RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right?

RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rulemylife -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 8:33:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Some of the comments were pretty fucking bad. Overall, relatively subdued, compared to some of the stuff that has been posted on this forum. Firm And since they troubled you so much I assume you can provide us the quotes in question. No need. Open any thread with "Palin" in the title. Firm No, there's a definite need. If you want to make outrageous claims then at least have the courtesy to back them up.

DomKen -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 8:40:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Let me tell you what DomKen's dirty little secret about this thread is, Rich. It's a distraction. Plain and simpe, he is hoping that either no one notices or that he can quail any comment about what really happened here. What really happened - and this is not in dispute - is that an Obama kid wore political statements in public. Not only are the two t-shirts political statements made in public, they specifically comment on the US policies, in a place and during a time in which they can not have been a mistake. One of the major arguments of the left, on why the Palin kids are "fair game" is because they were supposedly used for "political purposes". Now, by their own same definition, Obama's kids are also open to the same crap. That's really DomKen's agenda with this thread. He's goal is a pre-emptive strike, in an attempt to intimidate anyone from taking advantage of the situation. Nothing more. Nothing less. Firm WTF? Malia wore a t shirt with a peace symbol on it. There is no evidence at all that is was intended to comment on US policy. Actually the reason I posted this thread is because Rich was trying to make out like Palin had been treated far worse than cons treat liberals. As to your claim that wearing a political statement makes an 11 year old fair game to be called a 'whore', 'ghetto trash' and the assortment of other bigoted and hateful comments in that thread it is simply outrageous. Also you will never find any comment by me that her children were fair game because of their use for political purposes. Go through all my comments and you won't find any such claims made by me. I have attacked Sarah Palin for things she did and said but never attacked her children for anything.

TheHeretic -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 9:30:34 PM)
Firm, I am not seeing a secret political message to Europe here, via the wardrobe. It's a fashion statement from a ___ on vacation. Ok figured that out finally... RML, thanks for the tip (late, but the thought counts) Ken, you are right to be offended by some of that. Some of those comments were entirely outside the realm of decency. Others were just stupid. Sarah Palin actually said things like "by golly," so I'm willing to call the fake quotes in ebonics racist without some evidence that Michelle and her Momma can get they neck moving and talk some ghetto shit in a very real American dialect. Then I'd say fair game. Here is the problem with the web page, as I see it anyway. If we are talking about the decorum practiced by the family of a head of state, while on foreign soil, there might be reason to discuss President Obama's family. There does seem good fodder for the "no daughter of mine" philosophy, otherwise... not so much. I certainly think the ___'s should be left out of it. Is that how they do it in Rome, or was it just very, very tacky? Any fasionistas willing to offer an apolitical opinion? (I do find it funny that she is allowed to dress up the bodyguard any way she likes.) But the part of me that loves satire, knows this President's family is going to be a very hard target to steer clear of. His mother in law lives with the family. How does sketch comedy not run with that? (SNL clips welcome, if anyone has!) How does Comedy Central pass on a cartoon fully as respectful as 'lil Bush?

DomKen -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 9:39:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Firm, I am not seeing a secret political message to Europe here, via the wardrobe. It's a fashion statement from a ___ on vacation. Ok figured that out finally... RML, thanks for the tip (late, but the thought counts) Ken, you are right to be offended by some of that. Some of those comments were entirely outside the realm of decency. Others were just stupid. Sarah Palin actually said things like "by golly," so I'm willing to call the fake quotes in ebonics racist without some evidence that Michelle and her Momma can get they neck moving and talk some ghetto shit in a very real American dialect. Then I'd say fair game. Here is the problem with the web page, as I see it anyway. If we are talking about the decorum practiced by the family of a head of state, while on foreign soil, there might be reason to discuss President Obama's family. There does seem good fodder for the "no daughter of mine" philosophy, otherwise... not so much. I certainly think the ___'s should be left out of it. Is that how they do it in Rome, or was it just very, very tacky? Any fasionistas willing to offer an apolitical opinion? (I do find it funny that she is allowed to dress up the bodyguard any way she likes.) But the part of me that loves satire, knows this President's family is going to be a very hard target to steer clear of. His mother in law lives with the family. How does sketch comedy not run with that? (SNL clips welcome, if anyone has!) How does Comedy Central pass on a cartoon fully as respectful as 'lil Bush? I've certainly heard and told some funny jokes about Obama's mother in law living in the White House. I think within reasonable bounds that sort of humor is fine. I personally didn't find lil Bush all that funny so... However we're not talking humor we're talking vicious bigoted attacks against children. You've claimed that liberals say far worse things about Palin's children previously, do you still hold to that?

