Why is Olbermann trashing Bristol Palin?

[Bfgrn]

Can you find where I've defended that sort of thing? Good luck. You'd be more likely to find where I've said family is off-limits.

Nevertheless, you reveal something interesting: Instead of rising above the behavior you condemn, you choose to wallow in it. And this gives you the moral high ground...how, exactly?

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a public figure?

I didn't think so

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

Who dragged her out on the stage?

 

[uscitizen]

They keep forgetting that the god of the right Reagan used a teleprompter

Partisan sheeple.

... what?

By the way .. Obama .. (the God of the left)...hows he floating above us... now?

Obama never reached even sainthood status let alone godhood.

 

[sangha]

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a public figure?

I didn't think so

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

Who dragged her out on the stage?

Sarah Palin and John McCain. Criticize them for the decision

 

[Granny]

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a public figure?

I didn't think so

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

The "public" did not elevate Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. She chose to accept a nomination for VP out of the clear blue Alaska sky. She knew her capabilities yet procceeded on as if she was equal to the task. I is her responsibility to protect her children and when she made the decision to enter national politics with all indicators screaming that she would fail and end up a "spectical" she put her own children at risk.

Blaming the public for gawking at an accident on the freeway is stupid.

And how is that different from what any number of other females who may or may not be public figures are doing? Their first priority is their career, not their husband's career. It's all about which people to network with to advance their own criteria; catching that plane; taking control of that presentation or meeting; it's easier to call the caterer (for peer entertainment purposes) or get take out for the family - actually cooking a meal for their husband and/or children would be beneath them plus they don't know shit from Shinola about cooking. They give their children whatever new "toy" that comes available to keep their children occupied. In what way have they not put their children at risk? These children are very aware of what they are lacking and then sometimes we end up with a Columbine ... a Virginia Tech ... a public school bus riot.

Hillary Clinton got no backlash whatsoever in how she "raised" Chelsea. I do believe Bill Clinton loved/loves his daughter and maybe have wanted more children. Hillary was much more interested in pursuing her career - pushing her agenda. She was the media darling. I remember how she smiled from ear to ear during an interview session as she said how she just loved whipping up a plate of eggs for Chelsea when she was sick. Who the hell gives a sick child a plate of eggs - one who doesn't know that the child's stomach is going to turn and she's going to barf the stuff all over the place.

Is Barack Obama's children in the line of fire? No. Are they not public figures just because they are his and therefore "qualified" for public scrutiny and vile criticism? No.

The game is very simple: if the name "Palin" comes up for any reason whatsoever, whoever bears the name "Palin" is fair game for any criticism whatsoever. It's personal hatred for one woman, one family only - but nobody else who is so vehemently criticized for doing the same damned thing.

 

[sangha]

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

The "public" did not elevate Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. She chose to accept a nomination for VP out of the clear blue Alaska sky. She knew her capabilities yet procceeded on as if she was equal to the task. I is her responsibility to protect her children and when she made the decision to enter national politics with all indicators screaming that she would fail and end up a "spectical" she put her own children at risk.

Blaming the public for gawking at an accident on the freeway is stupid.

And how is that different from what any number of other females who may or may not be public figures are doing? Their first priority is their career, not their husband's career. It's all about which people to network with to advance their own criteria; catching that plane; taking control of that presentation or meeting; it's easier to call the caterer (for peer entertainment purposes) or get take out for the family - actually cooking a meal for their husband and/or children would be beneath them plus they don't know shit from Shinola about cooking. They give their children whatever new "toy" that comes available to keep their children occupied. In what way have they not put their children at risk? These children are very aware of what they are lacking and then sometimes we end up with a Columbine ... a Virginia Tech ... a public school bus riot.

Hillary Clinton got no backlash whatsoever in how she "raised" Chelsea. I do believe Bill Clinton loved/loves his daughter and maybe have wanted more children. Hillary was much more interested in pursuing her career - pushing her agenda. She was the media darling. I remember how she smiled from ear to ear during an interview session as she said how she just loved whipping up a plate of eggs for Chelsea when she was sick. Who the hell gives a sick child a plate of eggs - one who doesn't know that the child's stomach is going to turn and she's going to barf the stuff all over the place.

Is Barack Obama's children in the line of fire? No. Are they not public figures just because they are his and therefore "qualified" for public scrutiny and vile criticism? No.

The game is very simple: if the name "Palin" comes up for any reason whatsoever, whoever bears the name "Palin" is fair game for any criticism whatsoever. It's personal hatred for one woman, one family only - but nobody else who is so vehemently criticized for doing the same damned thing.

