The angry left will lose the election for Obama with these repeated attacks

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
71
Boston
for a start check out this month's us magazine, which is owned by the village voice, & whose owner is a big contributor to the obama campaign...

Al, I see a negative Palin article as well as one where McCain's daughter comes to Bristol's defense. Seems fair and balanced to me.:shrug:
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
Al, I see a negative Palin article as well as one where McCain's daughter comes to Bristol's defense. Seems fair and balanced to me.:shrug:

okay stevie if that's how you see it that's fine....nothing that i am going to say will change your mind so i'm not going to try....
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
71
Boston
okay stevie if that's how you see it that's fine....nothing that i am going to say will change your mind so i'm not going to try....

Al, is there any reason why anything negative on this cadidate is called an attack? My problem is not with her, as I don't know much about her, my problem is with the packaging. And I don't mean her looks. Republicans are clearing the supermarket shelves of sliced bread to make room for her.
 

RAYMOND

Registered
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2000
45,254
526
113
usa
nobody mentioned fred thompson`s speech....he kicked some proggie arse tonight....

he was on `em...

of course,two major networks aren`t even carrying the convention(now theres fair and balanced)...

"two questions we'll never have to ask about john mccain: who is this man?... and can we trust him with the presidency?"

"john's been to iraq 8 times since 2003, and he went every time seeking truth, and not publicity."(
whoa)...ouch!

on obama......."not because of a teleprompter speech designed to appeal to our critics abroad!"

whack!..

fred, you magnificent bastard!...usa!....usa!...



fred did a great job :00hour
 

Happy Hippo

Registered
Forum Member
Mar 2, 2006
4,794
120
0
The fact that Palin knowingly gave birth to a downs syndrome baby solidifies her pro-life stance with more than just rhetoric.

This is the thing I just don't get - what exactly is "pro-life"? Is giving birth to a baby where it ends? To me, the fact that she goes back to work 3 days after giving birth to a high-needs child, isn't "pro-life". To me, dragging her pregnant teenage daughter into the spotlight (which she had to know was going to happen by accepting this nomination) isn't "pro-life". If a person is truly "pro-life" then they should care for and about the life of their children more every day that the child is alive. Just giving birth doesn't make a person pro-life. In fact, I would go so far as to say that those people who are not ready to have a child and decide instead to have an abortion are more pro-life because they realize that they cannot give a child the time, attention, and support that he or she will need.

I'm sure this isn't the proper thread for this debate, but I am sick of hearing she is "pro-life". If that is true, then she should be taking care of her family #1.
 

Eddie Haskell

Matt 02-12-11
Forum Member
Feb 13, 2001
4,595
41
0
25
Cincinnati
aclu.org
Well said HH.

Seems to me she is Pro-Sarah. I see a lot of people who want babies for the sake of having babies. They think it is cool. The fact that there is responsibility and work attached doesn't seem to enter their thought process. These are the children that are often left in the laps of grandparents, relatives or foster care agencies. Dogs and cats often get better treatment.

I'm not taking a pro-life or pro-choice stand here. Just sayin thats the way it is a lot of times. Actually young Levi seems to be rather honest when he says that he doesn't want the kid and all he wants to do is put the puck in the net and his stick in the goal. Appropriate for a 17 year old. Not changing diapers.

Eddie
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,556
214
63
"the bunker"
now the msm is asking for dna tests to prove she is actually the 5 month old`s mother?...

this isn`t the media doing an investigation...this is the media being willfully led by the nose by the extremist left wing smear sites...

they didn`t give a whit about edwards` shenanigans..as he was running for president....but palin`s 17 years old daughter?...now that`s news....

lets denigrate a candidate`s children...i mean,whatever it takes,right?......

feminism is a sham...it`s not about women...it`s political...
 

VermontCat

Registered
Forum Member
Sep 7, 2006
88
0
0
New England
This is the thing I just don't get - what exactly is "pro-life"? Is giving birth to a baby where it ends? To me, the fact that she goes back to work 3 days after giving birth to a high-needs child, isn't "pro-life". To me, dragging her pregnant teenage daughter into the spotlight (which she had to know was going to happen by accepting this nomination) isn't "pro-life". If a person is truly "pro-life" then they should care for and about the life of their children more every day that the child is alive. Just giving birth doesn't make a person pro-life. In fact, I would go so far as to say that those people who are not ready to have a child and decide instead to have an abortion are more pro-life because they realize that they cannot give a child the time, attention, and support that he or she will need.

I'm sure this isn't the proper thread for this debate, but I am sick of hearing she is "pro-life". If that is true, then she should be taking care of her family #1.

How the hell do you know the quality of the childs' life? Just because she goes back to work 3 days later doesn't mean the child isn't loved or being cared for. Are we now in the business of measuring a womans' love and ability to care for her child by how long she stays out of the workforce after giving birth? This isn't 1960 anymore, most women are going back to work MUCH sooner than they used to but I'll bet you've never had a problem with that until now right? Mighty presumptous of you to assume she isn't "taking care of her family".

As far as "dragging her daughter into the spotlight", that's a family matter that has nothing to do with her political abilities yet leave it to the pathetic assholes on the left to dig up this petty and juvenile shit. It seems to be a pattern with Liberals, feminists, the democraps as a whole. Don't stick to the issues, just personal attacks, even if you have to slam children. And YOU of all people have the gall to lay this shit at HER feet? That's laughable dude....get a fawkin clue!
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
71
Boston
This is the thing I just don't get - what exactly is "pro-life"? Is giving birth to a baby where it ends? To me, the fact that she goes back to work 3 days after giving birth to a high-needs child, isn't "pro-life". To me, dragging her pregnant teenage daughter into the spotlight (which she had to know was going to happen by accepting this nomination) isn't "pro-life". If a person is truly "pro-life" then they should care for and about the life of their children more every day that the child is alive. Just giving birth doesn't make a person pro-life. In fact, I would go so far as to say that those people who are not ready to have a child and decide instead to have an abortion are more pro-life because they realize that they cannot give a child the time, attention, and support that he or she will need.

