Quote:
Originally Posted by Cocoanut Koala  I don't see how she is using it for political points.
It's obviously a bad thing politically for any candidate to have a child this young getting pregnant. (If Chelsea got pregnant, it would be different, as she is considerably older.)
I don't see what she SHOULD say about it. "Yeah, my daughter is a slut and we have disowned her?"
I'm sure she would have preferred it hadn't happened. (Who wouldn't?) But I absolutely don't see how this makes her a hypocrite.
I mean, if my daughters got pregnant, would that make me a hypocrite somehow? I mean, I wouldn't be the one getting pregnant, they would!
coco |
She has already started scoring points with the religious right for the "good family values". Apparently premarital sex is swept under the outrage rug when you get married and have the kid, even when you are a teenager. Everything I have been reading in the right wing geared forums is that people are supporting her because her daughter is proof that she is pro life.
What she *should* have done is not accepted the nomination for the well being of her daughter and focus on her family, not running for political office. I would have a lot more respect for someone who put their family first, before their political aspirations.
Of course, this is the woman accused of trying to get her former brother in law fired as a state trooper over her sisters bad divorce, and using her office to do so.