home

Levi and Bristol: Round 2, We're Engaged Again

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:03:21 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I bet Sarah Palin is thrilled to learn of her daughter's re-engagement to Levi Bristol from U.S. Weekly.

Guess what mom? We're engaged! Again!

Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston announced today on the cover of Us Weekly that they're back together, have decided to get hitched – and that even their parents had no idea.

"We got engaged two weeks go," the daughter of 2008 vice-presidential candidate and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told the magazine. "It felt right, even though we don't have the approval of our parents."

< U.S. Completing Turnover of Iraqi Prisoners | AG Holder Expresses Commitment to New Crime Fighting Policy >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Levi and Bristol: Round 2, We're Engaged Again | 150 comments (150 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    more (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:12:13 PM EST
    Within the next four to six weeks Palin's PR people will be releasing news that Bristol and Levi have signed on to "star" in a new reality show. All about young parenting. And yes, they will also work up to a wedding. This is part of the planned "story arc." Sort of a Bethenny Gets Married but with a faux conservative/young Republicans spin. Levi will be promoted as young, decent, salt of the earth guy, Bristol will be seen dealing with the "challenges" of young motherhood (with Trig and the nannies kept carefully out of sight.) Willow will be on a lot. (Since it's not like she goes to school.) They'll attempt to boost rankings in the first few episodes by having Sarah cameos, maybe some Piper thrown in there, but the rest of the time will be a "conservative young marrieds who just happen to already have a baby" theme.
    Are you presenting this as hard news? (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:21:02 PM EST
    Or internet rumor?

    Parent
    all my news about Levi (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:29:13 PM EST
    is hard

    Parent
    but seriously (none / 0) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:32:15 PM EST
    its from the Palingates blog.
    what about it do you find implausible?

    Parent
    2. To Make a New Reality Show (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:37:00 PM EST
    2. To Make a New Reality Show

    Given their numerous television appearances and familial squabbling, you may be forgiven if you thought that Palin and Johnston were already engaged in a reality TV show, but Gawker ran with a scoop today that claims the engagement is part of a one-two punch that will result in a new show featuring the newlyweds. The article quoted a source who goes by the screen name "Levinews," who stated:

    Within the next four to six weeks Palin's PR people will be releasing news that Bristol and Levi have signed on to "star" in a new reality show. All about young parenting. And yes, they will also work up to a wedding.

    While Surge Desk is suspicious, who could have predicted the seemingly endless media twists and turns initiated by this couple so far?

    Plausibility is not my question, whether it's fact or internet rumor is.

    Parent
    gawker agrees (none / 0) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:40:41 PM EST
    The rumor was repeated  in several  other places, but always anonymously and most predominantly on anti-Palin blogs. This makes it suspect. However, the Johnston clan is famously cozy with liberal anti-Palin bloggers; consequently, Palin's amateur dissenters actually do get the jump on news involving Bristol and Levi, sometimes. Most notably, little sister Mercede Johnston thanks  Dennis Zaki "for all of his hard work in getting this blog up and running" on MercedeJohnston.com, the blog that brother Levi ordered her to destroy when he got back together with Bristol. If Zaki's name sounds familiar, it's because he was on Palin's banned blogger list last year.

    We'll believe this rumor when we see it, but it would certainly make sense for a young couple newly accustomed to the finer things in life, but whose earning potential is directly tied to their nuptial and reproductive lives, and to and each other.



    Parent
    Isn't that what we all do when our (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 03:03:55 PM EST
    15 mins is up....get married?

    Funny.... (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:18:44 PM EST
    If the blogosphere of the Left had not made Palin famous with their lies and attacks she would now be just another ex VP candidate finishing up her term as Governor of one our nicer states.

    Congratulations to the many contributors.

    She couldn't have done it with out them.

    Aloha, chump? (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:17:34 PM EST
    Down here we just laugh at such drivel.

    You are the picture child of the "can't debate so I'll be nasty" members of the Internet.

    As I said. If the Left had not come out with all the lies about her she would not have become famous.

    You made her, chump.

    Parent

    Donald from Hawaii (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 10:08:49 PM EST
    We are obviously on different teams, but it is surprising to me that you have risen to the bait of this thread.

    Your comments are ones that I do pay attention to, but you seemed to have jumped into the shallow end head first on this Palin thing.

    Just speaking for myself.....

    Parent

    You do nothing but insult and you provide (none / 0) (#105)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 08:19:50 AM EST
    no proof.

    I repeat. It was the lies about the baby, book burning, etc., etc., told and spread by the Left blogosphere that has made her a national figure after the election.

    Parent

    and what about her lies and attacks (none / 0) (#38)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:28:44 PM EST
    were we just supposed to ignore them

    Parent
    Her lies? (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:50:41 PM EST
    heh

    Parent
    Her lies (1.00 / 0) (#50)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:57:42 PM EST
    like people like Jim's, are for the good of the country.

    Parent
    Well, I just wiped up Howdy's claim (none / 0) (#86)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:13:48 PM EST
    Let's see yours.

    Parent
    pfft (none / 0) (#106)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 09:05:06 AM EST
    my goodness.  consider me wiped.

    Parent
    Don't take it personal, Howdy. (none / 0) (#116)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:19:58 PM EST
    It was your argument that was proven wrong, incorrect, untrue, etc., etc.

    Of course I realize that hurts.

    Parent

    I will manage some how (none / 0) (#124)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:53:04 PM EST
    it will be difficult but I am strong.

