Posts Tagged ‘child’

Some Thoughts About Sarah Palin’s Daghter Bristol

September 3, 2008

With the left wing hit machine in full gear, Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol has become another vehicle to attack the Republican ticket.

What do we have to say about a 17-year old girl getting pregnant?

First of all, I’ll have you know that I have nothing against a 17-year old girl getting pregnant in and of itself.  To offer one classic counter-example, Mary the mother of Jesus was undoubtedly even younger.

It’s not “teenage pregnancy” that’s tragic; it’s unwed mothers getting pregnant.  Teenage unwed mothers are merely the particularly tragic case of what happens when unwed women become pregnant without a family support structure (especially a husband).  The statistics are overwhelming: marital status and single motherhood are far and away the largest factors contributing to poverty.

Bristol Palin is lucky.  First of all, she’s a member of a great family that will support and love her, and will have the resources to support her child if necessary.  A lot of girls don’t have any of those luxuries.  Second, the father of her child genuinely loves her and they have announced their plans to marry.  A lot of girls think that’s going to happen when they give up their virginity to a boy who only wants one thing.

Bristol Palin is lucky, indeed.  Something that can be disastrous for so many other girls will probably be just a premature blessing for her and her husband-to-be.

I have heard liberals throw up Bristol’s pregnancy in Sarah Palin’s face to attack her abstinence policy.  Apparently, the fact that one girl got pregnant conclusively proves that human beings are merely animals after all, and that teaching teenagers about the benefits of waiting is as pointless as trying to teach a cat to wait.

Am I opposed to birth control being taught in the schools?  No.  What I am deeply opposed to is the vitriolic opposition against even trying to teach children that abstinence is best, and that those girls (and boys) who wait for marriage will have happier, wealthier, more fulfilled lives.

Happiness IS important; and those who live by conservative values are significantly happier than those who live by liberal views.

One thing needs to be specifically mentioned: Bristol, unlike many girls in similar circumstances, had enough confidence in her parents to tell them she was pregnant.  And the Palin family, true to its values, chose life for the little baby when it would have been a lot easier to quietly “make the problem go away” by an act of abortion.

Finally, the attacks on Sarah, and the attacks on Sarah using Bristol, reveal the fundamental hypocrisy of liberals.  The same biased, liberal media that used Hillary Clinton’s gender as a weapon to undermine her (e.g. her slight tearing up after New Hampshire) are going all-out to destroy Sarah Palin using both her gender and her motherhood against her.  They are cynical liars who will say or do whatever they have to say or do to win, and their attacks are shameful.

My prayers are with Bristol and her admittedly too-young family as they start their lives together.  Fortunately, they have a great family in the Palins’ to help them along.

Advertisements

Sleazy Tabloid Rag Morally Superior To Top Democrat, Major Media

August 9, 2008

Sadly, this comes as no surprise to me.

I wrote about this when the evidence of the affair was already way beyond overwhelming, back when John Edwards was caught visiting Rielle Hunter in a hotel room in the wee hours of the morning.

Up until recently, John Edwards has refused to comment on a National Enquirer story that’s been unfolding for over a year. Asked about it on Thursday at an event in New Orleans, Edwards pompously sniffed: “I have no idea what you’re asking about. I’ve responded, consistently, to these tabloid allegations by saying I don’t respond to these lies and you know that … and I stand by that.”

Democrat strategist Lanny Davis somehow managed to climb up onto his gigantic moral high horse yesterday long enough to chide Fox News for covering the scandal (“It’s a private matter, blah blah blah.”). But where was this guy when Republican politicians were getting nailed? It would have been nice if you could have shown up on that high horse of yours then, Lan.

Okay, so John’s wife Elizabeth has been diagnosed with terminal, incurable cancer, and the guy that was very nearly our Vice President responded by getting busy with some homewrecker that filmed the pretty boy.

Now, it is something that such a major Democrat player is revealed to be a slimeball and a soulless liar. You’ve got major liberal donors (e.g. Fred Baron) showing their willingness to financially bail out a creep in the act of being a creep; you’ve got money games being played, with the mistress and the Edwards staff campaign fall guy (Andrew Young) being moved to mansions to keep the lie going; you’ve got a Democrat candidate for president and vice president cynically cashing out on the loyalty of those around him.

But the bigger deal about this story is the fact that a slimy tabloid rag is demonstrated to be morally superior to not only this top Democrat, but the major news organizations as well.

The National Enquirer‘s Barry Levine was on Geraldo Rivera’s Fox News program on Saturday pointing out that the Enquirer had “left a lot of bread crumbs way back in October” for the mainstream media, and that during the campaign for the Democratic nomination “all the time the mainstream press is following [Edwards] around, this affair was happening right under their noses.”

The New York Times hasn’t deigned to cover the Edwards scandal, even when it became blatantly obvious. But these ideologues didn’t have a any problem whatsoever literally creating an affair out of scratch to tarnish Republican John McCain. The title of the story itself – “For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk” – shows just how out to destroy McCain’s character The New York Times was. And there was no basis for this innuendo hearsay story at all.

And The Los Angeles Times not only refused to run a story in their own backyard when it reflected poorly on a Democrat, but they even went to the lengths of trying to cover up the story in their blog.

The Enquirer has had a whole bunch of ammo last year on this, but the elite media – not wanting to damage a top Democrat during the campaign season – put “the cone of silence” over the story, ala Maxwell Smart. Their silence about Edwards didn’t stop The New York Times from running a pseudo-story broadside about a manufactured John McCain affair.

In an unrelated but quite related story, Fox News pointed out yet another example – in its coverage of yet another major Democrat scandal going on – of the leftist bias that now so completely characterizes the media:

Selective Reporting?

We told you about Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick getting out of jail Friday. Thursday, when the Associated Press reported that he had been imprisoned for violating terms of his bond in his perjury case, the AP failed to mention his party affiliation. Kilpatrick is a Democrat.

But back on July 29, when Alaska Senator Ted Stevens was indicted, the AP made his party affiliation clear. The headline read, “Ted Stevens indicted, longest-serving GOP senator.” The article included the word “Republican” seven times and “GOP” four times.

Media watchdog Web site NewsBusters.org reports that both “ABC World News” and “NBC Nightly News” also failed to report Kilpatrick’s party affiliation.

It’s a shame. If you want politically neutral news, don’t turn to The New York Times, or The Los Angeles Times, or the Associated Press, or ABC, or NBC. Way too often they can only be counted on to try to help Democrats and hurt Republicans. Nope. If you want honest coverage, you’ve got to turn to the people that run stories about alien abductions, paparazzi trash, and half-dog, half-human babies.

The funny thing is that, even as major media are now forced to cover the Edwards story (due to prurient interests), they are covering it on very different terms from their coverage of Republican sex scandals. I constantly see the question, “Should we be covering this story? Is it good for society? How is it relevant?” When such questions never occupy the debate in covering Republican scandals. Let me just put it this way: if Sen. Larry Craig in a restroom is a story, then former Sen., V.P. candidate, and Presidential candidate John Edwards in a hotel room is a story as well. Yet we find the media in hand-wringing introspection over the latter when it seemed only to exult in the former.

John Edwards certainly ought to be ashamed. But the press should be hanging their heads as well.