Patterico's Pontifications

9/8/2008

Sullivan Implies Palin Supports Teaching Creationism and Opposes Teaching Contraception; Neither Is True

Filed under: 2008 Election,General — Patterico @ 6:46 am



Andrew Sullivan has implied that Sarah Palin opposes the teaching of contraception in schools, and has pushed the teaching of creationism in schools.

Neither implication is true.

On September 1, Andrew Sullivan wrote a post titled Palin On Sex Ed which read in its entirety:

Against it:

Q: Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

The implication, of course, is that Palin opposes teaching contraception in schools. Sullivan clearly meant this as ironic contrast with contemporaneous revelations that Palin’s daughter was pregnant.

Just so we’re clear, the L.A. Times ran a story on September 6 making it clear that Palin does not oppose teaching about contraception:

In July of that year, she completed a candidate questionnaire that asked, would she support funding for abstinence-until-marriage programs instead of “explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?”

Palin wrote, “Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.”

In August of that year, Palin was asked during a KTOO radio debate if “explicit” programs include those that discuss condoms. Palin said no and called discussions of condoms “relatively benign.”

“Explicit means explicit,” she said. “No, I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don’t have a problem with that. That doesn’t scare me, so it’s something I would support also.”

I don’t remember seeing a peep from Sullivan about this. Maybe I missed it. I do know his original post is not updated. But updating and correcting is hard. Quoting from Wikipedia and opposition documents is easy.

On August 29, Sullivan wrote a post titled Uh Oh, which read in its entirety:

Palin is creationist friendly. Does she favor banning private stem-cell research as the GOP platform does?

The link goes to a 2006 story which quoted Palin as saying in a debate that both creationism and evolution should be taught. The story says that, after the debate, she clarified that she merely meant debate should not be squelched:

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

“I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.

A recent AP story is titled Palin has not pushed creation science as governor and says that Palin “kept her campaign pledge to not push the idea in the schools.”

I see no evidence that Sullivan linked the story, or that he has mentioned that Palin promised not to teach creationism, and kept her promise.

Apparently Sullivan does think that there should be a “prohibition against debate if it comes up in class.” I see no other reason for an “Uh Oh” post because Palin says there shouldn’t be.

Just making sure that the memes and smears are set straight. It’s almost a full-time job with smear artists like Sullivan around.

It’s truly stunning that he gets paid to do this.

77 Responses to “Sullivan Implies Palin Supports Teaching Creationism and Opposes Teaching Contraception; Neither Is True”

  1. I’m gob-smacked at Andrew’s descent into madness, filled with heart-ache, too.

    A Reader (6c3271)

  2. Wait… You mean to hell me that Sullivan was intentionally deceptive?

    My God, what has the world come to?

    Scott Jacobs (a1c284)

  3. I’m reassured about Palin’s views on teaching creationism and sex ed. She apparently made a couple of casual comments that do not reflect her policy.

    Guess you really do have to take down Sully’s comments — a nearly full-time job in itself.

    Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407)

  4. And the anti-contraception smear is apparently contradicted by the debate itself.

    Karl (1b4668)

  5. The chrome on Sally’s dome is expanding from all the spontaneous combustion of his remaining hairs.

    rhodeymark (6797b5)

  6. I think my gob just got smacked.

    Kind of OT, but all of the gleeeens seem to have been remarkably quiet recently.

    JD (75f5c3)

  7. There is a simple explanation for Andrew Sullivan’s vitriol towards Sarah Palin.

    Cat Fight!!!

    Andy B (ebd07f)

  8. But yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids.

    Every time this subject comes up, people treat abstinence education as abstinence-ONLY education. They are not the same and I pre-emptively denounce everyone who trys to pretend they are.

    MamaAJ (788539)

  9. You mean sex education in Alaska doesn’t consist of a fire-breathing witch worthy of Carrie’s mother condemning the students to hell followed up by Mr. Mackey from South Park saying, “Um..sex is bad..mmkaay..you shouldn’t have sex….mmmkay…”?

