Bristol Palin Engaged to Dakota Meyer (moved)
- Thread starter MachZer0
- Start date
ArmenianJohn
Politically Liberal Christian Fundamentalist
- Jan 30, 2013
- 8,962
- 5,551
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
All citizens are private citizens. But some are also public figures, such as politicians or actors or musicians or anyone who has celebrity. If Bristol Palin wants to keep her life private then she should do so. But she has chosen to live her life in public (for money, because she is uneducated and lacks any marketable skills, apparently) and she chooses to publicly announce and star in reality shows and openly spread news about things like her private life and her pregnancies and so on. So your whining about her "privacy" really is going to fall on deaf ears... Bristol is the Kim Kardashian of the radical right-wing.
The motivation is to point out and highlight and make sure everyone is aware of their stupidity and not support these morons. Every time one of them says or does anything it is typically something extremely stupid, hypocritical, or both. Those of us who are against people like them will always want to point out that they are so stupid and hypocritical that the things they say can't be taken seriously by anyone who has any brains at all. It's not about our egos - it's about the fact that the Palins make our lives easier since we don't have to figure anything out about them, we can just point at them and their stupidity and say "look!" and the message is clear as to how stupid and ignorant and hypocritical they are. That's why it's so enjoyable - because it's easy, it's all what they do, and it's effective and true.
Hope that answer was clear enough for you.
She was NOT correct regarding death panels (there are none in Obamacare but there are death panels in private insurance companies), or Paul Revere (Palin said Revere "warned the British that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms" which is wrong and only a moron would believe that)...
Tina Fey, impersonating Sarah Palin, said "I can see Russia from my house", which sums up the basic stupidity of what Sarah Palin really said, which was that Russian land can be seen from American land in a part of Alaska... The stupidity of that is that it's irrelevant and stupid to think that there's any meaningfulness to that in regards to her being from Alaska. It's like me, being from New Jersey, boasting to someone in Germany that "Oh, you can see Mexico from land in America!" So what? Big deal! Who cares? She's so stupid though she thought that what she said was news to people and that it had any meaning at all when it didn't. She is an idiot!
Did YOU start a thread on what you believe about Hillary??? No. Why not?? Why don't you start a thread on it if you think it's important? Your sources and information are all wrong so why would I start a thread on it? If you start a thread on it I'll discuss it THERE, not HERE where you'd be hijacking a thread.
But why would you think that I would start a thread on something YOU believe to be true??? I don't expect YOU to start the thread on Bristol Palin's stupidity and hypocrisy - why would you expect ME or anyone else who has the sense to see how stupid the Palins are to start a thread on YOUR idea of Hillary Clinton??? That's extremely ignorant on your part to assume that people will A) read your mind and then understand and agree with your theories about Hillary Clinton and B) start threads on it for you.
No, the right-wing are not enlightened, that's the point... the far-right is in the dark. We're not demeaning them, we're pointing at the self-demeaning behaviors and words of the Palins. That's why it is easy to chuckle at it - they do it to themselves!!! They're clowns and idiots!!! lol
Upvote
0
Bristol Palin is a celebrity and paid spokesperson for abstinence. She hung her paycheck on abstaining from premarital sex. Private citizen, yes. Like most of us, but she put her face and voice out there pretending to uphold and promote a personal value. Rather then promote reality, she was a figure of hypocrisy. Abstinence only does work for many people, but it is only a small part of sex education. Maybe, Palin failed to learned the rest of the subject.
Upvote
0
- Jun 9, 2012
- 6,488
- 3,399
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Such a target rich environment.
Actors, musicians and celebrities are not elected officials. They can bloviate all they want, they have no direct power to enact or pass legislation. They can lobby, or donate a million dollars to the Obama campaign (as opposed to, say, aiding the inner city residents they claim to care so much about), but they can only directly influence your life if you decide they can. Bristol Palin is no different, she is a private citizen who chose to speak about an issue. Her comments however do and did not affect American domestic or foreign policy, unlike when John Kerry went to France in the wake of the terrorist attack and had James Taylor sing a song, or when Hillary Clinton joined the "blame the youtube video" bandwagon in response to the deaths of four Americans. And then dodged any responsibility. And then lied about it.