TheHeretic -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 10:02:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen . You've claimed that liberals say far worse things about Palin's children previously, do you still hold to that? Yeah. And I won't be running off to archived snapshots of forum blogs, so you can tell me you don't see a problem. Did I imagine you defending websites using a Downs Syndrome baby as template? If we catch the subtext, they aren't REALLY mocking the baby? WTF, man?!

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 10:10:47 PM)
FR: I have to say that making fun of someone's kid for having Downs Syndrome is pretty fucking low. I never agree with any politician or celebrity that pokes fun at someone's kids or family. But I imagine Barb and Jenn can laugh off the drunk, party girl jokes. Chelsea can ignore the ugly jokes (she's smarter than the assholes that were doing it.). I don't think Jimmy's brother gave a flying fuck what people thought about him; I think he enjoyed it. I know Bill's brother Roger reveled in the attention; I can still remember him getting popped for coke dealing here when I was a kid. But making retard jokes about a kid with Downs Syndrome? C'mon man, that's just fucking scumbaggery at it's lowest.

DomKen -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 10:25:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen . You've claimed that liberals say far worse things about Palin's children previously, do you still hold to that? Yeah. And I won't be running off to archived snapshots of forum blogs, so you can tell me you don't see a problem. Did I imagine you defending websites using a Downs Syndrome baby as template? If we catch the subtext, they aren't REALLY mocking the baby? WTF, man?! You must have imagined it since I didn't do it. If you actually look at what Firm tried to use as evidence up thread, one pic had photoshopped a stormtrooper mask onto a baby she's holding. The caption makes clear the pic is mocking Sarah and had nothing to do with Trig beyond it being his face that got the mask overlayed. The other makes one overt slam on Trig, that is also made to the whole family, and one further slam by making a point that the source family portrait did not include Trig at all. None of which seems to me to be an attack on Trig in any sort of singled out for ridicule way.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 10:28:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen . You've claimed that liberals say far worse things about Palin's children previously, do you still hold to that? Yeah. And I won't be running off to archived snapshots of forum blogs, so you can tell me you don't see a problem. Did I imagine you defending websites using a Downs Syndrome baby as template? If we catch the subtext, they aren't REALLY mocking the baby? WTF, man?! You must have imagined it since I didn't do it. If you actually look at what Firm tried to use as evidence up thread, one pic had photoshopped a stormtrooper mask onto a baby she's holding. The caption makes clear the pic is mocking Sarah and had nothing to do with Trig beyond it being his face that got the mask overlayed. The other makes one overt slam on Trig, that is also made to the whole family, and one further slam by making a point that the source family portrait did not include Trig at all. None of which seems to me to be an attack on Trig in any sort of singled out for ridicule way. Still haven't learned how to scroll, have you, huh? Firm

DomKen -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 10:48:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Still haven't learned how to scroll, have you, huh? Firm You're still whining about the stuff from SA? Not a liberal site.

TheHeretic -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 10:54:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen None of which seems to me to be an attack on Trig in any sort of singled out for ridicule way. Further establishing that we are on very different pages.

DomKen -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/14/2009 11:06:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen None of which seems to me to be an attack on Trig in any sort of singled out for ridicule way. Further establishing that we are on very different pages. I'm not seeing it. How is photoshopping him so his eyes are crossed matching what was done to the rest of them an attack on him? Showing him peeking over the rail of the ship when the original source photo excluded him from the family portrait is an attack on him how?

Arpig -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 12:33:45 AM)
Come on guys, it really doesn't matter if one side has done or said something that is wrong in the past. Wrong is wrong. Didn't your mother ever teach you that two wrongs don't make a right? Making fun of trig is a low fucking blow, the child's disabilities have nothing to do with his mother's qualifications or lack thereof. Equally saying that Obama's daughter is a whore is a low blow. Why cannot you all agree that these sorts of things are simply wrong and be outraged by them regardless of which side of the isle the target sits. Politics should be an arena of ideas, lofty and important ideas, not petty gutter attacks on children. You know, I am more and more thinking I should have been born a couple of hundred years ago. Back then people were passionate about important ideas, not what some 11 year old wears.

philosophy -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 12:38:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen . You've claimed that liberals say far worse things about Palin's children previously, do you still hold to that? Yeah. And I won't be running off to archived snapshots of forum blogs, so you can tell me you don't see a problem. Did I imagine you defending websites using a Downs Syndrome baby as template? If we catch the subtext, they aren't REALLY mocking the baby? WTF, man?! ....hmm, i'm getting tired of this debate, as it raises its ugly head in yet another thread. Democrats and Republicans have crossed the line. This doesn't make either side right or justified. Quite frankly it doesn't matter who did it first. This behaviour is plain wrong. Neither does degree matter. It's wrong. Period. Now both of you, Republican party and Democratic party....... STOP IT! It's not big and it's not clever. All it really does is feed into the unhelpful and self defeating culture of partisanship. ...and as for those of you who are trying to argue that somehow the other side's efforts in this regard are somehow much worse than your side....give it up. There are no winners here...just losers.

subrob1967 -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 12:55:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Just a couple of questions subrob,leaving aside for a minute your knee jerk reaction of "well they did it too"....What did you think of the remarks? Did you have a problem with my use of the word disgusting...or did you think I was too harsh. I think you were awful quiet when Bristol & Trig Palin were being made fun of.

