• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Huckabee Attacks Natalie Portman...

Roadtoad said:
Huckabee said some ill considered things. That doesn't make him evil; it makes him wrong. He's trying to deny he did anything wrong. That doesn't make him evil; it makes him dishonest. The same thing can be said about a number of people on both sides of the aisle, and it can be said about the vast majority of people. On many other points, he might be a fine man, and that can be said about most of the people I know. In all honesty, most folks want to do what's right.
Click to expand...

I very much like your post. However, I don't think anyone was implying that Huckabee is evil. Most of the discussion seems to center around, 'what he said was wrong, on many levels, to the point of being absurdly funny'. Then, being a skeptic's forum, people have tried to dissect each of those levels. We interpret the different ways it could be taken, and show how each of those are wrong and/or absurd. It's a thought exercise at that point.

When someone in politics puts his or her foot that deep down their own throat, it's going to be worked over. He's a contender for the Republican nomination, which makes this news.

It's a slow day, what do you want? :boxedin:
 
deepatrax said:
Some unmarried pregnant women who should be left out of the political debate:

- Natalie Portman
- Bristol Palin (a teenager at the time)
Click to expand...

Then bristol should stop taking money and being the poster mom for all kinds of political organizations.
 
As if he wasn't dumb enough already, now he has a problem with hot Jewish chicks having premarital sex? What the hell is wrong with him?
 
Roadtoad said:
True. For that matter, so should Megan McCain, regardless of her state of maternity.
Click to expand...

I don't take issue with them being political, it is that Bristol uses her being a teen mom as part of her political position. She can't even come up with a coherent message, did the kid ruin her life or was it the best thing that ever happened to her? The latter does not seem to discourage teens who might want to get pregnant(like my girlfriends brother and his sons mother did). Sure the effect is likely complex and nuanced, but that would also require recognizing that maybe being a teen mom is sometimes not all that bad.
 
The Mutha said:
"Most single moms are very poor, uneducated, can't get a job, and if it weren't for government assistance, their kids would be starving to death and would not get healthcare."

I find this interesting... I'm a single mom (although I was still married when I had The Dolly) and I'm not poor, I'm about 15 hours short of a BS, I have a great job and although I did qualify for WIC and food stamps when I was newly divorced, I've never taken government assistance and we've had health care through my employers.

My ex-husband paid $350 a month (when he actually paid it between being unemployed or in jail) and that didn't go very far given that I put my kid through private school until high school. He's not paid one cent of her college fees and she's in her fourth year.

I'm damn proud of what I've accomplished and having some old man in Washington denigrate that is highly insulting to me.
Click to expand...

You should be proud of what you accomplished. I have known plenty of kids who turned out excellent with a single mom. Also while I applaud that you were able to raise you child without assistance from the government those who maybe made a mistake and needed help should be proud if they were good parents.
But he didn't say all he said most. I don't know if what he said is a fact or not. I do suspect a lot of single parents are struggling and need help. Especially young ones.

Does any one know how close to the facts that statement is?
 
ponderingturtle said:
I don't take issue with them being political, it is that Bristol uses her being a teen mom as part of her political position. She can't even come up with a coherent message, did the kid ruin her life or was it the best thing that ever happened to her? The latter does not seem to discourage teens who might want to get pregnant(like my girlfriends brother and his sons mother did). Sure the effect is likely complex and nuanced, but that would also require recognizing that maybe being a teen mom is sometimes not all that bad.
Click to expand...

The message for teenagers shouldn't be that an unwanted pregnancy will ruin your life. But it can make your life a lot more difficult than what most young people would like.

Has she used being a teen mom for a political statement? I have seen a social statement but I don't know about political.
Saying be careful about getting pregnant when you are a teenager is not a political statement. I think for the most part both political parties would agree.
 
eeyore1954 said:
The message for teenagers shouldn't be that an unwanted pregnancy will ruin your life. But it can make your life a lot more difficult than what most young people would like.

Has she used being a teen mom for a political statement? I have seen a social statement but I don't know about political.
Saying be careful about getting pregnant when you are a teenager is not a political statement. I think for the most part both political parties would agree.
Click to expand...

She uses it as the spokesmom of abstinence only education groups, and I classify that as political.
 
ponderingturtle said:
She uses it as the spokesmom of abstinence only education groups, and I classify that as political.
Click to expand...

Yes, but does she classify it as political? If she really believes that abstinence only education is the most helpful and best thing, then it's a health and social issue.

That doesn't stop her from being wrong about pushing abstinence only, but it does take it outside of pure politics.
 
Normally Huckabee is the silver-tongued devil who will tell you you don't deserve equal rights with a smile and folksy aphorism.

Here, is is just a prick. I hate how conservatives tend to treat single mothers. They seem to rue the fact that women who keep their children can have financial support, instead of being dependent on a husband they do not wish to live with. I've never understood it, but I've never had a conservative explain it fully either.
 
ponderingturtle said:
She uses it as the spokesmom of abstinence only education groups, and I classify that as political.
Click to expand...

Maybe but I would call it a social message. What abstinence only group is she a spokeperson person for? I don't think Candies foundation is abstinence only. They are abstinence is the most fool proof method but they link to Stayteen.com that has birth control 101.
 
tyr_13 said:
Yes, but does she classify it as political? If she really believes that abstinence only education is the most helpful and best thing, then it's a health and social issue.

That doesn't stop her from being wrong about pushing abstinence only, but it does take it outside of pure politics.
Click to expand...

Then nothing is politics as long as there is an issue. You are making it so that the only politics is party politics, not disagreements on issues. I reject that definition of politics.
 
tyr_13 said:
Yes, but does she classify it as political? If she really believes that abstinence only education is the most helpful and best thing, then it's a health and social issue.

That doesn't stop her from being wrong about pushing abstinence only, but it does take it outside of pure politics.
Click to expand...

"Pure politics"? Politics is how we run our country, what we do with pooled resources, how we run our schools and hospitals. Advocating the allocation of funds away from comprehensive ed in favor of abstinence only is pure politcs.

Maybe you meant partisan? I'd agree with it not being purely that.

eta: the turtle got there first.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Then nothing is politics as long as there is an issue. You are making it so that the only politics is party politics, not disagreements on issues. I reject that definition of politics.
Click to expand...

But by yours everything is politics. I believe that most things have a political component, but when someone isn't motivated by the politics of an issue, I don't think it's alright to criticize it on political grounds. That in and of itself isn't enough to make one a 'political entity' and thus a fair target.

Now, Miss Palin might be a fair target for political discussion on other grounds, but I just don't agree with the implication in this case.
 
quixotecoyote said:
"Pure politics"? Politics is how we run our country, what we do with pooled resources, how we run our schools and hospitals. Advocating the allocation of funds away from comprehensive ed in favor of abstinence only is pure politcs.

Maybe you meant partisan? I'd agree with it not being purely that.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes. I'm being careless with terms. My bad. :blush:
 
I would no more chastise and condemn Bristol Palin, who was an unmarried teenager when she got pregnant, than I would Ann Dunham, the mother of President Barack Obama who was also an unmarried teenager when she got pregnant.

Why anyone would criticize either mother is beyond me...
 
headscratcher4 said:
No. It is the only thing I've yet mastered in life.
Click to expand...

Oh, okay then. Carry on.

But I think it is fair to say that Bristol Palin should mostly be left out of political debates like this. She is not running for office.

Now, if Sarah Palin makes statements about how families shouldn't allow sex outside of marriage then she might well be accused of hypocrisy. But she's just a joke anyway and none of her supporters would be put off by any kind of hypocrisy or incoherence of hers if they haven't already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom