If you don't think private family choices should be used for political fodder, then don't make judging other people's private family choices one of the cornerstones of your political movement.

I'd like to see one Republican representative stand up at the convention and make a motion that, in light of the unseemly speculation and attacks on Palin, Republican politicans take a vow to never comment on the private marriage, sex, and birth choices of other American citizens.

The family, especially children, should be off-limits, but not the candidate. There's a reason Edwards was a no-show at the Dem's convention, even they can't say his behavior is ok.

Anything Palin has done should be fair game, as it goes to judgment and character. What her child has done, not so much. Simply shows that, like a lot of teens, they don't always listen to their parents.

Quote from: CavScout;244275The family, especially children, should be off-limits, but not the candidate. There's a reason Edwards was a no-show at the Dem's convention, even they can't say his behavior is ok.

Anything Palin has done should be fair game, as it goes to judgment and character. What her child has done, not so much. Simply shows that, like a lot of teens, they don't always listen to their parents.

This sounds good -- but in practice people of both sides make a big deal out of attacking not just family, but anyone who is even moderately close to the candidate.  It seems to me that someone's family reflects on them at least as much as a neighbor, friend, or minister.  

I would prefer it if we concentrated more on what the candidates' platform and qualifications are, and less on any sort of private life.

Quote from: jhkim;244298This sounds good -- but in practice people of both sides make a big deal out of attacking not just family, but anyone who is even moderately close to the candidate.  It seems to me that someone's family reflects on them at least as much as a neighbor, friend, or minister.  

I would prefer it if we concentrated more on what the candidates' platform and qualifications are, and less on any sort of private life.

I disagree. Who the candidate associates with is, too, an indication of character and judgment. Family, especially children, is different. You might question a candidate who goes bowling with known criminals, but I don't think you could make the same judgment, or conclusion, if one of their children were a criminal. You can pick your acquaintances based on character, you don't have that leeway with family.

Quote from: CavScout;244302I disagree. Who the candidate associates with is, too, an indication of character and judgment. Family, especially children, is different. You might question a candidate who goes bowling with known criminals, but I don't think you could make the same judgment, or conclusion, if one of their children were a criminal. You can pick your acquaintances based on character, you don't have that leeway with family.

You don't pick your children... you make them.  Even if you believe that children are mostly genetically determined with little influence from their parents' upbringing, then they will reflect on your and your chosen spouse's genetic roots.  If you feel that upbringing has a large influence, then they will reflect that.  

Really, I would argue the reverse.  If a friend of mine went out and committed a crime, it would reflect relatively little on me.  I would be disturbed, but my conscience would be fairly clear.  If my son went out and committed a crime, then it would reflect a great deal more on me.  I'd be terribly upset, and I would be forced rethink a major part of my life, and I'd wonder what I had done wrong.

Quote from: jhkim;244310You don't pick your children... you make them.  Even if you believe that children are mostly genetically determined with little influence from their parents' upbringing, then they will reflect on your and your chosen spouse's genetic roots.  If you feel that upbringing has a large influence, then they will reflect that.  

Really, I would argue the reverse.  If a friend of mine went out and committed a crime, it would reflect relatively little on me.  I would be disturbed, but my conscience would be fairly clear.  If my son went out and committed a crime, then it would reflect a great deal more on me.  I'd be terribly upset, and I would be forced rethink a major part of my life, and I'd wonder what I had done wrong.

This. Children are a reflection (not a copy) of ones morals and attention to duty. It is convenient to say "It is not my fault as a parent". That said, as the child goes their own way in life they begin carving their own path and thoughts but will still be influenced by the parenting they grew up under.

Of course, just my opinion.

Bill

Quote from: jhkim;244310You don't pick your children... you make them.  Even if you believe that children are mostly genetically determined with little influence from their parents' upbringing, then they will reflect on your and your chosen spouse's genetic roots.  If you feel that upbringing has a large influence, then they will reflect that.  

Really, I would argue the reverse.  If a friend of mine went out and committed a crime, it would reflect relatively little on me.  I would be disturbed, but my conscience would be fairly clear.  If my son went out and committed a crime, then it would reflect a great deal more on me.  I'd be terribly upset, and I would be forced rethink a major part of my life, and I'd wonder what I had done wrong.

Nonsense. If a parent was a strong advocate of not drinking and driving and their teen gets busted for DUI, how does that reflect that the parent supports drinking and driving?

I don't necessarily believe that children are a reflection of the parents in all cases. I've seen very good parents have "bad seed" children no matter what they did, and I've seen bad parents have "turd blossoms" that rose above them, god only knows how.

The issue to me is that conservatives attack family members for political reasons or just out of spite, like when rush limbaugh called 13 year old chelsea clinton "a dog" on his TV show while demanding their families be sacred.

And no one even calls them hypocrites. I guess that bothers me a lot. Conservatives commit blatant, open hypocrisy and no one even bothers to call them on it. I guess america is so used to hypocrisy no one even bothers to bring it up as an issue anymore...