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  10. Liberals are so convinced humans decended from apes everytime they show apes some liberal doofus is saying their our closets living next of kin showing their as dumb as sticks and a flea or ant is more intellegent

    Krazy Kagu (001cfd)

  11. The Atlantic has just established an advice column where you can submit questions and receive advice/answers from the staff. I submitted mine asking when we and Mrs. Palin can expect a public apology from Sully because we know The Atlantic has a certain standard they wish to maintain.

    I anticipate an answer any second now!

    http://www.theatlantic.com/a/advice.mhtml

    Dana (b4a26c)

  12. Dana – I suspect that they will not respond to mine.

    JD (75f5c3)

  13. Mildly OT, but where did this thing with Andrew Sullivan and “power glutes” come from? I’ve searched on the web (not very hard, but still) and can’t find justification for this reference. I feel like I’m being left out of an inside joke!

    Andy (09ab51)

  14. You can find it refferenced here.

    I will say right now that the links that explain it are toward sthe middle-ish, and are not work safe. You have been warned.

    Scott Jacobs (a1c284)

  15. It’s truly stunning that he gets paid to do this.

    The only question is: by whom?

    George (a99b03)

  16. Here’s my letter to their advice column:

    I run a once-respected magazine, but a while back I made the mistake of hiring a crazy person who’s now turning our reputation into Alaskan Husky droppings. Should I fire him by e-mail or just stop paying him?

    Jim Treacher (592cb4)

  17. Jim, that is just BAD!

    Please let us know if they answer.

    Another Drew (e0c2ef)

  18. “The Atlantic has just established an advice column where you can submit questions and receive advice/answers from the staff.”

    You really cannot make this stuff up. Comedy gold, baby!

    Federal Dog (1404a2)

  19. Sullivan may be entering Olberman territory. I have to conclude he is getting sick and they haven’t realized it. We had a urologist in our hospital with AIDS about 20 years ago who was getting demented and nobody realized it except the nurses who had watched his decision making decline in the operating room. Everybody was afraid to say anything because nobody wanted to talk about the diagnosis.

    This thing with Sullivan may really be the disease. The change is too marked the past three years and especially lately.

    Mike K (155601)

  20. People’s problems with Palin is the same as with Obama. They think that she might be some manchurian candidate who will try and sneak non-secular things into the wrong parts of school curriculums, just like he might be some sort of manchurian candidate that will socialize the country.
    Basically both have the SAME problem which is no real track record to go on. There are hints and innuendos but that’s about it.

    Mrs Palin sort of sidesteps the question about sex ed by leaving open the definition of what is “explicit”, she does a sort of reverse Clinton there.
    “Explicit means explicit,” she said.
    Really? Does her “explicit” mean a list of contraception devices with a brief discussion of how they will all cause health problems and bascially mess you up followed by 30 minutes of how abstinence is the only 100% method of contraception (it true!) and has no adverse health effects?

    Or does explicit mean no talking about body parts? or masturbation?
    She doesn’t say, coz defining something limits one’s ability to do whatever they want ie. their plausible deniability.

    It’s the same for Creationism. Does “not stifling debate” mean that parents don’t get to complain about a teacher who is teaching creationism as legitimate science, because that would “stifle debate” in the classroom? Or is she just saying that students can ask “what about creationism” in class? Her answer above (maybe not elsewhere) leaves that question open.

    Fundamentalists are just people. Some are lying manipulators and some never lie about anything. Some are criminal some are incredibly self sacrificing etc.etc. They have gotten a bad rap lately because of the “culture wars” and people are worried that a fundie VP or Prez. will try and legislate their moral views. Gov. Palin needs to bring up her small record (esp. as Mayor?) and show that in office she spent her time negotiating good deals for her constituents, not trying to tell them how to live their lives.

    EdWood (c2268a)

  21. Ed, as opposed to Obama living off of non-profit money dubiously obtained as a “Community Organizer”?

    PCD (5c49b0)

  22. Apparently what your saying here is that Palin is against “Explicit” sex education, I.E. condoms.

    But it also seems she is pro-contraception as long as abstinence is discussed.

    If I were a “Main Stream Media” reporter, I would ask her what kind of contraception other than condoms can be taught to children?

    What kind of contraception doesn’t “scare” Palin?