Wingnuts blame Clinton for neglecting her (not pregnant out of wedlock) child, but give a pass to Sarah for putting her career first while her unwed child was out fucking

 

[HUGGY]

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

The "public" did not elevate Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. She chose to accept a nomination for VP out of the clear blue Alaska sky. She knew her capabilities yet procceeded on as if she was equal to the task. I is her responsibility to protect her children and when she made the decision to enter national politics with all indicators screaming that she would fail and end up a "spectical" she put her own children at risk.

Blaming the public for gawking at an accident on the freeway is stupid.

And how is that different from what any number of other females who may or may not be public figures are doing? Their first priority is their career, not their husband's career. It's all about which people to network with to advance their own criteria; catching that plane; taking control of that presentation or meeting; it's easier to call the caterer (for peer entertainment purposes) or get take out for the family - actually cooking a meal for their husband and/or children would be beneath them plus they don't know shit from Shinola about cooking. They give their children whatever new "toy" that comes available to keep their children occupied. In what way have they not put their children at risk? These children are very aware of what they are lacking and then sometimes we end up with a Columbine ... a Virginia Tech ... a public school bus riot.

Hillary Clinton got no backlash whatsoever in how she "raised" Chelsea. I do believe Bill Clinton loved/loves his daughter and maybe have wanted more children. Hillary was much more interested in pursuing her career - pushing her agenda. She was the media darling. I remember how she smiled from ear to ear during an interview session as she said how she just loved whipping up a plate of eggs for Chelsea when she was sick. Who the hell gives a sick child a plate of eggs - one who doesn't know that the child's stomach is going to turn and she's going to barf the stuff all over the place.

Is Barack Obama's children in the line of fire? No. Are they not public figures just because they are his and therefore "qualified" for public scrutiny and vile criticism? No.

The game is very simple: if the name "Palin" comes up for any reason whatsoever, whoever bears the name "Palin" is fair game for any criticism whatsoever. It's personal hatred for one woman, one family only - but nobody else who is so vehemently criticized for doing the same damned thing.

You do ramble on a bit. There is a difference between Obama and Palin. The president has EARNED respect for making it through two plus years of vetting and just the fact that he has made it to the White House deserves the respect we give our commander in chief.

"Making it" to the television screen does not earn respect. Quitting on the people of Alaska does not earn respect. Hiring a witch doctor to rid ones church of evil demons through exorcism does not earn respect. Bankrupting Wascilla by missusing funds and building a public building without clear title to the property does not earn respect.

It is unfortunate for the children of candiates and victors of presidential elections. The choice to put ones family through that gauntlet lays directly on those candiates and not on a public which deserves to explore any and all questions they might advance in discovery of who will be leading the free world. That holds true from everything from parenting skills to what one can see from thier front porch.

 

[daveman]

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a public figure?

I didn't think so

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a spokesperson for the abstinence movement?

Or will you just wimp out and find another way to ask the same question?

If you say you didn't, I'll accept it, but I won't really believe it.

 

[sangha]

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a spokesperson for the abstinence movement?

Or will you just wimp out and find another way to ask the same question?

If you say you didn't, I'll accept it, but I won't really believe it.

I knew you would wimp out

 

[daveman]

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a public figure?

I didn't think so

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

The "public" did not elevate Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. She chose to accept a nomination for VP out of the clear blue Alaska sky. She knew her capabilities yet procceeded on as if she was equal to the task. It is her responsibility to protect her children and when she made the decision to enter national politics with all indicators screaming that she would fail and end up a "spectical" she put her own children at risk.

Blaming the public for gawking at an accident on the freeway is stupid.

All I see is people looking to justify being being shits to kids.

 

[daveman]

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a public figure?

I didn't think so

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

Who dragged her out on the stage?

Like I said...

 

[daveman]

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

The "public" did not elevate Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. She chose to accept a nomination for VP out of the clear blue Alaska sky. She knew her capabilities yet procceeded on as if she was equal to the task. I is her responsibility to protect her children and when she made the decision to enter national politics with all indicators screaming that she would fail and end up a "spectical" she put her own children at risk.

Blaming the public for gawking at an accident on the freeway is stupid.

And how is that different from what any number of other females who may or may not be public figures are doing? Their first priority is their career, not their husband's career. It's all about which people to network with to advance their own criteria; catching that plane; taking control of that presentation or meeting; it's easier to call the caterer (for peer entertainment purposes) or get take out for the family - actually cooking a meal for their husband and/or children would be beneath them plus they don't know shit from Shinola about cooking. They give their children whatever new "toy" that comes available to keep their children occupied. In what way have they not put their children at risk? These children are very aware of what they are lacking and then sometimes we end up with a Columbine ... a Virginia Tech ... a public school bus riot.