Quote from: RPGPundit;244259There's pretty rampant hypocrisy going on in both sides. If a Dem VP candidate's daughter got pregnant at 17, the Republicans would be accusing her of bad parenting due to a lack of values, and wondering how she could possibly run the country if she can't control her own family.

On the other hand, if it was a Dem VP candidate who's daughter got pregnant, the Dems would be saying that its a non-issue that isn't worthy of commentary, and that attacking the family is wrong.

So both of them are showing just how fucking meaningless their convictions really are.

RPGPundit

As I said earlier, I guess hypocrisy is so rampant and prevalent in american politics and society no one even bothers to raise it as an issue. It's just not news when a poltical party commits blatant, open hypocrisy anymore.

Quote from: Demonoid;244353The issue to me is that conservatives attack family members for political reasons or just out of spite, like when rush limbaugh called 13 year old chelsea clinton "a dog" on his TV show while demanding their families be sacred.

Got proof?


If the family members are actively involved with the campaigning, then they are fair game and it is disingenuous to claim that they are "off limits". Chelsea Clinton was campaigning for Hillary Clinton for the democrat presidential candidacy and Michelle Obama continues to campaign for Barack Obama for the presidential candidacy - which means that since they are deliberately getting involved to provide support, then they are willing to also suffer the hardships that will come with providing that support. As far as I can tell, the pregnant 17 year old Bristol Palin has never campaigned for Sarah Palin even though she is her daughter - so she is wisely staying out of the fray and should therefore be left alone.

It seems logical enough to me, but then again I don't fill my posts with backslashes.

Quote from: Demonoid;244353I don't necessarily believe that children are a reflection of the parents in all cases. I've seen very good parents have "bad seed" children no matter what they did, and I've seen bad parents have "turd blossoms" that rose above them, god only knows how.

The issue to me is that conservatives attack family members for political reasons or just out of spite, like when rush limbaugh called 13 year old chelsea clinton "a dog" on his TV show while demanding their families be sacred.

And no one even calls them hypocrites. I guess that bothers me a lot. Conservatives commit blatant, open hypocrisy and no one even bothers to call them on it. I guess america is so used to hypocrisy no one even bothers to bring it up as an issue anymore...

So, just so we understand, you say it's OK to be a dick as long as someone, somewhere, was a dick to someone, somewhere on your side?

Quote from: jeff37923;244358It seems logical enough to me, but then again I don't fill my posts with backslashes.

I think he forgot what account he was logged in on and has forgotten that this one is supposed to be the "\" one.

:teehee:

Quote from: HinterWelt;244226I know you mean this in the executive sense but the woman does have some interesting accomplishments to here name. The biggest and most important, to me, is creating a surplus in her states budget. This is arguable though, but her methods are sound. One could site that the increase in oil prices worked in her favor and they would be correct. However, her methods of citizen involvement in the process and fiscal conservative approach make a strong case for a disciplined governor.

She didn't create a budget surplus.  She actually generated the largest budget in Alaskan history, but did so during a period of record oil company profits which created a windfall in the state budget.  Basically she blew all of the grocery money on crap, but just happened to luck out and buy a winning lottery ticket.

Apparently when she became Mayor of Wasilliam the town had zero debt.  When she left Wasillia the town she was $22 million in debt.  A politically involved housewife from Wasillia has some very interesting things to say about her time as Mayor of the town.

Quote from: Jackalope;244378She didn't create a budget surplus.  She actually generated the largest budget in Alaskan history, but did so during a period of record oil company profits which created a windfall in the state budget.  Basically she blew all of the grocery money on crap, but just happened to luck out and buy a winning lottery ticket.

Apparently when she became Mayor of Wasilliam the town had zero debt.  When she left Wasillia the town she was $22 million in debt.  A politically involved housewife from Wasillia has some very interesting things to say about her time as Mayor of the town.

Yeah, I red that as well after I posted. I will fully admit I am still researching her. More and more negatives keep coming up. The frustrating thing is I am having difficulty finding official records on what she has done and have to deal with all this second hand information. Still, I like some of the methods she has employed in terms of engaging voters.

In the end, I will not end up hating her but her approach to government just might not be mine.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWelt;244380Yeah, I red that as well after I posted. I will fully admit I am still researching her. More and more negatives keep coming up. The frustrating thing is I am having difficulty finding official records on what she has done and have to deal with all this second hand information. Still, I like some of the methods she has employed in terms of engaging voters.

In the end, I will not end up hating her but her approach to government just might not be mine.

She seems like your typically inept Republican to me.  Clever and cunning enough to manipulate voters, but utterly incompetent at the actual management of a government.  No comprehension of politics as the art of compromise.

I suspect that if she weren't a beauty queen, we'd have never heard of her.  I'm seeing a repeat of the Bush effect all over again.  Except instead of Republicans thinking she'd be fun to have a beer with, she's the chick they wish they could bang.  VPILF.