    Oiram (983921)

  23. The legend lives on from the Gray Lady on down
    To the network they call “Fair and Balanced.”
    The MSNBC, it is said, never gives up her dead
    When the skies of September turn gloomy.

    With a load of delegates – 2,500 or more
    Than the Barack Obama weighed empty
    That good ship and true was a bone to be chewed
    When the gales of November came early

    The ship was the pride of the Democrat side
    Rising out of the machine in Chicago
    As big ships go it beat out Team Hillary so
    With a campaign and the Veep well seasoned.

    Concluding some terms with special interest groups
    When they left fully loaded for Cleveland
    And later that night when the ships bell rang
    McCain announced Sarah Palin.

    The Kos and the Dish made a tattletale sound
    Claiming that McCain was insane
    First it was Trig, and then it was Bristol,
    This would finish the old man off early.

    Gustav came late and the GOP convention to wait
    And bets were being taken when she would drop out
    But when the Governor spoke to the assembled folk
    The Dems were in the face of a hurricane Palin

    When supper time came the old Veep came on deck
    Saying I hear that life starts at conception
    At 7AM when Intrade caved in
    Biden said fellas it’s been good to know ya.

    Then Captain hit a shoal called “New Pennsylvania”
    And the Dem ship and crew was in peril
    And later that night when Mac’s polls went out of sight
    Came the wreck of the Barack Obama.

    Joe (dcebbd)

  24. Apparently what your saying here is that Palin is against “Explicit” sex education, I.E. condoms.

    So, you’re basicly admitting you didn’t read the whole post then?

    Gotcha…

    Scott Jacobs (a1c284)

  25. #24 “Gotcha…”

    I did read the post Scott, and it looks like Palin might need some syrup with those waffles.

    Answer me this Scott, (I have to assume by your accusations here that you read the post better than I did) Does Palin advocate contraceptives as long as they are not condoms?

    Please educate this Democrat :)

    Oiram (983921)

  26. Does Palin advocate contraceptives as long as they are not condoms?

    She is pro-contraceptive, period. She does not equivocate on the issue. pro is pro.

    Please educate this Democrat

    Had I a thousand lifetimes, your density and resistance to basic logic would render that an impossible task…

    Scott Jacobs (a1c284)

  27. Scott…
    Oiram is like a Missouri mule, first you have to get their attention.

    I might take more than one whack, though.

    Another Drew (e0c2ef)

  28. nice job Joe

    quasimodo (e1b696)

  29. Patterico, Gov. Palin’s father, Chuck Heath, was long a high school coach and science teacher. If he taught creationism instead of evolution, I’m reasonably sure we’d have heard about that by now, and it would have been quite unusual back in the ’70s and ’80s anyway. I would love to see someone ask both him and Gov. Palin about this topic. I strongly suspect, but obviously cannot yet prove, that both would say they see no conflict between religious views which recognize a Creator and scientific views which recognize the theory of evolution. To the extent that either is taught in a manner that denigrates the other — which I think need not be done, but I recognize sometimes is nevertheless done — then we already know Gov. Palin supports a free marketplace of ideas, with parents ultimately having control of what their children are exposed to.

    While I’m admittedly making guesses, I would likewise guess that regardless of what they were taught in school, all of Sarah Palin’s teen children were given an equivalent grounding in sex education by their parents. It strikes me as very, very improbable that Bristol Palin didn’t know of the risks of sex without birth control, or that she didn’t know methods of birth control. Intelligent and fully-educated teens make bad choices when they’re young and irresponsible precisely because they’re young and irresponsible, not necessarily because they lack basic knowledge.

    Beldar (8a23eb)

  30. Actually, the problem rests with the poorly-worded compound question asked.

    And with Oiram, for the non sequitur that “explicit” must mean something to do with condoms.

    Karl (f07e38)

  31. Oiram (#22), the more reasonable interpretation of “explicit sex education programs” is that it’s a reference to sex education programs that are sexually explicit, i.e., that depict people having sex. It’s entirely possible to have sex education that wouldn’t draw an NC-17 rating from the movie review board.

    Show me anywhere that the word “condom” is defined as “explicit.” That doesn’t even make sense.

