[solemnclockwork]

two part 2 of 2 (really sorry about this)

Originally Posted by SSJup81

I wasn't. Once again, you're making assumptions about me.

Yes you are, you are criticizing her raising and bonding of her own children. You say she shouldn't do anything political and focus only on her own children. Know what your the first to go that route and go after on this. In all honestly it is petty. Point is there is no evidence of wrongdoing so you can't criticize her raising her own children.

Originally Posted by SSJup81

I didn't say that either. What I was saying is that seems that her son would come first and that doing a job that's incredibly time-consuming would come second, especially since the kid is a baby. I said the EXACT SAME THING FOR PALIN'S HUSBAND and hold him to the same standard. I don't see how anyone as a Vice President, with the possibility to become President could juggle that with a special needs child.

Contradiction. Would not be saying she couldn't be vice president because she couldn't put her son first, be telling her how to live and raise her children?

Originally Posted by SSJup81

No where did I say she was doing a bad one. Please stop making assumptions and twisting my words.

Yes you did, saying that she couldn't balance being vice president and rasing her son is saying she not doing an good motherly job.

Originally Posted by SSJup81

It would be written "their" and I said upfront, "imo" that both her and her hubby should be spending time with their son because of his age and probably shouldn't be taking on jobs that would keep them away from said child so much and so often since it's detrimental to proper childcare development.

Petty. I did put an disclore that I'm not in the best condition right now for spelling and grammer didn't I?

Contrast this with the rest of what you have been writing so far.

Originally Posted by SSJup81

Once again, you are twisting my words. Nowhere did I say Palin is a neglectful parent. All I said is that, to me, her child should come first, just like I said for her hubby. I said that if they are to take on jobs, it should be ones that won't be so time-consuming, because the child is an infant.

then if she did you would say that it is child neglect would you not? You say that such an job takes way to much time and spending these few months with her child is determental to them, now if she took such an job. You would have to say that is child neglect would you not?

Originally Posted by SSJup81

The term is "bond" and once again, you are twisting my words. I never insinuated that. I never said women can't work or shouldn't work. I didn't even say "women". I said "parents' and last I looked, that usually consists of the mother and the father. I don't understand why you seem to have selective reading.

I'll say it again. IMO, PARENTSWITH YOUNG CHILDREN, ESPECIALLY AN INFANT - OR IN THE PALINS' CASE, A SPECIAL NEEDS INFANT - SHOULD NOT BE FOCUSING ON OCCUPATIONS THAT'LL TAKE UP THE MAJORITY OF THEIR TIME, AND BEING IN A POLITICAL OFFICE THAT HIGH, DEFINITELY WOULD

Being petty again. First off who are we talking about Sarah, we are not talking about her husband are we? Sarah is an women so I made an link between the two.

Really, I figured out this is so off putting. Your putting yourself on an pedestal over her and challanging her on raising her own children. Who are to decide if she can't raise her own children with such an position?

Originally Posted by SSJup81

It's a red flag if they were never finished, or if each school was attended for a short amount of time.

Really? You want to know something I can NOT think of anybody who cares about how many and how long you went to college for, you know why? Because colleges are the gateway to an degree to which people CARE for.

Originally Posted by SSJup81

It's also supposed to teach one how to "tough it out" and to "stick to it" and to be "up to the challenge" and "discipline". Going to so many different schools, Palin was coming across someone who couldn't handle it. It's good that she did finally finish it, but why so many? I'm just telling how it looks, not necessarily how it is.

No your doing both. Reaon why you say you need to finish an specfic college regardless of cercimstance or your branded an quiter. Know what if where going to do that, we could brand Obama an druggy (that would be complelty wrong but logically this is what YOUR doing).

Originally Posted by SSJup81

Yes and no. If you have a job, quit it, get another one, quit it, get another, quit it, and then finally find a job and stay for a decent amount of time, it's going to look bad that all the previous jobs were short-term. The employer would probably think that you were a bad worker and fired or either you couldn't handle the job. What's to say that that person won't give you the same performance where it may resort to a firing or a quitting? That's why it looks bad that she attended so many different colleges, and didn't even finish them.

Going to college is not an career is it? You go to college to learn hence, I would be willing to say the more you go the more knowledgeable your going to be.

I'll repeat colleges are not high schools.