Yet as you prove again and again during your post, Bristol Palin apparently does wield power over you, as the fact she is pregnant (and didn't run straight to an abortion clinic) has caused you such consternation.
And here you prove my point. Anyone who has a job lives a substantial percentage of their lives in public, and they do it for money. You ever hold a job? Did you get paid for it? Evil capitalist. But that isn't really the point. The point with this particular comment is you openly snicker and sneer with your derogatory claims.
If Lifetime is going to give her a reality show, then she has marketable skills.
In addition, do you decry everyone who has a Facebook account? Do you have a Facebook account? Or perhaps she is happy about being pregnant. Ever consider that? No, because that would require a bit of humanity on your part where Bristol Palin is concerned.
Do you see any of the Conservative members here starting threads every time Kim Kardiashian says or does something? Kim Kardiashian is irrelevant, other than in how she is contributing to the rot of American culture.
This is so lame. If you really believe you are going to have any affect on the lives of the Palin family by voicing your elitist contempt in a thread here on Christian Forums, then the problem isn't Bristol Palin. But again you prove my point. Who is highlighting this as a newsworthy event? People who hate the Palins and revel in using terms such as "stupidity" and "morons."
Again you prove my point. People like them...
And again you prove my point. Anyone who doesn't agree with you obviously has no brains at all.
Yes it is, as you prove with your next words.
Is your life really that petty? That you rationalize it by some invented standard concerning the Palins? And oh, Joy! You get to point at them and say "look!" My God...
Which again proves my point. If you take joy out of demeaning others, it is all about your ego.
Oh you have made yourself very clear.
Howard Dean: Sarah Palin was right about death panels! Yeaarrggh!
When you’ve lost Hollerin’ Howard Dean, it may be time to rethink some things.
In 2009, Sarah Palin coined the term “death panels” as a more accurate name for Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB. Palin was widely ridiculed for her claim, but today, Howard Dean, of all people, is suggesting that she was on to something. After initially dismissing Palin's credibility and assailing her for her remarks, the fist-pumping firebrand is coming out forcefully today against the IPAB:
Shorter Howard Dean: "So... yeah, Republicans were right about death panels."
Source: http://twitchy.com/2013/07/29/howard-dean-sarah-palin-was-right-about-death-panels-yeaarrggh/
Sarah Palin Was Right—More Dems Ditch Death Panels
Palin was right as well, and also took a lot of heat, when she referred to ObamaCare's Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) as a death panel whose decisions would result in health care rationing.
Dr. Donald Berwick, who headed the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, admitted as much when he opined: "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open."
Berwick also said: "We can make a sensible social decision and say, 'Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit (new drug or medical intervention) is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds.'"
Source: http://news.investors.com/ibd-edito...palin-vindicated-as-democrats-oppose-ipab.htm
Death Panels? Sarah Palin Was Right
PolitiFact.com gave Sarah Palin their “Lie of the Year” award for warning on August 7 that the Democrat’s idea of “cost containment” implied rationing by “death panels.”
The self-described fact-checking web site of the St. Petersburg Times claimed Palin was criticizing a provision in the House bill under which “Medicare would pay for doctors’ appointments for patients to discuss living wills, health care directives and other end-of-life issues.”
The claim that Governor Palin confused one-on-one counseling between doctors and patients with any sort of “panel” was always ridiculous on its face. Indeed, that claim should itself have been a leading candidate for “Lie of the Year.” Yet Palin’s critics kept on equating death panels with counseling throughout the year, as though they could not even begin to understand plain English.
Source: http://www.cato.org/blog/death-panels-sarah-palin-was-right
How Accurate Were Palin's Paul Revere Comments?
Prof. ALLISON: Yeah. She was making a Second Amendment case. But in fact, the British were going out to Concord to seize colonists' arms, the weapons that the Massachusetts Provincial Congress was stockpiling there.
So, yeah, she is right in that. I mean, she may be pushing it too far to say this is a Second Amendment case. Of course, neither the Second Amendment nor the Constitution was in anyone's mind at the time. But the British objective was to get the arms that were stockpiled in Concord.
BLOCK: So you think basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right.
Prof. ALLISON: Well, yeah, she did. And remember, she is a politician. She's not an historian. And God help us when historians start acting like politicians, and I suppose when politicians start writing history.
Source:
Sarah Palin Was Right About Paul Revere
The media must have only read Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s famous poem, which is not a definitive account of Revere’s famous ride.