    Beldar (8a23eb)

  32. I’m very concerned that Mrs. Palin is not stating that she will use as much public money as possible and ensuring that in the government run, public schools, students are given the most graphic, point-by-point depiction of everything having to do with sex and pregnancy. Not only should she recognize that it is the state’s duty to explicitly instruct every student how to use every method of birth control but to take to task any schools that are spending time on such trivialities like math and science when such time could be better spent watching 9 1/2 Weeks, Deep Throat, What’s Butt Got to Do With It?, Dildo Baggins: Lord of the Reams, and An Inconvenient Truth.

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  33. Jack…
    Please have less coffee…

    Another Drew (e0c2ef)

  34. Jack was being sarcastic. But to my shame, I have only seen one of the movies he mentioned.

    (OT, but is Mickey Rourke a masochistic nut?)

    nk (21731d)

  35. Oh, o.k. sorry guys I re-read it and your right, I was wrong. It does seem that she is for sex education including condoms as contraceptives.

    Thanks

    By the way Another Drew your not going to get votes for McCain by “on the fence voters” (unlike me) with coments like this one”:

    “Oiram is like a Missouri mule, first you have to get their attention.”

    I just wanted clarification and I got it.

    Oiram (983921)

  36. “Should I fire him by e-mail or just stop paying him?”

    Neither – first have him b-tch slapped with an Alaskan Char, then drag him by his gonads behind a herd of musk oxen being chased by wolves (he likes the hairy backs, yes?). The Atlantic thereby receives the leavings of the entrails. Comedy Gold!

    Dmac (e639cc)

  37. Hey everybody: Just found out John and Cindy McCain will both be on The View this Friday 9/12. Let’s hope they’re both wearing something flame-retardant.

    qdpsteve (dc65ab)

  38. #20 – EdWood

    People’s problems with Palin is the same as with Obama.
    — Wrong in the very first sentence. This does not bode well.

    They think that she might be some manchurian [sic] candidate who will try and sneak non-secular things into the wrong parts of school curriculums [sic], just like he might be some sort of manchurian [sic] candidate that will socialize the country.
    — Wrong! 1) How many rational people actually think the VP has any sway whatsoever with school curriculum? Answer: none. Sullivan is just using this as one more color in his paint-her-in-a-negative-light palette. 2) The concern that Obama will socialize the country is based on his overt actions, as reflected in his plans that have been laid on the table already.

    Basically both have the SAME problem which is no real track record to go on. There are hints and innuendos but that’s about it.
    — Wrong. In his case there are PDF’s on his website with all of the grisly details.

    Icy Truth (8ecfb1)

  39. Oiram…
    We’ve been giving you clarrification on various subjects for months. I’m very glad that one of those clarrifications has registered.

    BTW, what did get your (not you’re) attention?

    Another Drew (e0c2ef)

  40. Boy, I’ve got to stop pressing that “r” key so hard.

    Another Drew (e0c2ef)

  41. 50. Can you imagine what curse from the heavens has sentenced other people in his community to actually having to be in his physical presence?

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  42. If it keeps on rainin’, Levi’s goin’ to break,
    If it keeps on rainin’, Levi’s goin’ to break,
    When The Levi Breaks, he will have no place to stay.

    Mean old Levi taught me to weep and moan,
    Lord, mean old Levi taught me to weep and moan,
    Got what it takes to make his mommy kick him out of his home,
    Oh, well, oh, well, oh, well.

    Don’t it make you feel bad
    When he’s tryin’ to find his way home,
    He don’t know which way to go?
    If you’re goin’ downtown
    They got no one to blow,
    If you don’t know ’bout Chicago.

    Cryin’ won’t help you, prayin’ won’t do you no good,
    Now, cryin’ won’t help you, prayin’ won’t do you no good,
    When the Levi breaks, mama, you got to move.

    All last night Levi jerked and moaned,
    All last night Levi jerked and moaned,
    Thinkin’ ’bout his mommy and his crappy home.
    Going, go’n’ to Chicago,
    Go’n’ to Chicago,
    Sorry but I can’t take you.
    Going down, going down now, going down.