    Parent
    That a guy. You can do it. (none / 0) (#144)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:24:00 PM EST


    Parent
    That's exactly right (none / 0) (#108)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 11:52:25 AM EST
    Palin pretty admitted her death panel comment was lie....but she said it was okay because it got people talking....just like Reagan's "evil empire" comment.

    To too many conservatives, politics and public policy discussions are just a game.  Say what you need to say.....It doesn't matter if it is false--does it work? is the only question.

    Remember when Obama met with the Republican Senators a few weeks back without the press being present (big mistake, that, as Republican spin can function with impunity)?  One of the Republicans told Obama afterwards to chill--he just took things too seriously.

    See it is all game.  Studies.  Facts.  Evidence.  Just say what you need to say.  Many conservatives have no respect for facts....they learn the truth on Sunday...and just cherry pick factoids (at least the smart ones do--many just parrot Rush) that help them argue what they learned on Sunday.

    There is an interesting article about how impervious conservatives are to facts.....Cite the correct facts, and conservatives just dig in their heels and become even more doctrinaire....I wish I could remember the article...made the rounds last week....

    Parent

    While there are certainly more than a few cons (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:03:16 PM EST
    who are impervious to facts, you must also accept that there are a fair few libs who are similarly fact-obtuse.

    No?

    Parent

    I wish I could remember the (none / 0) (#114)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:12:43 PM EST
    article....they have done studies on this....

    Liberals would tend to ignore the new facts.....Educated and smart conservatives, however, would double down and become even more adamant in their prior views....There was a qualitative difference between the two.

    It is a very human trait to more readily accept facts consistent with one's world view.  That is why jury consultants tell you that jury selection is so important.....

    Conservatives take it to an entirely new level,  however.  It is because religion is often the prime motivator.....Facts are just tools to religious conservatives.....If they work, use them; if not, discard them.  Hugh Hewitt is perhaps the best example....

    Parent

    So it's (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:42:17 PM EST
    "Sure, we do it, but I'm pretty sure them folks over thar do it more."

    Kinda thin gruel.

    Parent

    See, what a good example your comment is (none / 0) (#123)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:49:58 PM EST
    I gave you a sincere answer....let's have a real discussion, I say.  

    And you respond with a one-liner...Rhetoric....Win the game with an attempted good comeback....

    I repeat: the vast majority learn "The Truth" on Sunday, so discussion of facts on Monday through Friday is entirely irrelevant.....unless it helps you score political points....

    Conservatives typically are social conservatives and thus value religion above silly little facts or human investigation and study....

    Parent

    Ok, imo, a better answer. from you, (none / 0) (#126)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:00:54 PM EST
    or any person, regardless of idiology, would have been along the lines of "Yep, nutters on both sides. Thankfully there aren't more of them." You don't usually dish out such a perfect example of the moonbattia party line like you did here, so it suprised me.

    Parent
    I am quite serious (none / 0) (#127)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:14:10 PM EST
    it is not "Moonbattia"....

    Conservatives' religious beliefs are the unstated issue that permeates everything.....

    Global warming is a prime example....

    Social conservatives are basically threatened by modernity.  Their politics is an extended pushback against change--of all kinds.

    I believe that if conservatives could harmonize their religious beliefs with modern science, they would be (largely) politically conservative no more....you would see much more pragmatism, and less of the standard conservative elevation of abstract principles over real people.  Republicans like Lugar and Collins and Snowe....Not Inhofe and DeMint etc.

    Glenn Beck is perhaps the best example of elevating his feelings over established facts.  He talks of knowing something in your gut...and then presents some butchered set of facts....

    Beck is easy to understand--and predict.  He is a self-educated Mormon convert.  That is all you really need to know.  His politics are standard fare, Mormon culture.  Much of it right out of Sunday School....  

    Parent

    And did you also believe in global cooling (none / 0) (#131)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:28:57 PM EST
    when it was PC?

    Let me summarize your argument.

    Left good. Right bad.

    Parent

    I think you are finally getting it (none / 0) (#134)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:32:35 PM EST
    this is progress

    Parent
    There you go.....LOL (none / 0) (#140)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:00:32 PM EST


    Parent
    jim, against my better judgment, (none / 0) (#138)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:44:28 PM EST
    let me respond.

    I would go with the consensus of the scientific community on global warming....You dismiss such as "PC."

    This whole thing about the dreaded MSM and PC is perfect for conservatives.....You have nice, little acronmyms....What conservatives have done is provide a basis for ignoring facts and evidence and reason.

    Facts?  What facts?  You cannot believe anything broadcast by the MSM.  So, feel free to ignore such facts......A wonderfully perfect way to self-re-inforce socially conservative values....

    FOX and Glenn Beck tell the truth....I will listen to the facts--and only the facts--they tell me.

    There is a difference between O'Reilly and Beck--and I believe the difference is largely religious.  O'Reilly is Catholic and comes from that intellectual tradition....which makes it harder to ignore facts and reason but which is still very dogmatic....And O'Reilly is mainly an actor imo.  Beck, on the other hand, is more sincere than most might give him credit for.  He is just an uneducated Mormon using his Sunday School lesson to apply to all of humanity, and he listens to the kookiest Mormon writers--which is largely a function of his lack of education...

    Parent

    Everyone keeps telling me about Glen (none / 0) (#150)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:41:25 PM EST
    Beck. Maybe I should pay attention to him and see what he has to say.