“Would you believe,” as Maxwell Smart, Secret Agent 86, used to say, that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin knows more about American history than the members of what Rush Limbaugh calls “the drive-by media,” who are currently making fun of her?
Probably not. But she does, at least as far as Paul Revere’s ride is concerned.
Source: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/06/06/sarah-palin-was-right-about-paul-revere
Finally, someone who admits the truth. However this truth typically doesn't deter many from constantly attempting to attach that comment to Sarah Palin. It has happened here before, and it will happen again.
In addition, from Snopes dot com:
Henceforth, invocations of Sarah Palin frequently employed the line "I can see Russia from my house," rather than the words she actually spoke, "You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska."
As to the question of whether one can actually see Russia from Alaska, Governor Palin was correct...
Source: http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/russia.asp
Note the The Diomede Islands in the center. Guess which two nations they are a part of.
The answer Palin gave was in response to a question posed by Charles Gibson asking what insight she had gained from living so close to Russia. Her answer was perfectly reasonable. Except to those looking to voice their hate and disdain of Sarah Palin.
Such as:
Yet again you prove my point.
There have been multiple threads here concerning Hillary Clinton. Which is appropriate, as Hillary Clinton was appointed Secretary of State and has twice sought the Presidency. I have commented on many of them, and can say with certainty her clear lies in regard to her past and her role in foreign affairs have been staunchly defended by the American left, not only here but everywhere.
You haven't shown any of my sources are wrong.
Ah, the Wounded Duck Syndrome. I was not hijacking anything, I was drawing a corollary, a standard and legitimate debate tactic.
How far out in left field did you have to go to come up with this? Your follow on point is ridiculous.
So you say. But yet again your true motivation is on display. I was going to stop here, but I thought I would let you prove my point one more time:
Actors, musicians and celebrities are not elected officials. They can bloviate all they want, they have no direct power to enact or pass legislation. They can lobby, or donate a million dollars to the Obama campaign (as opposed to, say, aiding the inner city residents they claim to care so much about), but they can only directly influence your life if you decide they can. Bristol Palin is no different, she is a private citizen who chose to speak about an issue. Her comments however do and did not affect American domestic or foreign policy, unlike when John Kerry went to France in the wake of the terrorist attack and had James Taylor sing a song, or when Hillary Clinton joined the "blame the youtube video" bandwagon in response to the deaths of four Americans. And then dodged any responsibility. And then lied about it.
Yet as you prove again and again during your post, Bristol Palin apparently does wield power over you, as the fact she is pregnant (and didn't run straight to an abortion clinic) has caused you such consternation.
And here you prove my point. Anyone who has a job lives a substantial percentage of their lives in public, and they do it for money. You ever hold a job? Did you get paid for it? Evil capitalist. But that isn't really the point. The point with this particular comment is you openly snicker and sneer with your derogatory claims.
If Lifetime is going to give her a reality show, then she has marketable skills.
In addition, do you decry everyone who has a Facebook account? Do you have a Facebook account? Or perhaps she is happy about being pregnant. Ever consider that? No, because that would require a bit of humanity on your part where Bristol Palin is concerned.
Do you see any of the Conservative members here starting threads every time Kim Kardiashian says or does something? Kim Kardiashian is irrelevant, other than in how she is contributing to the rot of American culture.
This is so lame. If you really believe you are going to have any affect on the lives of the Palin family by voicing your elitist contempt in a thread here on Christian Forums, then the problem isn't Bristol Palin. But again you prove my point. Who is highlighting this as a newsworthy event? People who hate the Palins and revel in using terms such as "stupidity" and "morons."
Again you prove my point. People like them...
And again you prove my point. Anyone who doesn't agree with you obviously has no brains at all.
Yes it is, as you prove with your next words.
Is your life really that petty? That you rationalize it by some invented standard concerning the Palins? And oh, Joy! You get to point at them and say "look!" My God...
Which again proves my point. If you take joy out of demeaning others, it is all about your ego.
Oh you have made yourself very clear.
Howard Dean: Sarah Palin was right about death panels! Yeaarrggh!
When you’ve lost Hollerin’ Howard Dean, it may be time to rethink some things.
In 2009, Sarah Palin coined the term “death panels” as a more accurate name for Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB. Palin was widely ridiculed for her claim, but today, Howard Dean, of all people, is suggesting that she was on to something. After initially dismissing Palin's credibility and assailing her for her remarks, the fist-pumping firebrand is coming out forcefully today against the IPAB:
Shorter Howard Dean: "So... yeah, Republicans were right about death panels."
Source: http://twitchy.com/2013/07/29/howard-dean-sarah-palin-was-right-about-death-panels-yeaarrggh/
Sarah Palin Was Right—More Dems Ditch Death Panels
Palin was right as well, and also took a lot of heat, when she referred to ObamaCare's Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) as a death panel whose decisions would result in health care rationing.
Dr. Donald Berwick, who headed the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, admitted as much when he opined: "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open."
Berwick also said: "We can make a sensible social decision and say, 'Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit (new drug or medical intervention) is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds.'"
Source: http://news.investors.com/ibd-edito...palin-vindicated-as-democrats-oppose-ipab.htm
Death Panels? Sarah Palin Was Right
PolitiFact.com gave Sarah Palin their “Lie of the Year” award for warning on August 7 that the Democrat’s idea of “cost containment” implied rationing by “death panels.”
The self-described fact-checking web site of the St. Petersburg Times claimed Palin was criticizing a provision in the House bill under which “Medicare would pay for doctors’ appointments for patients to discuss living wills, health care directives and other end-of-life issues.”
The claim that Governor Palin confused one-on-one counseling between doctors and patients with any sort of “panel” was always ridiculous on its face. Indeed, that claim should itself have been a leading candidate for “Lie of the Year.” Yet Palin’s critics kept on equating death panels with counseling throughout the year, as though they could not even begin to understand plain English.
Source: http://www.cato.org/blog/death-panels-sarah-palin-was-right
How Accurate Were Palin's Paul Revere Comments?
Prof. ALLISON: Yeah. She was making a Second Amendment case. But in fact, the British were going out to Concord to seize colonists' arms, the weapons that the Massachusetts Provincial Congress was stockpiling there.
So, yeah, she is right in that. I mean, she may be pushing it too far to say this is a Second Amendment case. Of course, neither the Second Amendment nor the Constitution was in anyone's mind at the time. But the British objective was to get the arms that were stockpiled in Concord.
BLOCK: So you think basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right.
Prof. ALLISON: Well, yeah, she did. And remember, she is a politician. She's not an historian. And God help us when historians start acting like politicians, and I suppose when politicians start writing history.
Source:
Sarah Palin Was Right About Paul Revere
The media must have only read Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s famous poem, which is not a definitive account of Revere’s famous ride.
“Would you believe,” as Maxwell Smart, Secret Agent 86, used to say, that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin knows more about American history than the members of what Rush Limbaugh calls “the drive-by media,” who are currently making fun of her?
Probably not. But she does, at least as far as Paul Revere’s ride is concerned.
Source: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/06/06/sarah-palin-was-right-about-paul-revere
Finally, someone who admits the truth. However this truth typically doesn't deter many from constantly attempting to attach that comment to Sarah Palin. It has happened here before, and it will happen again.
In addition, from Snopes dot com:
Henceforth, invocations of Sarah Palin frequently employed the line "I can see Russia from my house," rather than the words she actually spoke, "You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska."
As to the question of whether one can actually see Russia from Alaska, Governor Palin was correct...
Source: http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/russia.asp
Note the The Diomede Islands in the center. Guess which two nations they are a part of.
The answer Palin gave was in response to a question posed by Charles Gibson asking what insight she had gained from living so close to Russia. Her answer was perfectly reasonable. Except to those looking to voice their hate and disdain of Sarah Palin.
Such as:
Yet again you prove my point.
There have been multiple threads here concerning Hillary Clinton. Which is appropriate, as Hillary Clinton was appointed Secretary of State and has twice sought the Presidency. I have commented on many of them, and can say with certainty her clear lies in regard to her past and her role in foreign affairs have been staunchly defended by the American left, not only here but everywhere.
You haven't shown any of my sources are wrong.
Ah, the Wounded Duck Syndrome. I was not hijacking anything, I was drawing a corollary, a standard and legitimate debate tactic.
How far out in left field did you have to go to come up with this? Your follow on point is ridiculous.