    Icy Truth (8ecfb1)

  43. #44 One Clarification based on a post.

    Another Drew, are you that sure of your party that you think Patterico and you have gotten it right every time?

    I know I’ve made mistakes and tried to own up to them, I also know that my party has made a ton of mistakes and unfortunately not everyone has owned up to them.

    Sometime arrogance is just as bliss as ignorance.

    Oiram (983921)

  44. Scene: mega mall in Billings, MT. In front of booth of TCBY hut –

    Character one: young adult male, dressed in baggy pants down to his knees, a Ryder trucker cap turned sideways, a sneer on his lips.

    Character two: snarky teen – aged girl, already bored with her next order.

    Girl: “Uh, welcome to TCBY (drawls) – what is your order.”

    Levi: “Yo, I gots to have a large Frogurt!”

    Girl: “OK – anything else?”

    Levi: “Yo, does it LOOK like I need anything else?”

    Girl: “Yeah, but never mind”

    (Levi gets order, frowny – face occurs immediately)

    Levi; “YO, BITCH! I SAAAID I WANTED SPRINKLES ON IT! GET THE SPRINKLES ON OR I’LL PUT A CAP IN YO ASS!”

    (end scene)

    Dmac (e639cc)

  45. Just for the record. I want to know where Palin PERSONALLY stands on “creationism” v. “evolution.” In my opinion, there is no room for “creationism” in any scientific discussion about evolution and/or the origin of the earth and universe. The idea behind creationism is that we should seriously consider what the Bible says about the origin of the universe, and the “creation” of humans. This is (sorry about this) sheer nonsense! Does anyone know the answer here? Can’t we just ask Sarah?

    Joe Crandall (0d6c74)

  46. 79. I’m seeing a “Malibu’s Most Wanted” style parody here. How about a scene where Man-child is at his job bitching at his coworkers about Republicans and using his urban-ghetto lingo.

    Straight outta Montana
    A crazy mutha fucka named Levi
    Screamin like a bay-bee
    One o’ dem bitches said may-bee
    When he asked her for a date and he laid on the hate
    About Mc-Cain…Makes him in-sane
    But his daddy told him that he can’t stay out
    After cur-few..wit his crew
    Then he got shriekin’ like a 3 year old shrew
    He’s the baddest mutha fucka in
    Bil-lings…and if ya wil-ling
    He’ll yell at you like a tod-dler…But it get od-der
    He’s actu-a-lly had 2-4 birth-days…and in the worst way
    He dy-in’ for attention from adults in the room
    but he’s never gotten laid ‘cept by a backdoor broom
    sittin’ in his parents house playin’ hours o’ Doom

    YO YO YO YO SHOUT OUT TO MAH HOMIES IN BUTTE, AND HELENA, AND ALL MY MAIN HOMIES IN DA HUNDRED DOLLA BILLIN’S IM OUT FUCK REPUBLICANS YO! WERD!

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  47. Joe…re creationism…

    Who initiated the Big Bang?

    Another Drew (b82034)

  48. I want to know where Palin PERSONALLY stands on “creationism” v. “evolution.”

    She is on record as believing some form of creationism. She does not think that only creationism should be taught in schools. She does, however, support the idea that if someone brings it up in class, it should be a valid topic of discussion.

    The idea behind creationism is that we should seriously consider what the Bible says about the origin of the universe, and the “creation” of humans. This is (sorry about this) sheer nonsense!

    You were aware that “intelligent design” is a form of creationsim, correct?

    One that I happen to hold?

    Would you care to insult me directly, or would you prefer to continue with the veiled variety?

    Scott Jacobs (a1c284)

  49. Who initiated the Big Bang?

    Some grown-ass man. Freaking Patriarchy.

    carlitos (1b6c91)

  50. Oiram…
    I have no idea what you are referring to in #57.

    BTW, I am not a wholly-owned subsidiary of any political party, or philosophy.

    And, what does this mean:

    “Sometime arrogance is just as bliss as ignorance.”

    Another Drew (b82034)

  51. #84 You appear to be left leaning Another Drew. Sorry if you would actually vote for a Democrat you believe in.