Hillary Clinton got no backlash whatsoever in how she "raised" Chelsea. I do believe Bill Clinton loved/loves his daughter and maybe have wanted more children. Hillary was much more interested in pursuing her career - pushing her agenda. She was the media darling. I remember how she smiled from ear to ear during an interview session as she said how she just loved whipping up a plate of eggs for Chelsea when she was sick. Who the hell gives a sick child a plate of eggs - one who doesn't know that the child's stomach is going to turn and she's going to barf the stuff all over the place.

Is Barack Obama's children in the line of fire? No. Are they not public figures just because they are his and therefore "qualified" for public scrutiny and vile criticism? No.

The game is very simple: if the name "Palin" comes up for any reason whatsoever, whoever bears the name "Palin" is fair game for any criticism whatsoever. It's personal hatred for one woman, one family only - but nobody else who is so vehemently criticized for doing the same damned thing.

Indeed. Its:

 

[sangha]

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

Who dragged her out on the stage?

Like I said...

Like I said

 

[sangha]

 

[daveman]

Can you find where I criticized Bristol before she became a spokesperson for the abstinence movement?

Or will you just wimp out and find another way to ask the same question?

If you say you didn't, I'll accept it, but I won't really believe it.

I knew you would wimp out

You have a bad case of "If I say it, it must be true!!" going on there, Skippy.

Let me put it this way: I don't believe you. You're a hateful little bastard, and I have no doubt that you went after the Palin kids just as soon as you found out they existed.

You don't like that? Tough shit. Call me names and pretend you won teh innernetz. You cannot change my opinion of you.

 

[daveman]

Whew! Good think I don't think any of that, huh? I just disagree with his policies and his plans for America.

Oh, wait...that makes me racist, though, doesn't it?

 

[sangha]

If you say you didn't, I'll accept it, but I won't really believe it.

I knew you would wimp out

You have a bad case of "If I say it, it must be true!!" going on there, Skippy.

Let me put it this way: I don't believe you. You're a hateful little bastard, and I have no doubt that you went after the Palin kids just as soon as you found out they existed.

You don't like that? Tough shit. Call me names and pretend you won teh innernetz. You cannot change my opinion of you.

Wingnuts are incapable of changing their programm....err, I mean their opinion

 

[sangha]

Whew! Good think I don't think any of that, huh? I just disagree with his policies and his plans for America.

Oh, wait...that makes me racist, though, doesn't it?

Let me put it this way: I don't believe you. You're a hateful little bastard, and I have no doubt that you went after the Obama kids just as soon as you found out they existed.

 

[daveman]

I knew you would wimp out

You have a bad case of "If I say it, it must be true!!" going on there, Skippy.

Let me put it this way: I don't believe you. You're a hateful little bastard, and I have no doubt that you went after the Palin kids just as soon as you found out they existed.

You don't like that? Tough shit. Call me names and pretend you won teh innernetz. You cannot change my opinion of you.

Wingnuts are incapable of changing their programm....err, I mean their opinion

Wrong. Ask anyone who's known me on the net about my opinion on gays serving openly in the military.

But you won't, because you'd have to acknowledge your failure...and you're incapable.

 

[daveman]

Whew! Good think I don't think any of that, huh? I just disagree with his policies and his plans for America.

Oh, wait...that makes me racist, though, doesn't it?

Let me put it this way: I don't believe you. You're a hateful little bastard, and I have no doubt that you went after the Obama kids just as soon as you found out they existed.

You'd be wrong there, too, in addition to being unable to come up with anything original on your own.

 

[HUGGY]

She became a public figure when her mother was nominated to run as VP, not for anything Bristol did.

Do you think that made her fair game?

The "public" did not elevate Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. She chose to accept a nomination for VP out of the clear blue Alaska sky. She knew her capabilities yet procceeded on as if she was equal to the task. It is her responsibility to protect her children and when she made the decision to enter national politics with all indicators screaming that she would fail and end up a "spectical" she put her own children at risk.

Blaming the public for gawking at an accident on the freeway is stupid.

All I see is people looking to justify being being shits to kids.

THAT'S ALL you see????

Simple solution. If you want to keep your children protected from the public...don't go public.

Somewhere along the line a mother needs to make the choice between taking care of her kids or following a path that might lead to areas one would not want thier children exposed to. That was Sarah's choice. It is not up to the public to babysit for or otherwise give special consideration to what is Sarah's own responsibility.