    And to be more exact, the earth has warmed/cooled for millions of years.

    It is AGW that I do not believe in.

    I like this from Karl Popper regarding consensus science.

    Logically, no number of positive outcomes at the level of experimental testing can confirm a scientific theory, but a single counterexample is logically decisive: it shows the theory, from which the implication is derived, to be false.

    Link

    Now, did you or did you not believe in global cooling when it was PC?

    Parent

    you should definitley (none / 0) (#154)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:53:21 PM EST
    pay attention to Glenn Beck.  heck, I bet you could land a spot at Glenn Beck University.


    Parent
    Wow. You think so? (none / 0) (#162)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:41:09 PM EST
    Would you come and give some moral support?

    Parent
    The part of Global Warming (none / 0) (#158)
    by Untold Story on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:01:27 PM EST
    which seems to have escaped the 'experts' in the field of  

    our fresh water supply -

    never have I seen it mentioned and, yet, to me, it is the most significant factor.

    Our planet is 30 percent land and 70 percent water; only 2.5% of that water is fresh water --
    1.6 pecent are the ice caps and glaciers and 0.36 percent underground.

    Only 0.036 percent is lakes, rivers, brooks, streams for daily use.

    Each year the oceans and seas taken more land - don't have the percentage exactly but each and every shoreline will tell its own story of what was, say, a hundred years ago, and how it is now, what used to be is now under water.

    With melting of ice caps and glaciers going into oceans and seas, we are left with less and less water.

    Perhaps we should be developing methods to remove salt from our oceans and seas in addition to paying attention to reducing pollution by fosil fuel.

    Perhaps it is inevitable that the ice age fades away into a new age - but in the meantime all life on our planet will need fresh water!

    Parent

    actually (none / 0) (#128)
    by CST on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:17:38 PM EST
    I think the response was more like "nutters on both sides but they react differently to situations where they are wrong, here is how group a reacts, here is how group b reacts" which is probably more accurate than giving a false equivalency, since the fact remains that while there are "nutters on both sides" they don't react the same way in those situations.

    I think it's disingenuous to imply that the two sides are the same - because they are not, that's why they are different sides.

    Of course I also think my side has significantly fewer "nutters" - but I will admit that could be my left-wing bias coming out :)

    Parent

    Trust me, both sides are the same. (none / 0) (#133)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:32:28 PM EST
    Because both sides are made of human beings with all the same failings and shortcomings.

    There aren't too many posters here who get that, but there are a few.

    You side with the side that supports your beliefs, regardless of how often they fail to live up to those beliefs.

    What else would you do, side with the side that doesn't support your beliefs?

    Parent

    I think we need a new Internet Law (none / 0) (#117)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:22:32 PM EST
    The first person to bring up Christian religion as an attack tool loses.

    Parent
    The religious motivation (none / 0) (#122)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:43:44 PM EST
    of conservatives explains almost everything having to do with their politics.....Liberals often forget this....

    Liberals and progressives try to reason with facts and experience--but it is often futile because the issue is one of religious and existential meaning to religious conservatives....and most conservatives are religious conservatives....too many studies to count have show this to be true.

    The best antidote to religious conservatives?  It truly surprises me.....But it is things like the Da Vinci Code....and the Gnostic Gospels and other finds at Nag Hammadi....

    Some of the criticisim of Christianity seems a little much for me--but it works.   Just saying there is no solid evidence that there ever was a Jesus seems to hit real hard.  Also, tell them the last verses of the Gospel of Mark (the first Gospel to be written as most scholars--even conservative scholars--agree) were added much later....It used to end with an empty tomb--not the Resurrection--and that most scholars agree with this....and you will see that cock-sure attitude of self-righteousness dissipate somewhat....

    Parent

    Like I said (none / 0) (#130)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:24:07 PM EST
    You lose...

    And Da Vinci Code is fiction....

    You do know that, don't you?

    Parent

    So is (none / 0) (#132)
    by CST on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:32:20 PM EST
    the Bible.

    Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

    Parent

    heh (none / 0) (#136)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:39:20 PM EST
    at the DC was based on real stuff.


    Parent
    Look at it like this (none / 0) (#145)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:25:48 PM EST
    If you are right and I am wrong...

    I lose nothing.

    On the other hand...

    If I am right and you are wrong...

    Ouch!

    Parent

    I will worry (none / 0) (#146)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:28:20 PM EST
    exactly as much about that as I will about running into Zeus or Odin in the afterlife.


    Parent
    cyclical argument (none / 0) (#149)
    by CST on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:39:30 PM EST
    What if the Muslim's are right?

    Ouch!

    There's always some group out there that is more than willing to send some other group out there to hell.

    Pick your religious poison.

    Parent

    I lean toward (none / 0) (#151)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:49:18 PM EST
    the Buddists myself.


    Parent
    that would be (none / 0) (#152)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:51:03 PM EST
    Buddhists
    fortunately they have no hell for me for spelling it wrong.

    Parent
    The difference is (none / 0) (#153)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:52:51 PM EST
    they demand you believe.

    I leave it up to you.

    Parent

    hilarious (none / 0) (#155)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:54:41 PM EST
    and fundamentalist christians dont??

    Parent
    Let me know when the Church Police (none / 0) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:32:46 PM EST
    show up and I will come defend you.

    Parent
    umm (none / 0) (#159)
    by CST on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:04:04 PM EST
    no they don't.

