Mother of Palin's boyfriend arrest

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

Actually if there is nothing to hide, then why not produce the records? As much as Palin talks about honesty and integrity, seems like she would be open to that as well. And besides, as I stated previously there has been no release of RECORDS. You specifically referred to RECORDS and those carry FAR more weight than a mere letter from a doctor. By the time the doctor wrote this letter, they could have just produced the records. The end.

OK - but wait, unfortunately for you, there's more to it than this!

Why should she have to prove her daughter was hers? Maybe Ms. Palin has AIDS or Hep C, and doesn't want that part of her record public (she can't exactly redact parts, or you'll still be dissatisfied, right?). Maybe it was a non-standard birth and she took drugs. Maybe the records aren't easy to find, or reveal something else private. All of these are incredibly good reasons to protect your own privacy - ones the US Government and SCOTUS both feel are well worth securing.

Let's see why you think she should:

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

You can go on all day about how what I'm saying is not true and whatnot. That still doesn't mean anything. There is far more evidence on MY side than on yours at this point. You apparently want to keep your head in the sand. And the burden of proof is on YOU to use your Internet the same way that everyone else does. That way you can find your own sources because if I povide you with sources, the next thing that you will say is that my sources are biased.

Here's the deal. You are promoting that something is false (in this case, "Trig Palin is Sarah Palin's son"). You are asserting that there are facts to back this up. I am asking for them; you are not providing them.

So her daughter missed 4 months of school during a time frame that may or may not coincide with part of the pregnancy, depending on who you believe? Inconclusive, but by far your best evidence. Some 'friends' (unnamed, as far as I've seen) claim they didn't know Palin was pregnant until the shower? Uh, OK, there's this whole "job" thing that may just have taken up more time, who knows? Not close to conclusive. Additionally, this is counteracted by her public appearances.

The rhetorical device, "why get pregnant at that stage in your political career?" Specious at best, intentionally misleading at worst. This is a religious woman who is anywhere from slightly to wildly against birth control and abortion. Accidents happen. It's no more or less likely that Palin had the accident than Bristol having it . . . twice . . . in a row. As such, there's no reason to deviate from the stated story - there's just no solid evidence, just assertion or innuendo that requires you to make a judgment about Ms. Palin's personality and motivation rather than actual facts!

Things you haven't accounted for:

-Why cover it up? She had no knowledge she was a VP candidate until just before the actual selection, and thus the Trig issue would have required a massive cover-up for reasons unrelated to her VP run . . . that's a lot of foresight for someone most don't think is all that smart.

-Why cover it up in the specific fashion she did (i.e. appearing as pregnant in public)? There are easier ways that you must discount first.

-Again, read up on Occam's Razor. Why take the leap?

OK - see, here's the difference between what I'm actually saying and what you're reading . . . while I would be surprised if this was indeed some massive conspiracy, I'm not completely closed to it. I simply have not seen any evidence that this is the case, and until then, I'll go with the simplest solution as the most likely. If you can provide any evidence, I'll look at it objectively and decide on its own merits.

Can you say the same? Remember, again: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We can take it one logical fallacy at the time, if you'd like.

[Kevin]

Occam's Razor.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

OK - but wait, unfortunately for you, there's more to it than this!

Why should she have to prove her daughter was hers? Maybe Ms. Palin has AIDS or Hep C, and doesn't want that part of her record public (she can't exactly redact parts, or you'll still be dissatisfied, right?). Maybe it was a non-standard birth and she took drugs. Maybe the records aren't easy to find, or reveal something else private. All of these are incredibly good reasons to protect your own privacy - ones the US Government and SCOTUS both feel are well worth securing.

Let's see why you think she should:



Here's the deal. You are promoting that something is false (in this case, "Trig Palin is Sarah Palin's son"). You are asserting that there are facts to back this up. I am asking for them; you are not providing them.

So her daughter missed 4 months of school during a time frame that may or may not coincide with part of the pregnancy, depending on who you believe? Inconclusive, but by far your best evidence. Some 'friends' (unnamed, as far as I've seen) claim they didn't know Palin was pregnant until the shower? Uh, OK, there's this whole "job" thing that may just have taken up more time, who knows? Not close to conclusive. Additionally, this is counteracted by her public appearances.

The rhetorical device, "why get pregnant at that stage in your political career?" Specious at best, intentionally misleading at worst. This is a religious woman who is anywhere from slightly to wildly against birth control and abortion. Accidents happen. It's no more or less likely that Palin had the accident than Bristol having it . . . twice . . . in a row. As such, there's no reason to deviate from the stated story - there's just no solid evidence, just assertion or innuendo that requires you to make a judgment about Ms. Palin's personality and motivation rather than actual facts!

Things you haven't accounted for:

-Why cover it up? She had no knowledge she was a VP candidate until just before the actual selection, and thus the Trig issue would have required a massive cover-up for reasons unrelated to her VP run . . . that's a lot of foresight for someone most don't think is all that smart.

-Why cover it up in the specific fashion she did (i.e. appearing as pregnant in public)? There are easier ways that you must discount first.

-Again, read up on Occam's Razor. Why take the leap?

OK - see, here's the difference between what I'm actually saying and what you're reading . . . while I would be surprised if this was indeed some massive conspiracy, I'm not completely closed to it. I simply have not seen any evidence that this is the case, and until then, I'll go with the simplest solution as the most likely. If you can provide any evidence, I'll look at it objectively and decide on its own merits.

Can you say the same? Remember, again: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We can take it one logical fallacy at the time, if you'd like.

1. She would still cover it up because she was still an elected official at the time who made her views clear on sex before marriage and abstinence.

2. She only had to produce parts of her records that showed she was fit to serve as VP (healthwise, which is something all candidates are expected to do) and to show she gave birth around the time Trig was born. Once you put yourself in the spotlight in politics, whenever any rumors come up that could potentially create a prblem, if you can stop the rumors by proving what is true, then you should do that. Obama did just that in making sure that his birth certificate information was released proving that he was indeed born in the US.

3. As far as why she covered it up the way she did, I don't know why she chose that manner. And who are you to say what would be an easier way? You don't know what would have been easiest for her. But the reason she chose to perhaps do it that way is of no importance. What matters is that there was a potential cover-up.

4. As far as whether Bristol missed four months of school, that was not one piece of information that I used in coming to a conclusion. I knew about it and I knew that the story that was promoted was that Bristol had mono.

5. As far as the rhetorical question of "why get pregnant at that stage in your political career?" That is something YOU brought up. I never said that, nor do I have that mindset. If you are going to accuse me of making false accusation, you would do well to heed your own advice. I think if you want to get pregnant at ANY stage in your career do you. Who cares?

The thing is, when it is all said and done you accuse ME of not providing facts, yet you haven't produced any yet. Nor does it seem like you have bothered to look.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

The thing is, when it is all said and done you accuse ME of not providing facts, yet you haven't produced any yet. Nor does it seem like you have bothered to look.

No one, not even Sarah Palin, has to provide you any facts to prove that it is true or not. We've already had this discussion when the issue first came up, maybe do a GC search. You'll see that there is "proof" that Sarah WAS pregnant, and that Bristol is CURRENTLY pregnant.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by epchick

No one, not even Sarah Palin, has to provide you any facts to prove that it is true or not. We've already had this discussion when the issue first came up, maybe do a GC search. You'll see that there is "proof" that Sarah WAS pregnant, and that Bristol is CURRENTLY pregnant.

She didn't just need to prove it to me, but to the rest of the public that she was potentially lying to.




It's my opinion that she made things too rigid for herself and her family and it came back to bite her in the butt. Had she not been so self-righteous and unforgiving in her views, the situation would not have been as sticky.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

, the situation would not have been as sticky.

This is a [probably] unintentional, but wonderful choice of words.

But still.

Occam's Razor.

When was the last time one of these 'vast' conspiracies worked out the theorists believed it had worked out? For obvious reasons, (see KSig RC above) the vast conspiracy theory just doesn't wash.

No need to try and jam square pegs into round holes. Palin doesn't owe anyone an explanation because nothing happened.

[SWTXBelle]

Well, if you want to rumourmonger, do it right!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bristolbaby.asp

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bristolbaby.asp

I'm gonna have to send that to some of my friends. Hilarious!

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Kevin

This is a [probably] unintentional, but wonderful choice of words.

But still.

Occam's Razor.

When was the last time one of these 'vast' conspiracies worked out the theorists believed it had worked out? For obvious reasons, (see KSig RC above) the vast conspiracy theory just doesn't wash.

No need to try and jam square pegs into round holes. Palin doesn't owe anyone an explanation because nothing happened.

I'm well aware that there are some people who see a conspiracy in everything. However, it is important to remember that just because someone suggests there IS a conspiracy in a situation, you shouldn't automatically discount it as a crazy conspiracy theory with no support. That's just as bad in my opinion.

[nittanyalum]

Just to pop back in here, my understanding of Occam's Razor is that when there are two competing theories that reach the same prediction, the simpler one is better, right? So how is saying that Bristol is the mother the theory in conflict with Occam's Razor? Isn't that the simpler explanation, versus all of the explanations Sarah's ahd to make and taking down of pictures and absence of video, photos and records of all those months and events? Not to mention the appalling series of events she recounted the day she says she gave birth. To me, the story built around Sarah's pregnancy is much more in conflict with Occam's Razor than that her daughter got knocked up and had a kid in April.

One of the more interesting things I read today in my hour-plus-google-fest on the subject is that Bill McAllister, a former Anchorage TV reporter (who, interestingly, was later hired as the Governor's communications director), was quoted saying that the governor had approached him in the early spring and asked if he'd been hearing rumors about Bristol being pregnant because they weren't true. This was before Palin had announced her pregnancy.

Why is it unthinkable that a conservative governor of an evangelical Christian bend who is outspoken on abstinence, no birth control and anti-choice would be motivated to conceal the pregnancy of her teenage daughter? I personally find that much more believable than that the same right-wing, pro-life, showing-she-can-do-it-all politician wouldn't have been trumpeting her 5th pregnancy at the ripe, healthy age of 43 and that her baby would be special needs and they made the pro-life choice because that's the right thing to do and aren't I a great example for all the young women of Alaska and America? Here I am, a successful, working Mom, I'm married and I'm with child, I'm doing all the right things in the right order, listen to what I have to say because I walk the talk I talk.

I'm still not saying I'm 100% on the "It's Bristol's baby!" bandwagon, but I am saying that I disagree with all those saying it's not her case to prove. Baloney. Not with the high-stakes political game she was trying to play. You want people to shut up and stop "spreading rumors"? Produce a birth certificate. Produce a hospital record. Produce your own doctor, for heaven's sake. Who, by the way, is a family practitioner, not an OB/GYN. So a 43-year-old with a high-risk pregnancy and a special needs child was not referred to a specialist, but instead relied on her regular family doctor to give her prenatal care and deliver a child that might have needed special attention as soon as he was born? AND she won't make a definitive statement that she delivered the governor's baby in April? The hospital didn't make an announcement that the governor had chosen their facility to have her baby? No birth announcements or a family photo in the recovery room after the 5th blessing had arrived?

Just saying -- there'd be no Occam's Razor in play if Palin had just taken the smallest effort to prove the theory leading to her conclusion.