So you say. But yet again your true motivation is on display. I was going to stop here, but I thought I would let you prove my point one more time:
Last edited:
Upvote
0
CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN
My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.
- Jul 1, 2007
- 17,286
- 5,060
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Seeker
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
I forgot she was speaking at abstinence only speeches. Maybe she will be more honest now. And say abstinence is crap. Or maybe the Conservatives will believe this is a one time thing, and still have her do these abstinence only speeches.
right wing hypocrisy at its worse (again)
Upvote
0
CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN
My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.
- Jul 1, 2007
- 17,286
- 5,060
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Seeker
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
I'm not getting what Hillary has to do with this, unless your joking.
Upvote
0
- Jun 9, 2012
- 6,488
- 3,399
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
What is so hard about this? Have you never in your life compared one thing to another? Contrasted two ideas or concepts? Drawn an analogy? What is there for you not to get?
Upvote
0
The Cadet
SO COOL
- Apr 29, 2010
- 6,290
- 4,743
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Bristol Palin is a spokesperson for a political issue that her mother (a person who had the potential to wield quite a bit of political power) was strongly in favor of. She also simultaneously serves as a wonderful example of why this stance on this particular issue is really stupid.
Abstinence only sex education doesn't work. It really, really does not work. And here we have a person stumping for abstinence only sex education, and this person has legitimate contacts with real social and political power, and this person has made a non-trivial amount of money from these contacts and from speaking on the subject, and this person is a gigantic hypocrite who has gotten pregnant out of wedlock twice. Turning around and saying "She's a private citizen" is completely disingenuous. She thrust herself out into public and took a stand on a political issue and made a lot of money for taking that stand. That makes her fair game as a public figure. It doesn't help that she is unambiguously on the wrong side of that issue. Or should we not talk about Ted Haggard's "private life" either?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
This is not a political conversation. The deliberate attempts to derail the conversation is simply a sign of a weak defense.
Upvote
0
HonestTruth
Member
I don't see forum right wingers here criticizing the Palins for their hypocrisy. Instead we are getting attacks from them on those who point out the hypocrisy and double standards.
No surprise.
No surprise.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- May 29, 2012
- 41,108
- 24,128
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
She is a celebrity, not to be confused with being a celibate. You would have a better case for arguing she is not in politics and the thread belongs elsewhere.
That would make for an excellent thread. Perhaps you should start one.
Upvote
0
ArmenianJohn
Politically Liberal Christian Fundamentalist
- Jan 30, 2013
- 8,962
- 5,551
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
She's a public figure as well as a paid spokesperson for sexual abstinence. And she went ahead and had extra-marital sex, going directly against what she preaches for her supposed "morality" as well as for money.
You seem to be unable to comprehend that "private citizens" can still be "public figures". Whether or not someone makes legislation or is otherwise involved in politics or government, he or she can still be a public figure. And at the same time all public figures, including those who are public servants like politicians and elected officials, are still private citizens. So your repetition of the "she is a private citizen" mantra really is completely meaningless. Everyone is a private citizen, even public figures. Everyone has rights to a certain level of privacy; public figures make themselves public by putting out and sharing those things that they COULD keep private if they really want to.
And apparently John Kerry and (especially) Hillary Clinton wield even more power over you!
Where did I or anyone say that it was wrong to do something for money? I should have said that she lives her life "in the public eye"... I have never lived my life in the public eye, I have had ordinary jobs which garner me no fame (or notoriety). Now, had I chosen such a job, I'd be well aware that a lot of my private life would become public, especially if I'm the one putting it out there. As far as my "snicker[ing] and sneer[ing]" and "derogatory claims", I think you're making things up in your head because you're responding emotionally.
No, it means there is something about her that is marketable. Especially with "reality" shows, it is more about a marketable quality or qualities that people have as opposed to skills or knowledge or education. I never said she wasn't marketable; rather, I was pointing out that her marketability comes from her celebrity which in turn comes from her name and her mother and her situations. I'm sure she has some marketable skills, but I am also sure they are the kinds of skills that would only help her get a low-paying, minimum-wage type job. She is marketable because of her celebrity so she can (and does) play that to her advantage.
Where is any of this coming from? I never said anything about Facebook, nor did I say anything about whether she is happy or not about being pregnant. You're again overreacting in your emotionality and imagining things that I never said.