    I know a whole lot of Muslims, not a single one of them has ever "demanded" I believe anything.

    In fact, the only people who've ever even tried to convert me were Christians.  And trust me, while it may seem like a friendly "save your soul" thing to those who are doing it, when you are stuck next to said converter on an airplane with nowhere to escape to, it feels a whole lot more like a demand.

    Parent

    If you fail to understand how Islam has been (none / 0) (#161)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:38:11 PM EST
    spread and what would happen to you NOW in SA, Iran and other theocracies you need to study history.

    And you know, I never had anyone show up and try to convert me. I have had several invite me to attend church, sometimes over a glass of wine.

    It must be that Left wingers emit a scent that attract fundamentalists.

    lol

    Parent

    again hilarious (none / 0) (#163)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 04:03:02 PM EST
    do you have any idea how Christianity was spread?

    Parent
    Oh please (none / 0) (#164)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 06:04:32 PM EST
    Read the New Testament and you can see how it was initially spread and then you can see how the Reformation started a change and you can watch that change spread.

    Did Spain and Portugal, primarily, convert through the sword? Yes.

    Is that done now? No.

    So trying for equivalence between Islam and Christianity "spreading" is... yes, hilarious.

    Parent

    There was something about Knights that (none / 0) (#165)
    by Untold Story on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 07:52:31 PM EST
    dressed rather like the Red Cross and the KKK, but they were Templar.

    Parent
    I now understand your moniker. (none / 0) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 08:53:50 PM EST


    Parent
    Largely fiction (none / 0) (#139)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:50:05 PM EST
    The best description I heard is the further back in history you go, the better the Da Vinci Code is.  The Gospel of Mary, Pope Gregory wrongly accusing her of being a prostitute, the Council of Nicea deciding on the content of the Bible--all true.

    The more recent, 20th Century stuff, regarding the modern Priory of Sion--totally bogus.

    Sure the book was largely fiction but it rocked the world of a lot conservative religious folks--as told to me by their pastors.....I was surprised that it did, but it did--that is why you had such a furious response from Christian apologists....

    Parent

    there are many facts (none / 0) (#141)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:08:48 PM EST
    in that movie.  the hysterics glommed onto a couple of exaggerations and enhancements to try to make it all false but it is not.

    the central theme, that the Holy Grail was Marys womb, is most likely true.
    that is the one they hate the most. btw, this is not the only book on the subject.
    try googeling the bloodline of christ

    Parent

    Could be (none / 0) (#143)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:19:21 PM EST
    and it would be fine imo if that were the case....

    A majority of scholars, however, seems to believe otherwise...and these include Jesus Seminar i.e., "liberal" scholars....It is something about a linguistic analysis of how Mary is referred to....If she were Jesus's spouse, the fact that she was not described as such would be unique in all of ancient literature (if I have recalled the argument correctly)

     

    Parent

    I will pass (none / 0) (#148)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:34:10 PM EST
    on buying anything said at a "jesus Seminar" even by liberals.
    Im thinkin they have a vested interest in the outcome of the argument.


    Parent
    The Jesus Seminar was (none / 0) (#156)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:55:35 PM EST
    a formal group of Jesus historians who orignally met (in Colorado iirc) to try and detect the true historical Jesus.....largely considered heretical....many believed that Jesus was not divine and that there was no literal, physical resurrection.....So, I do not think they would automatically be biased against finding Jesus was married...

     Perhaps they are still biased, as much of their life's work has been spent studying Jesus.....but seeminly less biased than so many others....

    Parent

    would that include (none / 0) (#129)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:19:21 PM EST
    christians?

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#135)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:34:15 PM EST
    Remember I'm the guy who says a sin is a sin is a sin...and everyone can work it out between themselves and God.

    Parent
    unless the sinners (none / 0) (#137)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 01:40:24 PM EST
    name is Palin

    Parent
    Sin is sin (none / 0) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:29:20 PM EST
    And to repeat, I will let everyone, Palin included, work out their own salvation.

    That is what makes me a Social Liberal.

    But that has nothing to do with her spot on naming "death panels."

    Parent

    See my #85 (none / 0) (#118)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:23:11 PM EST


    Parent
    thats right (none / 0) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:55:38 PM EST
    her lies.

    lets start with death panels.


    Parent

    Obama's appointee is on record (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:12:52 PM EST
    of favoring rationing.

    Plus Obamacare itself is financed by taking money from Medicare. Anytime you take money from any program the program is reduced. This means what is left will have to be rationed among the many clamoring for service.

    Now watch my lips. Rationing means that some don't get what they want/need. This will be done, as it is now as I noted re Medicare Rx, by guidelines and procedures ran by people. That would be a panel.

    Now since some will be denied care that will lead to a death that has been selected, facilitated and ordained by a "panel" then that is a Death Panel.

    Let's be honest enough to not try and put a happy face on something that will kill some people.

    Capt'n, you may dislike her. In fact, you may hate her. But she flat out nailed this and the Senior Citizens out here know and understand that.

    And if you get lucky and live long enough you may get unlucky and get to experience it yourself.

    Parent

    Yep (none / 0) (#65)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:32:35 PM EST
    Like her claim that the Jones Act is obstructing the cleanup efforts in the gulf, which is, of course, false.

    Parent
    We had a a bunch of (none / 0) (#96)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:35:30 PM EST
    back and forths on that and yet you still try and tell me that this administration didn't use the Jones Act?

    heh

    Now. What else?

    Parent

    Uhhh, ...... yeah (none / 0) (#98)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:51:09 PM EST
    They didn't, and I can cite a half dozen reputable sources that verify that the Jones Act, nor some imagined refusal to waive it, have prevented foreign vessels from being used in the cleanup.

    Tell ya what .... you post your evidence from your wingnut sources, and I'll post mine.

    I could use a good laugh.

    Parent

    If the Jones Act was not applied (none / 0) (#100)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:57:17 PM EST
    then how does one square the list of reputable sources that show the significant delay in the administration's acceptance and/or denial of foreign assistance offers?

    Parent
    Start ... (none / 0) (#103)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 07:13:13 AM EST
    ... here, but in short, the Unified Command has said that any offers that were turned down "did not meet their operational requirements."  The Jones Act is only one of their operational requirements, and the UC has said that "there are 15 foreign flagged ships currently participating in the oil spill cleanup. None of them needed a waiver because the Jones Act does not apply.  In a June 18 statement, the NIC also confirmed that "[W]e have not seen any need to waive the Jones Act" but are prepared to process waivers "should that be necessary."

    Parent
    Whole lotta parsing going on here (1.00 / 0) (#119)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:25:10 PM EST


    Parent
    Really? Is this simple enough ... (none / 0) (#157)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:59:30 PM EST
    ... for you?

    Q: Has the Jones Act stood in the way of any offers of international assistance?

    A: In no case has any offer of assistance been declined because of the Jones Act or similar laws (emphasis added)

    Link

    No "parsing" at all.

    BTW - That's from the June 8, Unified Command fact Sheet cited in my original link.

    Parent

    Strategic Propaganda and Spin (none / 0) (#111)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:00:20 PM EST
    AKA the big lie...  BushCo and Rover upgraded Goebbels technique.... OK... FAUX news is the lynchpin..

    Parent
    McCain's campaign manager (none / 0) (#107)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 11:44:21 AM EST
    is the one who says she lies....and has not much of a tether to the truth.....

    Parent
    Translation: (none / 0) (#55)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:05:36 PM EST
    Im mad about "the Left" exposing the walking punchline that she's been from the beginning and ruining Palin in 2012.

    Parent
    honestly (none / 0) (#58)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:07:10 PM EST
    I dont think she needed any help from us.


    Parent
    So this is what we've come to (5.00 / 3) (#91)
    by lambert on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:28:57 PM EST
    Sad.

    Fie, fie, 'tis an unweeded garden...

    I hope (none / 0) (#4)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:21:21 PM EST
    They lead a nice quiet life and will be happy and raise their son to be a good person.  

    Best wishes to them and hope they make it.

    And I bet Sarah Palin feels like any other mom who's kid has been hurt and has now reconciled with the person who hurt her.
     

    You assume of course (none / 0) (#7)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:32:40 PM EST
    it wasn't the other way around.

    To have a chance I would have suggested they move to Montana and never tell a soul of their plans. But it appears they would have no interest in my advice by announcing on the cover of a weekly rag.

    Parent

    and thats probably (none / 0) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:34:49 PM EST
    not the best location for the reality show.

    Parent
    Me too (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:39:47 PM EST
    But they didn't ask for my advice, so I can only hope for the best of them.

    At this point, they are not any different than the countless useless people on things like "The Bachelor" or "Wife Swap".

    Parent

    except that (none / 0) (#12)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:42:01 PM EST
    as far as I know "The Bachelor" or "Wife Swap" cant boast a potential "first daughter"

    Parent
    Highly unlikely (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 03:44:10 PM EST
    About as much chance as I have for becoming First Daughter...

    Parent
    I pray almost daily (1.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 03:53:46 PM EST
    that you are correct

    Parent
    cool, a one (none / 0) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:00:57 PM EST
    guess shoephone wants a reality show about the first daughter.


    Parent
    Right (none / 0) (#13)
    by lilburro on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:44:12 PM EST
    nice and quiet, just like all other couples who sold their story to US Weekly.  And appear on the "Secret Life of the American Teenager."

    Parent
    omg (none / 0) (#32)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 04:24:09 PM EST
    I never saw that movie.  if I had only know there was a glory hole involved that would not be true.

    netflixed.


    Parent

    I totally forgot (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:08:33 PM EST
    it was John Waters.

    bumped on netflix.
    thanx


    Parent

    Hmmm (none / 0) (#14)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:48:45 PM EST
    Hard to imagine that this is anything more than a business decision by the Palin clan. A week or two ago, Levi made a public apology, and retracted all the mean things he said about Sarah and Bristol.

    This is not about love but about power and money. That is how the aristocrats do it, and the Palin's are American aristocrats... lol

    you might be (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 03:54:13 PM EST
    surprised

    Parent
    About the same number whose Grand and Great (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:13:09 PM EST
    grand parents made a fortune selling illegal booze...

    or family members involved in cocaine.

    Parent

    Wingnut humor? Oximoron (none / 0) (#64)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:23:40 PM EST
    grand parents made a fortune selling illegal booze

    Evidence?

    A recurrent rumor about Kennedy is that he made money in "bootlegging," the illegal importation and distribution of alcohol during Prohibition. Although there is no evidence of this, Kennedy did have extensive investments in the legal importation of spirits. The "bootlegging" rumor itself may be traceable to Samuel Bronfman and his crime syndicate, which did in fact smuggle spirits across the Canadian-American border. Post-Prohibition, Bronfman had a bitter rivalry with Kennedy in acquiring North American liquor distribution rights.

    or family members involved in cocaine.