I'm sure this isn't the proper thread for this debate, but I am sick of hearing she is "pro-life". If that is true, then she should be taking care of her family #1.

My point exactly HH. People who put their family ahead of their careers would stay home with sick kids and even stay home and help the daughter with her baby. What I have against Palin is the dishonesty of the way she is being packaged. When Clinton was running against Old Man Bush the Republicans where hitting Hillary because she was not a stay at home mom. Hilary came back with the fact that she was sure Barbara Bush makes better cookies than she does. She told the truth. But I guess lies work better for this group of Republicans.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
now the msm is asking for dna tests to prove she is actually the 5 month old`s mother?...

this isn`t the media doing an investigation...this is the media being willfully led by the nose by the extremist left wing smear sites...

they didn`t give a whit about edwards` shenanigans..as he was running for president....but palin`s 17 years old daughter?...now that`s news....

lets denigrate a candidate`s children...i mean,whatever it takes,right?......

feminism is a sham...it`s not about women...it`s political...


Link please, regarding your first sentence. I know you're not being literal, but what are you referring to?
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,493
256
83
Victory Lane
if anything these stupid attacks on Palin's daughter are mobilizing the social conservatives and also are very offensive to small town people. Almost everyone in small towns deal with these issues if not for their kids, for their kids friends.

To see this ridiculed in the press, in such a hateful way, will do nothing but earn sympathy for Palin, AND is an attack on small town/rural values and way of life.

This act could actually be the whole key to a McCain victory.

Losing rural America by a landslide is what will happen if the "angry left" keeps doing what it is doing.

.........................................................

:142smilie :142smilie

Even the neo cons are running scared over this.

They know there is no turning back and they are stuck with her.

She better hit one out of the park tonight.

Alot to talk about Palin in the next two months
 

saint

Go Heels
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
9,501
140
63
Balls Deep
How the hell do you know the quality of the childs' life? Just because she goes back to work 3 days later doesn't mean the child isn't loved or being cared for. Are we now in the business of measuring a womans' love and ability to care for her child by how long she stays out of the workforce after giving birth? This isn't 1960 anymore, most women are going back to work MUCH sooner than they used to but I'll bet you've never had a problem with that until now right? Mighty presumptous of you to assume she isn't "taking care of her family".

As far as "dragging her daughter into the spotlight", that's a family matter that has nothing to do with her political abilities yet leave it to the pathetic assholes on the left to dig up this petty and juvenile shit. It seems to be a pattern with Liberals, feminists, the democraps as a whole. Don't stick to the issues, just personal attacks, even if you have to slam children. And YOU of all people have the gall to lay this shit at HER feet? That's laughable dude....get a fawkin clue!

Well-written response. HH you usually have some intelligent things to say, even if I don't agree with you, but that statement was utterly ridiculous.
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
As far as "dragging her daughter into the spotlight", that's a family matter that has nothing to do with her political abilities yet leave it to the pathetic assholes on the left to dig up this petty and juvenile shit. It seems to be a pattern with Liberals, feminists, the democraps as a whole. Don't stick to the issues, just personal attacks, even if you have to slam children. And YOU of all people have the gall to lay this shit at HER feet? That's laughable dude....get a fawkin clue!

Just wondering did you have this same venom when Bush and Rove attacked McCains child calling it an illegitimate back babyin the 2000 primaries? I will wait for your reply.
 

UGA12

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 7, 2003
7,774
108
63
Between The Hedges
This is the thing I just don't get - what exactly is "pro-life"? Is giving birth to a baby where it ends? To me, the fact that she goes back to work 3 days after giving birth to a high-needs child, isn't "pro-life". To me, dragging her pregnant teenage daughter into the spotlight (which she had to know was going to happen by accepting this nomination) isn't "pro-life". If a person is truly "pro-life" then they should care for and about the life of their children more every day that the child is alive. Just giving birth doesn't make a person pro-life. In fact, I would go so far as to say that those people who are not ready to have a child and decide instead to have an abortion are more pro-life because they realize that they cannot give a child the time, attention, and support that he or she will need.

I'm sure this isn't the proper thread for this debate, but I am sick of hearing she is "pro-life". If that is true, then she should be taking care of her family #1.

Your right, that thread can be found in the 1960's.

BTW how would a couple that were both pro-life earn a living if they were both at home "taking care of their family"

Just laughable
 

Happy Hippo

Registered
Forum Member
Mar 2, 2006
4,794
120
0
I was too mad last night to reply to this thread and say what I really meant to say.

Here is a question for all you people who want to tell me to get a fawkin clue:

If you had an infant with special needs, and a teenage daughter who was about to have a baby, would you accept a promotion at your job that involves high levels of responsibility, extended trips away from home, and a lot of public scrutiny - basically you would not be able to be at home with your new child or help your teenage daughter with her new baby. Now I don't care whether you are a man or a woman, answer this question honestly and then tell me to get a fawkin clue again.

Since she and the republican party are touting her as a "hockey-mom" and conservative who puts "family first", I think this is a legitimate question to ask.

I will tell you this - I would put my family FIRST and say screw my political ambitions.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top