I hate Sarah Palin!

[stof]

Sqrl said:

stof said:
So far, there are two stories surrounding Sarah Palin which have importance. The first is the ongoing investigation as to whether she requested Alaska's public safety commissioner to fire Palin's state trooper brother in law and then dismissed him after he refused.

The second is her high school daughter's pregnancy.

The first is important because if true, she abused power and broke the law... She'd be completely fucked.

The second is important, not because it says something about Sarah or her daughter, but because it illustrates the folly of abstinence only education (the part about how it doesn't work at all), which is not an illustration you want coming from the daughter of a Vice Presidential candidate who's a proponent of abstinence only education.

That is all.

@bold,

 1. How exactly would that be against the law?  Unethical certainly, but I don't think it actually breaks any laws, does it?

Anyways, in the interest of full disclosure it is only fair to mention that this is the same brother in law who has allegedly been found drinking in his squad car (I believe on duty, but not 100% sure if that was part of the allegation), making death threats against Palin's father, and using his tazer on her nephew. If even one of those things is true the story isn't going to matter in the court of public opinion.

 2. Either way, more information needs to develop before anyone should legitimately be reaching a final conclusion on that case.  I believe the inquiry into the matter will be finished sometime in late October iirc, so we should have quite a bit more info to make a factual determination then.

 3 . Now on the other issue, if you want to make a case against abstinence only policies then you can do it with studies and facts, not with anecdotes. I would hope that people on this site of all places understand that a single anecdote has about as much meaning as Amazon.com sales rankings do on the weekly sales numbers.  The only reason it is being made into an issue is because it is easily sensationalized into a slogan.  Using this case to make the point is an invalid argument on an intellectual level and a shameful exploitation of a young woman on an ethical level. 

If the argument against abstinence only policies has merit (as I personally believe it does) then it can be validated without exploiting someone.  At some point people need to stop and give consideration to what effect this actually has on Bristol and even the child once it is born, I'm not simply attempting to be melodramatic by calling this an exploitation..it truly is an exploitation of their personal lives to advance a political agenda with no regard for the impact on them.

Frankly I think the whole thing is fairly petty, but hey that is politics as usual.  Sadly even if Obama is ready to move away from "the same old politics as usual", the majority of the media and pundits clearly are not.

1. Your right. Not illegal. But still a flagrant abuse that would leave her completely fucked.

2. which is why I said "if true" The investigation is to determine whether it's true or not.

3. The studies and facts already discredit abstinence only education programs. sex education already has been validated. The problem is that Sarah Palin is a proponent of a system that doesn't work in spite of evidence to the contrary. The fact that her own daughter has slipped through the gaping cracks in absitence only education is more than "just an anecdote", it raises the question of how can Palin possibly stick to her guns on such an ineffective policy when it's effects have hit so close to home.

As for the exploitation of Bristol. yeah, I think they'll drag her through the mud for it when, like I said in my first post, it means nothing about her as a person or Palin as a mother, but as the daughter of a vice presidential candidate, that happens.