What I DID point out is that she made the choices she made to share the information she wanted to share, and I pointed that out in response to your claims that she is a "private citizen" wherein you imply she is entitled to privacy about even the things that she herself broadcasts to the world.
Still not sure what your Facebook rant is about...
Why would conservatives start threads about Kim Kardashian? She is rich and conservatives worship money and the wealthy. Kim Kardashian is a goddess to most conservatives - of course they aren't going to start threads complaining about her. Although since she's married to a black guy you might find some conservative threads against that...
Where did I say I'd have any effect on the Palin family? I never did. Again, over-emotional overreaction on your part.
I never said it's not a newsworthy event - on the contrary, I think it truly is newsworthy! A paid spokesperson for the abstinence-only campaign and a darling of the conservative right-wing has become pregnant out of wedlock for the SECOND time, even after making commercials and making money by pushing "abstinence-only" commercials... Of course that's newsworthy! It's hilarious that the hypocrisy is so thick!
And I don't "hate" the Palins - I don't know them. I just think they are stupid and morons. And they provide me with PLENTY of proof of that!
Sorry it bothers you that I find it funny that the Palin family makes fools of themselves again, but it is funny.
Please don't take the Lord's name in vain. I'm a Christian and that offends me - do it again and I'm reporting it. I have zero tolerance for that, especially on a Christian forum.
I'm not demeaning anyone - Bristol Palin has demeaned herself. I didn't have any influence over her or her family and what they've said and what they've done (right down to the extra-marital sex)... It is their doing. I find it funny but also sad that they are so hypocritical and that their lap-dog followers will simply ignore anything they do wrong.
I know I have, but somehow you seem to still not understand me... I think it's your over-emotional reaction to hearing the truth about Bristol Palin and her sexual immorality.
All your rants and "sources" on "Palin was right" about this and that are off. Your source for her being right about "death panels" never proves it, instead it makes assumptions from other things Howard Dean said and makes connections where there are none. Your "Paul Revere" stuff doesn't prove that Palin was right at all when she said that Paul Revere warned the british that they were not gonna take American arms from us. (How stupid does someone have to be to say such a stupid thing, anyway.... That Sarah Palin is a completely stupid moron, she should stop talking about things she knows nothing about).
Do you want a medal? Or a monument? (What does this have to do with ANYTHING???)
Your sources haven't shown where anything you or they claim is right. Your sources are just rambling, emotional rants. Crybaby stuff.
Drawing a corollary would take a line or two - you posted paragraph upon paragraph of your rant/attack on Hillary. Go start a thread on that if you want to but don't hijack this or another thread.
You have to be WAAAYYYYYYYYYYY FAR OUT IN LEFT FIELD to come up with that.... So why did you come up with that? I didn't come up with it, you were the one whining to me about why I didn't post a thread criticizing Hillary. Like I said, WAAAAYYYY OUT IN LEFT FIELD...
I'll say it again - the far-right is unenlightened and entrenched in darkness, mentally AND spiritually. If your point is that I am against the far-right radical movement and Teabag Partyists and whatnot, then you don't have to work too hard, I'm pretty open about stating that I feel that way about the right-wing.
Upvote
0
essentialsaltes
Stranger in a Strange Land
- Oct 17, 2011
- 33,266
- 36,587
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
Upvote
0
CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN
My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.
- Jul 1, 2007
- 17,286
- 5,060
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Seeker
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- May 29, 2012
- 41,108
- 24,128
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Bristol Palin: poster child for abstinence education and the sanctity of marriage.
More states seem to be giving fathers an equal footing in child custody/support agreements. I don't know about Alaska but some states have a starting point of "50/50" and one party must prove the other less capable in order to get other arrangements. That includes the financial (parents split medical, day care costs, etc.) as well as physical custody. The parent making more money pays the other some additional amount. In this case, Ms. Palin may be making more money and will get to pay baby-daddy child support.
More states seem to be giving fathers an equal footing in child custody/support agreements. I don't know about Alaska but some states have a starting point of "50/50" and one party must prove the other less capable in order to get other arrangements. That includes the financial (parents split medical, day care costs, etc.) as well as physical custody. The parent making more money pays the other some additional amount. In this case, Ms. Palin may be making more money and will get to pay baby-daddy child support.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