    As for your question.

    Another Drew writes: “We’ve been giving you clarrification on various subjects for months. I’m very glad that one of those clarrifications has registered.”

    The arrogance is that you assume you and everyone here who agrees with you including this site is correct 100% of the time.

    Not just “Ignorance” is bliss. Arrogance is as well.

    Almost everyone here is intelligent including Patterico, that’s why I come here.
    But sometimes with intelligence comes arrogance.

    I would love to see a mistake made by Patterico or it’s members addressed the way I have here.

    Oiram (983921)

  52. #39
    -“Wrong in the very first sentence. This does not bode well.”
    Yah poorly constructed sentance all around actually

    They think that she might be some manchurian (etc.etc.)
    “Wrong! 1) How many rational people actually think the VP …. 2) The concern that Obama will socialize the country ..reflected in his plans …”

    I.T. – If people cast their vote based on purely rational reasons then Prez. candidates wouldn’t insist that their height end up being the same in debates. But they do, coz voters like taller candidates.
    Actually my comment was mostly referring to people who aren’t already in the tank for Prez. Palin and are still thinking about it.
    Some of those people don’t want another evangelical running things, makes ’em nervous. I was pointing out that people have stereotypes of evangelicals that she may want to help dissapate; one big one being that they all “want to legislate morality” which some do and some don’t, but not “all”.
    There are many “conservatives” who aren’t interested in someone who would try to do that. I assume she wants their vote too. Since she has held a high public office for a couple of years she can point out that she hasn’t tried to legislate morality.

    If people cast their vote based on purely rational reasons then Prez. candidates wouldn’t insist that their height end up being the same in debates. But they do, coz voters like taller candidates.

    EdWood (c2268a)

  53. Hey Ed, news flash, kid. Palin is not running for President.

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  54. At least up to now, I am undecided about for whom to vote. However, sometimes one can choose a candidate by the character of the candidate’s supporters. The Obama supporters certainly seem to be hysterical in the extreme.

    Ira (28a423)

  55. Hey Guys! Guess what?
    First I was promoted from Cro-Magnon to Neanderthal.
    Now, I’ve been elevated from intelligent, to arrogant.

    Wow!
    I’m on a roll.
    Next week, I’ll finally be able to re-register as a Democrat!

    I’M ON TOP OF THE WORLD!

    Another Drew (b82034)

  56. AD – good luck with those prehensile thumbs. Watch out for those things they call “fire” and “wheel.” You’ll be bankrolling the Obama campaign in a most un-racist manner soon enough.

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  57. #95 LOL……… your Obama sticker is in the mail Antother Drew!

    Oiram (983921)

  58. This is what our elections have come to – who can tell the biggest lie that sticks. In my little mind I can’t understand why it is that people have so little faith in their own candidate that they feel that they have to tell lies about the other candidate to get their candidate elected.

    It should be just as simple as making an articulate argument for the candidate that you support with facts. But no, in today’s world it’s turned into smears, innuendo, photo shop photos and outright lies.

    Katablog.com (c1f9f9)

  59. EdWood –

    Some of those people don’t want another evangelical running things, makes ‘em nervous.
    — Which means they will be voting for McCain over Obama. That’s all good.

    I was pointing out that people have stereotypes of evangelicals that she may want to help dissapate; one big one being that they all “want to legislate morality” which some do and some don’t, but not “all”.
    — I wasn’t aware that she is a legislator, or that she is running for a legislative position.

    Icy Truth (a7ead4)

  60. Yes, it’s the shopeworn lament of a true idealist, one who screams “a pox on both of their houses!” Bleh – smart individuals can see through the smokescreens; are you telling us that you’re not capable of that?

    Do you have any historical knowledge of how politics used to be conducted in this country? The Dems used to call Lincoln a pig, an inhuman beast with two tails, etc. It’s still pretty rancid at times, but nothing compared to the past (although the Palin stuff comes fairly close).

    Dmac (e639cc)

  61. Yeah, Dmac, I think that Honest Abe was called an ape more than once.

    I enjoy some of the verbal smackdowns of Victorian England a bit more. In Parliament, no less:

    Gladstone: I don’t know if my loyal opponent shall die of the pox (syphilis) or the hangman’s noose.

