest $1.5 billion incentives for states to adopt more paid leave. Education? Invest $10 billion more a year for early childhood, as well as the first $4,000 per child for college expenses (even though he’s going to require them to work 100 hours of public service a year for that $4,000). Health care? $10 billion a year to move the US health care system to broad aoption of standards-based electronic health information systems, but the actual universal health care will be funded by raising taxes. Yeah, us! Fighting Poverty in Africa? Double our annual investments from $25 billion to $50 billion as well as another $50 billion to fight AIDS/HIV in Africa. For Africa. And here I thought we kinda need to pay attention to our own empoverished and AIDS/HIV-afflicted citizens first… And for the rest of the world, he’s going to double our foreign assistance to $50 billion to fight global poverty. For Latin America and the Caribbean, he’s going to double our foreign assistance to $50 billion to embrace the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme poverty in half by 2015. Expand access to jobs? He’s investing $1 billion a year for transitional jobs and career pathway programs. Not to mention he’s going to increase minimum wage to $9.50/hour, which just kills my paycheck and drops my family and I out of the middle class. Iraq? He’s going to expand the humanitarian help by at least $2 billion.
Pot, meet Kettle.
Then who does McCain pick for VP? A 44-year-old who parades her dysfunctional family as a poster-child for conservative values.
As opposed to the Clinton’s dysfunctional family as a poster-child for liberal values. As opposed to the entire Kennedy family–including not-quite-proven-but-everyone-knows-he-did-it-and-the-family-successfully-covered-it-up murderer/adulterer/drunk Teddy, adulterous (but still amazing president!) John, bootlegging father Joseph, drunk/drug addict/violent Patrick Kennedy, rapist-but-aquitted-and-then-paid-off-another-victim-he-sexually-assaulted William Kennedy Smith–as the poster-children for liberal values. I could go on, but suffice it to say…
Pot, meet Kettle.
Who as a mayor of an Alaskan town of 6,700 hired lobbyists to reel in $27 million in federal pork.
Does the Democratic Pennsylvania Representative John Patrick “Jack” Murtha, Jr. name ring any bells for you? Here is something interesting about Mr. Murtha.
A review by The Wall Street Journal of dozens of such contracts funded by Mr. Murtha’s committee shows that many weren’t sought by the military or federal agencies they were intended to benefit. Some were inefficient or mismanaged, according to interviews, public records and previously unpublished Pentagon audits. One Murtha-backed firm, ProLogic Inc., is under federal investigation for allegedly diverting public funds to develop commercial software, people close to the case say. The company denies wrongdoing and is in line to get millions of dollars more in the pending defense bill…In addition to using taxpayer money to build a local defense industry, Mr. Murtha has funded by legislative fiat miles of new roads, water projects, medical facilities and federal offices for his district. He even brought a Marine attack-helicopter squadron here; it’s next to the John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County Airport. Mr. Murtha has steered at least $600 million in earmarks to his district in the past four years, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan Washington group. The nonprofit group estimates he’s sent $2 billion or more to the district since joining the appropriations committee.
Pot, meet Kettle.
Back to the article:
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has five children, but she waited until they were grown before she ran for high political office. Palin returned to the job three days after giving birth to a special needs child, all the while her 17-year-old is entertaining a lover. And what about plans to have the girl wed the stud, author of some very unromantic remarks on Facebook? Note that she’s been pregnant for five months and still no matrimony. These nuptials couldn’t be a last-minute political move, could they?
Well, IMO, this is a very thinly-veiled attempt at saying that she should be at home, raising her children. To quote Giuliani (someone I have only quasi-respect for):
“Because how do you raise questions like this: ‘Does Sarah Palin have the time to be a mother and vice president?’ Well, I don’t know, does Barack Obama have the time to be a father and president? John McCain? George Bush? Al Gore? John Kerry? I can go on and on. I never remember that question being asked.”
Besides, according to this ABC news article, 45% of US mothers work full time, 16% part time, and 37% said they’re “on a career track.”
And as far as her going back to work three days after giving birth? So? Yes, Trig has Down Syndrome. That doesn’t mean she didn’t give him the mothering he needs. Besides, according to this article at People magazine’s website, she took him with her to work. She also planned (and I’m assuming she still does this) to take some days off for his pediatric appointments. I see this decision as her wanting to be the one who cares for him, rather than leaving him in a daycare center all day.
And yes, there are daycare centers who take children that small. Trust me. Ours does, which is a darn good thing, too! Foster parents don’t get any time off whenever we get a new child in our home–regardless of that child’s age. We brought our newest foster son home whenever he was three days old–and he was in daycare the next morning. We don’t have a choice in the matter, because neither one of us make enough to support the entire family on our own. So, we both have to work. As much as we both would love to have him with us all day–whether at work or at home–it’s not possible for us in the jobs that we have. If it’s possible for Gov Palin to keep Trig with her? Why not? I have absolutely no problem with her keeping him with her.
all the while her 17-year-old is entertaining a lover.
Yet another pathetic dig at Bristol. They’re not living together. And chances are they probably weren’t in bed together while her mother was at the hospital having Trig. She’s a teenage girl in love with her boyfriend, and she made the choice to sleep with him. Again, at least she’s dealing with her decision to do that responsibly.
And as for calling him a “stud” in such an egregious tone? You need to take a step back here. A “stud” is an animal kept for breeding. If you were calling him that in a positive manner–ie, “he’s such a stud!”–that’s one thing. But here, you’re clearly debasing him and his person to the level of an animal to be used only for procreation purposes. How utterly vile. How pathetic that you have to attack him, whenever he has nothing to do with this election.
And as far as him having “unromantic” things to say? The only thing reported is that he was in a committed relationship and he didn’t want children. Well, I don’t particuarly want four children, but there’s a distinct possibility that that’s exactly what we’ll have. It doesn’t mean that I won’t love all four of them equally. It doesn’t mean that I won’t do everything humanly possible to give them the kind of love, care, and life that they deserve. It doesn’t mean that I won’t love them any less than what I already do. I’m still going to be the father of four children–and it’s my decision to be just that. I do have the option of saying no. But I won’t. Not because of some misguided sense of entitlement or anything else other than it’s because I love these children with all my heart. I’m betting that Levi does want this child. And I know he wants to be married to Bristol–he has her name tatooed on his ring finger. Why? Because hers is the only ring that belongs there.
Oh, yes, I forgot. He’s a “@#!%^&* redneck” who likes to fish, “shoot some $%^&,” and “@#$%^&* chillin’.” While I think I would have used less offensive language, it doesn’t change the fact that he knows who he is, and this is what he likes to do. He’s obviously smart enough to use a computer–something that I know a lot of adults can’t do. He’s also obviously into the same things most rednecks are: fishing, hunting, sports, and hanging out. These are all things *I* enjoy. There’s nothing wrong with being a redneck. Heck, I wish more guys were rednecks. The nation probably wouldn’t be in the horrid state that it’s in if there were more of us around. This nation was founded by a bunch of rednecks. They hunted. They fished. They grew their own food. And they were able to kick British butts (not the word I wanted to use here) and secure our freedom.
Being a redneck doesn’t mean you’re uneducated. Being a redneck means that you know what hard work is–and you’re not afraid to do it. Being a redneck means that you know how to survive, when it comes down to it. Being a redneck is being man enough to worship God, and still know how to stand up to–and take out–someone who is threatening our family. Being a redneck doesn’t mean you can’t be romantic, either–it’s a lot harder to woo the girl-next-door than you think it is, especially whenever she’s capable of correctly field dressing a moose. We rednecks learn how to be romantic real quick. Being a redneck isn’t something to be ashamed of. It’s a way of life. It’s not always easy, but we’re also not afraid to take the bull by the horns and show said bull who’s boss.
Just ask Montana’s Democrat governor, Brian Schweitzer, who Bill Clinton appointed to the US Department of Agriculture as a member of the Montana USDA Farm Service Agency, as well as the fact that, in 1986, he launched a ranching and irrigation business in Whitefish. I’m betting he’d call himself a redneck–because that’s what his lifestyle defines him as.