Arpig -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 1:34:35 AM)
quote: I think you were awful quiet when Bristol & Trig Palin were being made fun of. I know that wasn't directed at me subrob, but you are right. At the time I had other shit going on in my life and I didn't really pay much attention to what was going on in the US, and didn't post as often as I do today. But I can tell you I thought those attacks were scummy. Life gets in the way, and to be honest for an outsider to try follow all the dirty digs and mudslinging that goes on in a US election (which, counting primaries, runs for 2 or more fucking years!!!!) is a really hard task. But I will readily admit that I did peruse these boards and I should have spoken out mote on those threads that dealt with the dirty attacks on Sarah Palin's family. I did not, and I would be hypocritical to comment on the present attacks without admitting that the previous attacks were equally abhorant (sp?). There was a time when a candidate's family was considered irrelevant, when a candidate was judged on his position on the issues, not who sucked his cock. That time, regretably is now long gone, we live in the world of Karl Rove, a world where "swiftboating" is recognised word and accepted tactic. It is not only in the US, here in Canada the Harper Government has been airing advertisements questioning the Canadianness of its major rival, and there isn't even an election pending. We can all bitch about it til the cows come home, but that will change nothing. Get involved in your party of choice at the local grassroots level and insist on a change. If enough people do this in enough ridings (districts in the US) things will change. If we don't take back our governments ourselves, the powers that be sure as hell won't give them back to us.

housesub4you -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 3:46:41 AM)
My thinking is very simple, if politicians don't want their children in the press, Then don't showboat them, don't bring them on stage, don't hold them up as proof of what a great parent you think you are. This applies to both parties. If they choose to do this, then they have to understand the press and everyone else will go after them. Period. No local elections have the people running carrying their children around, they leave them home. Well at least in my area. But for some reason they think when they hit the national scene, they have to drag their children out on stage with them.

Irishknight -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 4:18:02 AM)
I think its wrong to go after the kids no matter who does it. Sadly, both major parties feel it is okay for them to do it just not the other party. Both major parties need to grow the fuck up, get out of the fucking past and clean house of all the 60s leftovers and the stagnant "we have always done it this way" assbags. These are the two groups that have fucked up our country for 20 years and yet we still kiss their political asses by engaging in a debate about which assraping liar is the worst. We are so busy trying to pin something on this mythical other side that we forgot that we're all on one side... America's. Atleast we're supposed to be. Sorry. Didn't realize that soapbox was there. I'll climb down now.

Arpig -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 8:39:08 AM)
quote: If they choose to do this, then they have to understand the press and everyone else will go after them. Period. This puts the blame on the wromg people. Just because a candidate puts his/her children on display does not mean one has to attack them. Why is it that the press (and others) cannot simply control themselves. A person who makes some sort of attack against a candidates children is 100% solely responsible for that attack. They chose to do it, and saying that the children were fair game because they were put in the limelight is a cop-out. You are responsible for your actions, nobody else.

tazzygirl -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 12:19:24 PM)
FR I had to go back to look in the Palin thread. i see many who stated Palin's kids were not off limits because she thrust them into the lime light. interesting how many now change their minds. kids should be off limits i want one of those t-shirts. retro is in!

downkitty -> RE: Conservatives would never attack a politician's children, right? (7/15/2009 12:35:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Come on guys, it really doesn't matter if one side has done or said something that is wrong in the past. Wrong is wrong. Didn't your mother ever teach you that two wrongs don't make a right? Making fun of trig is a low fucking blow, the child's disabilities have nothing to do with his mother's qualifications or lack thereof. Equally saying that Obama's daughter is a whore is a low blow. Why cannot you all agree that these sorts of things are simply wrong and be outraged by them regardless of which side of the isle the target sits. Politics should be an arena of ideas, lofty and important ideas, not petty gutter attacks on children. You know, I am more and more thinking I should have been born a couple of hundred years ago. Back then people were passionate about important ideas, not what some 11 year old wears. I love you, Airpig <3

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875