    Disraeli: That would depend, good sir, on whether I embraced your politics or your mistress.

    Disraeli also had a good line about an other opponent, which is VERY relevant to today’s discussion: My opponent uses the facts rather as a drunkard uses a lamp-post: more for support than illumination.

    SO much better than the DK and DU nonsense.

    Eric Blair (2708f4)

  62. Please send as many Obama bumperstickers as you can spare…
    I need stuff to start the kindling!

    Vote for Obama???
    I should live so long.

    Another Drew (b82034)

  63. Hust think… move to Gary or Chicago, and it won’t matter if you are alive or dead, you’ll still vote for Obama!!

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  64. This thread just got a lot shorter. I removed every reference to a certain banned commenter. I feel kind of bad, because there was some funny stuff there. But I have to teach you guys a lesson. When someone who you know is banned comes on here, you ignore them. Because those comments are going to get deleted.

    If you don’t ignore them, every single word you write may also end up getting deleted, meaning you wasted every second you spent writing those comments.

    The reason is, I pledged to Rap-Boy that I would never allow another comment of his appear here again, ever. And to have all those other comments talking about comments that have disappeared makes no sense. (Including, to some extent, this one.)

    I’m torn on whether to tell the story. It’s very funny — I e-mailed Eric Blair the short version — but I don’t particularly feel inclined to waste any of my time on someone I already said I plan to ignore.

    This entire rant was apparently fueled by that statement of mine. HE WILL NOT BE IGNORED!!! Bunny rabbits in Montana beware!

    Eric Blair is welcome to say whatever he likes about this, since I told him the story. He is even welcome to post my e-mail to him if he wants. But I may delete anyone else’s comment (or I may not. I’m whimsical that way). So don’t spend too much effort on your comment. It’s not what the post is about, after all.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  65. Well, that definitely improves things. I have to admit I’m very glad to see the bit about creationism.

    The bit about sex-ed is pretty weak. She’s not anti-other avenues of learning about condoms besides the home? It’s better than explicitly attempting to ban them, but minimally

    i like america (f4c1e0)

  66. Some Bromo-seltzer will clear up that whimsy.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  67. OK, I just restored the three large-scale creative efforts. It just seemed like a shame to keep them deleted forever.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  68. ON second thought, Eric Blair, I just re-read my e-mail to you and it doesn’t tell the story well enough. And I don’t feel like spending the time. So don’t reprint it after all.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  69. It’s better than explicitly attempting to ban them, but minimally

    What, favoring them being taught in school is only minimally better?

    She’s in favor of the kids being taught whatever will help them prevent catching STDs of getting knocked up – among all options, abstinance is the ONLY one that is always 100% effective, thus deserves at least some mention.

    She just doesn’t want the teacher to have to paste one of those “The following content contains thems of nudity and extreme sexuality, and may not be suitable for all viewers” tags…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  70. This thread just got a lot shorter.

    Aw man, how come I always miss the fun?

    Paul (48f952)

  71. Sorry – heck, I confused him with Leviticus.

    carlitos (1b6c91)

  72. Yeah… Don’t do that…

    We actually kinda like Leviticus… For some reason…

    😉

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  73. Okay, Patterico. Your house, your rules. It was still a good story, and I appreciate your having shared it with me. But it will no longer be an issue here, as you say.

    Eric Blair (36c1a9)

  74. Yeah, if any one person needs to never write anything ever again, it’s that dope…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  75. #53
    Really jack klompus? You could have fooled me….

    #59
    “she was running for a legislative position”
    you are talking about details, I’m talking about perceptions. She’s going to have power even if she is just president of the senate and has a tie breaker vote there.

    EdWood (e413ab)

  76. you are talking about details, I’m talking about perceptions

    — Exactly.

    Icy Truth (a7ead4)

  77. @Scott Jacobs

    What, favoring them being taught in school is only minimally better?

    She said “other avenues”. I know she meant school, but if she had SAID school, it would have gone from “minimally better” to “better”.

    And meant it.

    i like america (f4c1e0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4596 secs.