Or how about Wyoming’s Democrat governor, Dave Frudenthal. He grew up on a farm–and, being what farms are, they’re the reason the word redneck was even coined. I wonder how he’d respond if you told him rednecks couldn’t be romantic.
Hmmm…. Let me think if there’s other statements that one would consider romantic.
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman!” – President Bill Clinton.
“See, Barack’s been talking down to black people on this faith-based…I want to cut his &#*$ off.” – Jesse Jackson.
“Now that’s my phone buzzing there. I don’t want you to think I’m getting fresh or anything.” — Barack Obama.
“I’m sure a lot of you have tripped out on alcohol. It’s a lot safer to do it on marijuana.” — Democratic presidential candidate Mike Gravel.
“He’s too snore-y and stinky, they don’t want to ever get into bed with him.” — Michelle Obama.
Mmmmm…. Those are some romantic things to say!
Pot, meet Kettle.
And as far as them not being married (even though she’s five months pregnant)? Means nothing, because they are (at this point) going to get married. Barack’s mother was three months pregnant whenever she got married.
Pot, meet Kettle.
Palin supporters insist that her out-of-control home life will resonate with many American families. Yes, if they’re from Mars or perhaps on welfare.
Again, may I introduce you to the Kennedy family? The “royalty” of this nation’s political environment? Talk about out-of-control home life.
Or even, oh, say, the Richie family–as in, Lionel Richie. You remember their daughter Nicole, right? Well, turns out that she supports Obama. And, while she may be from Mars (or, should I say, Venus), I’m fairly sure she doesn’t qualify as being on welfare.
Or what about Britney Spears’s sister, Jamie Lynn? While they’re both likely to be from Mars/Venus, Jamie’s a teenage mother, and is most definitely not on welfare. And she’s not marrying the father. I’m thinking she could easily identify with Bristol, but I’m also betting money she’s an Obama supporter.
Pot, meet Kettle.
It’s four more years of national humiliation as our leadership undermines the teaching of evolutionary science, and if something happens to John McCain, opposes stem-cell research.
Um, not true. Definitely not true. Evolution is taught equally with creation, according to laws passed across the nation–and supported by the National Science Teacher’s Association. I’ve even asked about this at my children’s school, because I’m one of those stupid fathers who believe that I should be involved in my children’s education, rather than just letting the school system do it’s job. My children’s teachers all say the same thing–whenever it comes to evolution vs creation, each is given equal time and study.
And she doesn’t necessarily oppose stem-cell research. She, like Bush, opposes where the stem-cells come from. In this New York Times article, it states that they’re wanting to get the cells by destroying microscopic entities, “smaller than the period at the end of this sentence.”
Aside: May I humbly remind the writer of this article the lesson taught to us by none other than Dr. Seuss himself: a person’s a person, no matter how small.
It comes down to when you personally believe life starts. I’m one of those nutcases who thinks it starts at conception. Obviously, Gov Palin is, too. We all think getting these stem cells from adults is A-OK. But it’s not OK whenever you have to destroy a life to get them. But as I said, it’s a personal belief that, one day, we’ll all know the answer to.
…and similar excesses appeal to a passionate but small slice of the electorate.
Hmmm… Well, I guess this statement completely invalidates this article. And this one. I’m sure I could go on, but what’s the point?
They are one reason voters are booting Republicans out of power.
So tell me why the Democrat-bloated Congress’ popularity is at a historical low? Can’t be because of how great the Democrats are doing. Sounds to me like they’re doing just as poorly as Republicans.
Pot, meet Kettle.
So while some religious conservatives may be “energized” by the Palin pick, most everyone else is revolted.
*shakes head at her clear befuddlement about the situation.*
This Palin deal makes you question not only his judgment, but–if he really had vetted Sarah Palin–his sanity.
Actually, it clears the whole question up for most of us.
Here’s to voting for Palin! Here’s to her being the President in four years!
UPDATE: It looks like enough people in Alaska complained to RealClearPolitics.com about the title of Ms. Harrop’s article. She’s changed the title from Don’t They Have Birth Control up in Alaska to Palin’s Social Views Hurt Ticket. Pardon me while I laugh for a minute. :D
