Kids are off limits when it comes to tearing them down. If what either side says is in a positive light, then by all means, talk them up and be proud. But if your intent is to bring their actions to light as fodder to tear someone down, then that's where the line is drawn.
Should be obvious.
en(un)lightened
[QUOTE=clocker;2954981]Originally Posted by j2k4
Because they normally are; the liberal press has much less compunction.
Now-
How do you know the shotgun was in play?
Should Palin, rather than issue a statement on her daughter's behalf, shove her out front for the media?
How do you know the girl doesn't want to marry the fellow?
This is precisely the type of gaffe you attempt to take me to task for below, vis a vis Chelsea Clinton.
Think goose/gander.
That is not to say you shouldn't feel free to express the thought, you see.
Would you say (assuming you've been watching the coverage) the liberal press is being fair, at this point?
All I said was that, had Chelsea become pregnant, you'd never have known it one way or another, and guess why?
Just think, two days into this thing and you already know more about Bristol Palin than eight years of Chelsea revealed, all thanks to the liberal press.
Tell me then, what exactly do I need to form the basis upon which to speculate about whatever I please?
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
en(un)lightened
Perhaps that ought to be qualified:
If the young lady were out there stumping for Mom and McCain, an argument could be made for open season.
The libs don't get it, and the evidence is plain, judging from the whining about Michelle Obama's treatment and Barak's subsequent complaints.
The rule should be, Don't put anyone out front you don't want to see flayed.
In other words, to escape the harsh light, stay the fuck out of the sun and keep your mouth shut.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Yeah, I agree with that to a point.Perhaps that ought to be qualified:
If the young lady were out there stumping for Mom and McCain, an argument could be made for open season.
Where I'd differ would be that if she was out there simply talking good about her parents, then to a point she should still be off limits. Where she would be fair game is if she decided to join in on smearing the other side.
You expect kids to want to support their parents, and so long as they are being respectful of the other side and not debating the pro's or con's of the opponents, then let 'em do so.
en(un)lightened
Right.Yeah, I agree with that to a point.
Where I'd differ would be that if she was out there simply talking good about her parents, then to a point she should still be off limits. Where she would be fair game is if she decided to join in on smearing the other side.
You expect kids to want to support their parents, and so long as they are being respectful of the other side and not debating the pro's or con's of the opponents, then let 'em do so.
In other words, no campaign appearances.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Shovel Ready
Um, it was SARAH PALIN who made the announcement.
Her credentials as "lib press" are as shaky as her credentials for VP.
Having seen how half-assed the McCain vetting process was for Palin, one shudders to imagine the rest of his choices.
I still say she bows out.
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
Someone like say:
Sarah Palin?
[youtube]874yiexEM_k[/youtube]
It's over the line to ask for an example of a claim made about her?
Seems it's over the line to ask anything about her.
I think it was a particularly funny complaint when he said you don't have to belittle her experience while he was doing just that himself to Obama.
Last edited by devilsadvocate; 09-02-2008 at 10:04 PM.
Shovel Ready
That clip is everywhere today, and rightly so.
Besides, it's funny.
I see that McCain is now labeling any criticism of Palin as "sexist".
I guess we can wait for the "circumspect" conservative press to let us know what is permissible and what is not.
You'll be able to identify the "circumspect" conservative pundits because they'll be riding unicorns.
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
en(un)lightened
Young Tucker obviously wasn't properly prepared; as has been noted, it wasn't a tough question, and he came across with the stink of a brain fart.Someone like say:
Sarah Palin?
[youtube]874yiexEM_k[/youtube]
It's over the line to ask for an example of a claim made about her?
Seems it's over the line to ask anything about her.
I think it was a particularly funny complaint when he said you don't have to belittle her experience while he was doing just that himself to Obama.
I would say that query will be asked again, and answered.
Yup.
Watch the polls over the next, oh, seven days or so.
So angry over stolen tactics?
You really are upset, aren't you.
Only if you get off your "everything but FOXNEWS" high horse.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
So what is your opinion of McCain canceling Larry King because of it?
We appear to be in agreement that it wasn't an unreasonable question.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks