Thursday, June 25, 2015


You probably know that Bristol Palin just announced on her blog that she's pregnant again. Palin, of course, is unmarried. This is her second out-of-wedlock pregnancy.

I bring this up because, as you probably also know, she was paid $262,500 by a teen pregnancy prevention nonprofit a few years ago; her fee for an abstinence lecture was reported to be $17,500.

Oh, but she's not just a moralizing hypocrite grifter. Sometimes she moralizes hypocritically for free.

Back in 2012, President Obama said that he'd changed his mind on same-sex marriage and now supported it, in part because of conversations he'd had with his daughters. He said:
You know, Malia and Sasha, they have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we’re talking about their friends and their parents and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t make sense to them and, frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.
Palin responded to this on her blog:
While it’s great to listen to your kids’ ideas, there’s also a time when dads simply need to be dads. In this case, it would’ve been helpful for him to explain to Malia and Sasha that while her friends parents are no doubt lovely people, that’s not a reason to change thousands of years of thinking about marriage. Or that -- as great as her friends may be -- we know that in general kids do better growing up in a mother/father home.
(Emphasis added.)

Really, Bristol? Is that why you think gay marriage is awful? Because it's vitally important, in your opinion, to have two opposite-sex parents in the home raising every child?

When I go to this post, I'm told that I "might also enjoy" another post from Bristol's blog:
Put a Ring on It

Have you ever heard of “shacking up?” Now, people describe living together with a more complimentary phrase: “a trial marriage.” ...

In fact, you may have even recently heard rumors I’m living with my boyfriend. As that gossip spread a couple of weeks ago, people all over America were applauding me for -- finally! -- coming to my senses and abandoning my no-sex-until-marriage policy. Others are saying that me shacking up with my boyfriend is the height of hypocrisy.

Here’s the thing. It’s not true. As I mentioned before, I recently bought a home across the lake from my parents’ house. While it’s under renovation, I’m actually living in an apartment on their property. Rest assured -- there’s no way on earth my mom and dad would allow a guy to spend the night here with me.

But even if I weren’t temporarily living on their property, I wouldn’t move in with someone. Why? Well, new evidence reported in the New York Times suggests what the Bible has already told us: living together before marriage does not lead to happiness.

... now we have the Bible, the New York Times, and even Beyonce suggesting the best way to secure relationship success is to... “put a ring on it.”
Um, thanks for clearing that up, Bristol.


Paul Canning said...

It is at moments like this that I miss Joan Rivers.

I never watch reality TV but made an exception for the houseswap between Joan and Bristol. What a culture clash. Is on Youtube.

Victor said...

She be gradjewate of the bessest absti... don' fock... clasis dat Wussilla had two ofer...

'N Inglish, two!

Pops said...

I am still waiting for Sarah to blame Lena Dunham.

Aunt Snow said...

Well, let's be fair about it. Bristol doesn't write her blog posts, her mom pays Nancy French to do that.

Susan of Texas said...

You know what else does not lead to happiness? Being a conservative unmarried mother of two who is risking her stream of wingnut welfare. She thinks that because conservatives must say the right thing that they can always do whatever they want in private. That only works to a point--a young woman's sexuality is considered public property in her world.