    Bush?

    Parent

    http://www.lavidaocean.com/the-rum-runners/ (none / 0) (#66)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:35:55 PM EST


    Parent
    Let me try again (none / 0) (#68)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:44:07 PM EST
    http://www.lavidaocean.com/the-rum-runners/

    Even FDR said the reason he appointed Joe K to be SEC Commissioner was to need a crook to caught a crook (Google will aid you with that if you have any doubts)

    Parent

    You need a crook to catch a crook, (sorry) (none / 0) (#69)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:46:30 PM EST


    Parent
    That wasn't about bootlegging (none / 0) (#109)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 11:55:36 AM EST
    but insider trading on wall street.....It was legal before FDR....

    Parent
    Try one more time (none / 0) (#71)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 07:52:09 PM EST
    I meant something more than some claims typed on a website.

    The bootlegging rumors didn't even begin until 30 years after the end of Prohibition, and were debunked by one of the foremost experts on the history of Prohibition.

    BTW - Roosevelt's quote was a joke, and had nothing to do with the rumors of Kennedy's bootlegging.

    Parent

    Your links please (none / 0) (#72)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 07:54:06 PM EST


    Parent
    Click on the word ... (none / 0) (#73)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:05:35 PM EST
    ... "evidence" in my first post, and "debunked" in the second post.

    Parent
    Oh, the irony (none / 0) (#74)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:15:12 PM EST
    In a Palin bashing thread the Kennedy's pop up and there is a quick rush to defend them.

    The Kennedy's would have lasted a NY minute in today's media/Internet age.  

    Maybe this was a "comedic" side track to the thread subject.

    Parent

    Irony? (none / 0) (#75)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:19:27 PM EST
    A preference for facts over fairytales isn't "irony", - it's rationality.

    Of course, YMMV.

    Parent

    Yes YMMV (none / 0) (#77)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:45:19 PM EST
    Please don't buy into the Kennedy sainthood concept.

    Joe had plenty of baggage (or is there link to debunk his Nazi sympathies?)

    JFK and RFK get a pass.

    Teddy should have been sent to prion for murder if not for Joe, JFK and RFK sympathies.

    Parent

    I don't ... (none / 0) (#89)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:17:34 PM EST
    ... buy into the concept of "sainthood" - for anyone, and I never claimed Joe had no "baggage".

    Fact over fairytale.

    You should try it.

    Parent

    OK, let's call Joe a draw for the moment (none / 0) (#90)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:20:24 PM EST
    Care to step up to the Teddy plate?

    Parent
    What are you even ... (none / 0) (#95)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:34:53 PM EST
    ... babbling about - the "Teddy plate"?  I never even mentioned Teddy Kennedy.

    It's almost like you want to change the subject.

    Ohhhhhhh ...... I understand.

    Parent

    Come on, you know what the (none / 0) (#97)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:41:48 PM EST
    Teddy Plate is.

    Please defend debacle of Teddy.  Anyone, regardless of which side of the aisle other than a Kennedy would have been in prison, much less been in a position to run for POTUS (against their own party incumbent BTW) and then stay in the Senate for 40+ years.  Please, that is just beyond the scope of reality.

    Parent

    If you want to argue ... (none / 0) (#99)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:56:40 PM EST
    ... about Ted Kennedy's history - a subject I never brought up - you should find someone who's interested, ...

    ... or contact a medium.

    I was responding to someone pushing unsupported rumors that Joe Kennedy was involved in bootlegging, but you keep wanting to change the subject.

    Maybe if you were a little less transparent ...

    Parent

    It was an accident (none / 0) (#110)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 11:59:35 AM EST
    That is what it was....

    And the times were different....Drinking and driving were often thought of humorously....See Cary Grant in North by Northwest.  See any John Wayne move to see how being drunk was oh so funny.....

    That you guys bring up Teddy in a Palin thread is quite a stretch.  ....I hope she gets the nomination....

    And she will run.....

    Parent

    So what is the difference between 'something' (none / 0) (#76)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:42:05 PM EST
    on the web and something contained in a book which has taken newspaper articles as fact!

    May be wrong, often am, but believe Canada has made the connection from old documents of whiskey and beer distribution during that era.

    It wasn't a joke FDR's famous saying about JK, or his actual dislike for JK and, therefore, his assignment to Britian even though JK had actually 'paid for' a much higher office.

    Even then JK took the wrong side with Germany against Britian and had to come back to the States!

    Today's banking and stock manipulation may pale when compared to JK's - or, at least that is what is said.

    I know, I know, if it is said often enough it is believed - but I don't think JK was a stellar guy, just too much dirty laundry all around him.  Usually where there is that much smoke there is fire.

    Just don't care for pretense - hiding, covering, paying for ethics, and all that crap.

    Obama was honest with what he did in his youth.  Did anyone hold it against him - no - because he was upfront - no shadows hiding, and that's how it should be.

    Just my opinion.

    Parent

    Well, except for that little matter of (none / 0) (#78)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:48:53 PM EST
    releasing college transcripts and client records.

    Obama was honest with what he did in his youth.

    There, I bet you were hoping for a birther opening - sorry to disappoint.  :)

    Parent

    What about his college transcripts? (none / 0) (#80)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:52:08 PM EST
    Clients' records - isn't that privileged information?