ETA: came across this picture and thought, huh, don't see many 18-year-old-guys kissing their girlfriend's little brother like this too often:

[Jimmy Choo]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

I never thought a wedding was going to happen either. I am also surprised that she didn't suddenly "lose" the baby. I say that because I always wondered if she was really pregnant since they mainly revealed her pregnancy to head off the rumors that Trig was actually Bristol's baby and not Palin's.

I'm glad to know I'm not the only person who had this thought!

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

About Palin, and her daughter, and her possible future mother-in-law - at the end of the day I'm not really surprised about the arrest and whatnot because, well, this may come off as harsh but the whole family strikes me as a little trashy. But - I'm from a trashy little town, too, and you see this type of crap all the time.

I guess it's just as well that Palin's not going to be in the White House. But - these things happen. Especially in small towns.

Palin has always screamed white trash in a suit to me. It's like the epitome of the saying "You can take the girl out of the trailer park but you can't take the trailer park out of the girl."

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

Just to pop back in here, my understanding of Occam's Razor is that when there are two competing theories that reach the same prediction, the simpler one is better, right? So how is saying that Bristol is the mother the theory in conflict with Occam's Razor? Isn't that the simpler explanation, versus all of the explanations Sarah's ahd to make and taking down of pictures and absence of video, photos and records of all those months and events? Not to mention the appalling series of events she recounted the day she says she gave birth. To me, the story built around Sarah's pregnancy is much more in conflict with Occam's Razor than that her daughter got knocked up and had a kid in April.

One of the more interesting things I read today in my hour-plus-google-fest on the subject is that Bill McAllister, a former Anchorage TV reporter (who, interestingly, was later hired as the Governor's communications director), was quoted saying that the governor had approached him in the early spring and asked if he'd been hearing rumors about Bristol being pregnant because they weren't true. This was before Palin had announced her pregnancy.

Why is it unthinkable that a conservative governor of an evangelical Christian bend who is outspoken on abstinence, no birth control and anti-choice would be motivated to conceal the pregnancy of her teenage daughter? I personally find that much more believable than that the same right-wing, pro-life, showing-she-can-do-it-all politician wouldn't have been trumpeting her 5th pregnancy at the ripe, healthy age of 43 and that her baby would be special needs and they made the pro-life choice because that's the right thing to do and aren't I a great example for all the young women of Alaska and America? Here I am, a successful, working Mom, I'm married and I'm with child, I'm doing all the right things in the right order, listen to what I have to say because I walk the talk I talk.

I'm still not saying I'm 100% on the "It's Bristol's baby!" bandwagon, but I am saying that I disagree with all those saying it's not her case to prove. Baloney. Not with the high-stakes political game she was trying to play. You want people to shut up and stop "spreading rumors"? Produce a birth certificate. Produce a hospital record. Produce your own doctor, for heaven's sake. Who, by the way, is a family practitioner, not an OB/GYN. So a 43-year-old with a high-risk pregnancy and a special needs child was not referred to a specialist, but instead relied on her regular family doctor to give her prenatal care and deliver a child that might have needed special attention as soon as he was born? AND she won't make a definitive statement that she delivered the governor's baby in April? The hospital didn't make an announcement that the governor had chosen their facility to have her baby? No birth announcements or a family photo in the recovery room after the 5th blessing had arrived?

Just saying -- there'd be no Occam's Razor in play if Palin had just taken the smallest effort to prove the theory leading to her conclusion.


ETA: came across this picture and thought, huh, don't see many 18-year-old-guys kissing their girlfriend's little brother like this too often:

Well said.

[SWTXBelle]

Forget the dna test - he kissed the baby!

[Munchkin03]

Nothing the Palin family produces could surprise me. It always seemed to me that the families who let their daughters run around with trashy guys were pretty trashy themselves, and got a little trashier for the wear.

Also, who wouldn't kiss Trig? He looks like a lovable little fellow. I hope that we still get to see him grow up.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Forget the dna test - he kissed the baby!

Seriously! I wonder how many children my brother has supposedly fathered!