    Parent
    OK, let's skip the clients records (none / 0) (#81)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:59:05 PM EST
    and dive into the college transcripts.

    Works for me.

    Parent

    Never mind - you are talking about (none / 0) (#82)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:03:53 PM EST
    those nutty people trying to unbirth him from America!

    Parent
    That silly scholarship he is supposed to have (none / 0) (#83)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:07:49 PM EST
    gotten under some assumed name because he was Indonesian - well guess what, the scholarship could not have been ever given to an Indonesian -

    Boy was that the wrong choice of scholarship -

    He was enrolled under his own name, Obama.

    Parent

    Let O stand up the to same scrutiny (none / 0) (#87)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:14:06 PM EST
    that GWB did and open up his college and military records.  To hell with the BC nonsense, college records are records - fair is fair.

    Parent
    They are afraid Bush will beat him (none / 0) (#93)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:32:29 PM EST
    like Bush beat Kerry.

    ;-)

    Parent

    Did George W. go to college? (none / 0) (#94)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:33:18 PM EST
    (Just kidding - yeah, guess he did show up for the beer parties at least!)

    Think he may have done just about the same with his military record - records showed he was somewhere when he was actually somewhere else.

    Parent

    Actually the opposite (none / 0) (#104)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 08:12:52 AM EST
    is true. The AWOL charge was proven wrong and the infamous memo ended some careers at CBS.

    And yes, Bush's grades were better than Kerry's.

    Although I am not sure what college grades are supposed to prove 20 years after the fact. What the person has done seems to be more important.

     

    Parent

    Wow--you are really off here (none / 0) (#113)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:03:44 PM EST
    I have waded deep into wingnuttia and birtherism from time to time, and I have no idea what you are talking about.

    You chastise Donald about decorum and yet you appear up to your gills in the most off-the-wall wingnuttia.....

    You a devotee of Jon Voight?

    Parent

    Huh? (none / 0) (#115)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:17:16 PM EST
    My comments are factual.

    Trying to reframe, eh?

    lol

    Parent

    Not talking about you (none / 0) (#120)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:33:06 PM EST


    Parent
    I didn't say JK ... (none / 0) (#84)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:10:37 PM EST
    ... was a "stellar guy".  I merely pointed out that the rumors s re: his involvement in "bootlegging" have been debunked.

    BTW - The difference between "something on the web" and the book I cited is that anyone can write anything on the web - it has zero credibility.  A book written by a historian and expert - and first Public editor of the NY Times - has faaaaaaaar more credibility than unsupported rumors posted on a website.

    Parent

    Yeah, thanks, think it is Schenley's old records (none / 0) (#79)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:49:41 PM EST
    that show JK purchasing whiskey and beer during prohibition - and there is another Harvard connection - got to think on that and try and research it out - a classmate perhaps - just can't remember . . .

    Parent
    No kidding (none / 0) (#92)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:30:40 PM EST
    I have no idea who or what you're referring to ("Schenley's old records"), but I have no doubt that JK was purchasing alcohol during Prohibition.  Did you even read the article I linked to?

    These contracts were the crucial third leg of an enterprise that was also balanced on medicinal liquor permits--legal throughout Prohibition --that Kennedy had obtained in Washington, and the bonded warehouse space he had lined up.  Somerset Importers was in business, ... Somerset emitted the pungent air that hovered around most marriages of politics and commerce, but it was in every respect perfectly legal.

    He would have been a pretty lousy businessman if he set up a liquor importing business and then didn't buy any liquor.

    Parent

    Don't Know The Total (none / 0) (#33)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 04:49:12 PM EST
    But here is a list of 100 who you can start with

    Parent
    oh please (none / 0) (#41)
    by DFLer on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:37:53 PM EST
    these are mostly pot busts.

    Parent
    wow (none / 0) (#15)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:50:29 PM EST
    why is everybody so judgmental

    Because (none / 0) (#17)
    by lilburro on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 02:58:27 PM EST
    we don't get $$$ from US Weekly for coverage of our romantic reconciliations?

    Parent
    So what if they are ? (none / 0) (#25)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 03:49:34 PM EST
    I remember well how many pundits and talking heads analyzed the Clinton marriage ("it's all about power!").  People grt married for all kinds of reasons.  I don't plan on buying US Weekly or watching any show they may get, so I won't be contributing to this.  But if people are going to talk about it and write about it, then they will stay in the spotlight and try to make money off of it.

    Parent
    if there is a teevee show (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 03:52:58 PM EST
    I hope it ends with Levi tossing a bucket of water on Sara making her melt.


    Parent
    Well, I'm glad that's cleared up (none / 0) (#20)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 03:08:31 PM EST
    So now there is no reason whatsoever not to vote for Sarah Palin.

    Yeh, right.  As if this will work.

    Many of you are quite mean (none / 0) (#39)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:31:02 PM EST
    This is another lost little girl inside a woman's body -- always controlled by a domineering mother with, obviously, no father-daughter relationship other than as dictated by their Mrs. Mom.

    Her lack of self-esteem in letting another controlling person dominate her life is text book - Levi enters, leaves, enters, whatever Levi wishes.

    It is sad, very sad.

     

    Seems well adjusted to me (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:44:20 PM EST
    Jeez, she's not a little girl.  She stepped away from a relationship, spent time learning to parent, is trying to figure out how to support a child, separating from her parents at an appropriate age (it is very typical for teens to separate from the parent/child relationship, develop and then enter a new stage)and is now ready to try and build a family with the other parent.  Seems to be doing well at adjusting.


    Parent
    Stop i, just stop it now (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:49:41 PM EST
    It is against the rules to allow anyone in the Palin family to have any semblance of human characteristics.

    Didn't you get the memo?  :)

    Parent

    Levi (none / 0) (#49)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:57:42 PM EST
    has some extremely human "characteristics" and photo spreads to prove them.

    and I wouldnt worry to much about the poor Palins.
    they are crying all the way to the bank and they have people like you to carry their water up every hill.
     

    Parent

    First, was not refering to physical (none / 0) (#54)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:02:38 PM EST
    characteristics.

    Second, I've never given a red cent to Palin, or any effort she is involved in (ie the 2008 campaign).  Sorry if that pokes a hole in your theory.

    I find it completely hysterical, the left's phobia of SP.  She is the ultimate stealth weapon.

    Dang, can't believe I got sucked into this thread.

    Parent

    fyi (none / 0) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:06:15 PM EST
    carrying water doesnt mean contributing money.
    it means apologizing for rationalizing and justifying every idiotic inane pathetic thing they do.

    and sneering at people like me who make fun of them for what they are.  money grubbing rubes.

    Parent

    Please find where I have (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:19:19 PM EST
    "carried" her water.

    All I've stated is that the left goes complete apoplectic at the mere mention of her name.  Then they pile on with personal attacks well outside the political realm.

    I have the same position regarding how Chelsea, Jenna/Barbara and Melia/Sasha.  It is not a healthy political debate to attack a pols family.

    As for SP herself, speaking from the right, she is not national leadership quality.  However, that doesn't mean she should have a public lynching and proctology exam.  

    As for making fun of you, you bring it on yourself by the above described non-political personal attacks.  Your "realty show" posts are worthy of ridicule.  You are not addressing political issues, but acting like a left wing Sean Hannity.

    Parent

    tell us again (none / 0) (#125)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:59:54 PM EST
    how silly the "reality show" stuff is.
    please.

    video: Bristol Palin: How Levi Johnston Proposed to Me

    Parent

    dont you just hate baseless rumors? (none / 0) (#142)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 02:12:07 PM EST
    Johnston has openly angled for a reality show in the past. In July 2009, he sat down with New York magazine accompanied by Tank, his bodyguard and agent. "Tank mentions a soon-to-be-announced television project," the magazine reported. "I don't even want to call it a reality show," Tank said. "It will be a docudrama or something similar. I think the whole reality-show thing is played out."

    In April, on the heels of news that Sarah Palin was shopping an Alaska-themed reality show with Survivor creator Mark Burnett, Johnston told E Online that he too was pitching a project -- a "bromance" show that would center on him trying to land a new girlfriend.

    "I haven't dated since Bristol so that is going to be in the show," he said. "I've got to find [a woman], take her back to Alaska and see if she can hang."

    Tension over the pursuit of stardom seemed to be one of the factors that drove the couple apart in the first place. Bristol Palin said in a custody hearing that Johnston wanted a public case so he could "continue to make a spectacle of this custody dispute for his own self-promotion."

    But Bristol has embraced her role in the public eye, and got her feet wet in the world of TV last month with an appearance on The Secret Lives of the American Teenager -- though her performance was widely panned.

    A lucrative reality show contract would be a financial boon for the young couple. Bristol told People magazine in May that supporting herself financially is "very difficult."

    "I'd say the majority of any paycheck I ever receive is going to Tripp," she said. "Child care is very expensive, formula is expensive, diapers are expensive - and you don't think about that as a kid, at all." But according to Palin family attorney Thomas Van Flein, Bristol recently signed on for a public speaking gig where she will give offer speeches on abstinence and "pro-life" issues, among other subjects, and will earn between $15,000 and $30,000 per appearance.



    Parent
    That was fun (none / 0) (#60)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:09:51 PM EST
    Your knee jerk republicanism just leaked out.... you don't care a fig about her but reflexively jumped to her defense and declared your adoration.

    Parent
    See post #62 (none / 0) (#63)
    by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 06:19:47 PM EST


    Parent
    Has she lived away from her mother? (none / 0) (#48)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:57:00 PM EST
    Usually tune out anything to do with SP as she seems such an idiot, but have lots of sympathy for her family as they have been kind of a reality show without trying. . .

    Thanks for bringing me up to date on this.

    Parent

    I feel sorry for her family as well (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:59:16 PM EST
    they have been used as every possibly kind of prop.
    from political to just plain greedy money grubbing.


    Parent
    not sure how you know all of this (none / 0) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:35:04 PM EST
    but from what I know about reality shows they are going to make pretty damn sure this is what SHE wants before the fork over the dough.

    so I wouldnt worry.  I suspect she can take care of herself.


    Parent

    Are you serious about the reality show? (none / 0) (#42)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:41:34 PM EST
    I thought you were just kidding????  Now I am really confused.

    Parent
    well (none / 0) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:48:00 PM EST
    it is just "internet rumor" but personally I would bet it happens.  it is being reported (or rumored) as fact.

    and really, how hard is it to believe.

    Parent

    Crazy is all that comes to mind! (none / 0) (#51)
    by Untold Story on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 05:58:51 PM EST


    Parent
    Levi and Bristol: Round 2, We're Engaged Again | 150 comments (150 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment