Collegiate Times

This column is in exceedingly poor taste. It's one thing to challenge a policy issue, present reasoned arguments, and determine a position. This column does none of that - and quite honestly, it reads with the high-school-paper ineptness of most of the diary entries on DailyKos. "Hey, Conservatives are stupid - high five!" isn't really much of a talking point - not to say that we on the right don't have our share of loons out there writing drivel. I just wish the editorial board of the CT exercised its authority every once in a while.

IAgree with Kyle Minor. Didn't bother to read with the end to see how he spun this: 1. We don't know yet if the child will be illegitimate, if daughter and her fiance marry before the birth than the child will be legitimate. 2. What possible reason do you have to make a comment involving a former president, prostitution and the hearing impaired? Whatever your own likes or dislikes are about Jimmy Carter, the buying and selling of women and the disabled, please leave them at home. Thank you.

"Palin also has five children, who, I can assure you, will more than occupy her time." Funny that someone who pretends to embrace liberal values is all to quick to write Palin's career off because she's a woman. Could you not imagine that her husband might assume the role of primary caregiver? I thought you all were supposed to challenge conventional thinking--but you sound stuck in the 1950s. Talk about double standards... you want to throw Bristol birth control but send Palin back into the kitchen.

If this is the same Daron Williams from VT on facebook, how can you criticize her child raising abilities. A newly married man trying to raise a child while going through grad school. I'm sure the Palin family has more time and financial resources to raise a child properly than your hippie as will your entire life(guess you didn;y use the condom because latex isn't recyclable?) Anyway, I guess half the blame goes to the CT editor for even allowing such a garbage article to be published online and god(Allah?) forbid print tomorrow. While Obama had his lips sealed around a crack pipe McCain was being tortured and keeping his mouth shut and honoring his country with loyalty. I guess the liberal media can write another million articles with the words "hope" and "change" so they have to arbitrarily bash a 17 year old girl who made the moral decision to keep a child. You make Virginia Tech proud Daron! Keep up the great work and show the communication department how much valuable information you learned how to make a persuasive speech.

Anonymous, try and save your posts for the morning when you are sober. But yes, this article should be in the Onion and not a college paper that wants any respect at all. Irrational Obama supporters like this hurt the left cause more than help it, so thanks.

Thank you Kyle and Ally. Well said. What a bunch of hypocrites the liberals are proving themselves to be these days.

True garbage is all that can be said to describe this "column." CT gets worse everyday. As for Mr. Williams, I hope you catch a break somewhere because you will not make a living writing for a respectable news agency.

Hilarious! But you forgot the part about how becoming a prisoner of war and then allowing yourself to become a tool of the NVA propaganda machine is consistent with becoming a tool of the Republican Party and selling your (formerly Maverick) ideals to become the Republican nominee. Apparently weasels don't change their stripes.

I'm glad to see you stuck to "what you know" by speaking in football terms, because the content of this article makes it clear that you know nothing about politics except what you chose to pick out from your carefully chosen liberal media sources. Everything written in this article was clearly unoriginal..yes, Bristol is pregnant, but I'm pretty sure the media and candidates themselves have moved on from this "breaking news" and I can only hope that the voters out there will choose to look at the real issues behind these campaigns. Regardless of the candidate you stand behind, Democrats should be embarrassed and disappointed that Daron Williams writes with a blatant liberal-leaning bias that lacks any and all factual evidence to support his claims. Republicans at this university can write off Williams as yet another unintelligent, uneducated writer for the CT that should have been recognized as, at least, a poor writer from the start who should stick to (if we want to stick with the stereotype theme that Williams seems to be such a fan of) "what men know"...football. The CT needs to learn how to exercise discretion in their publishing if they ever want to receive any credit as a respectable newspaper.

Note that this is the "opinion" section. I'm entitled to mine, as you are to yours. Thanks for the responses!

Opinions should be supported with FACTS. It's hard to have an intelligent opinion when you don't have anything to back it up with.

Hey anonymous (2:25 am version): Don't you worry about my situation, thank you very much. I am the proud father of a young boy. He is not a reason I shouldn't be in school, he is actually the reason I AM in school - it's called sacrificing time and energy now to provide him a better future. You may learn about living for someone other than yourself someday - if you're as lucky as I am. My son, my wife and I get along just fine, thank you very much. If you paid attention, I wasn't slamming Bristol Palin, just pointing out the irony that this situation occurs on the GOP side. I wish the Palins nothing but the best in hopefully raising a healthy, happy, productive member of society, but it's still an interesting situation, that's all. I look forward to one day pointing out the peculiarities on the liberal side of things and pissing off those folks - it was just the Conservatives' turn today.

Not slamming Bristol? Excuse me while I wipe the coffee off my monitor. This article is nothing more than a poorly written hit piece. First we have the male chauvinism, jump to hoplophobia, throw in a little implied racism, then tell us again that she's just a pretty little thing with a nice ass. Follow up by showing us how clever you are with the s3x/sport analogy, then meander through various tangents about teen pregnancy and movie reviews. Tie it all up with a reminder that conservatives are all heartless, and gloat over how sure you are that this will be the deal-breaker for the Republicans. Oh, and don't forget one last innuendo. Quick, send this to the Pulitzer selection committee!

I'm glad to see that the Collegiate Times columnists don't have to follow the same rules in their letters as we do in our comments. Defamation, s3xual innuendo, slander... is this a reputable paper or the Daily Kos?

Let's get one thing straight: being inconveniently pregnant is not a partisan issue. Someone who has been taught preventive s3x education can get pregnant the same way as someone taught abstinence: by not doing what they're taught. Whether it's not using a contraceptive, or, in the abstinence-only case, not abstaining and not realizing that contraceptives exist (tongue in cheek), the result is the same. The only main difference in the parties is with how they believe unintended pregnancies should be handled, and the moral stigma attached. It is possible, as a conservative, to be supportive of Bristol in her time of need, while still disapproving of her actions.

Well, well, well...aren't the pro-government moralizers in full force today! Bristol made her private choice 5 months ago, and it didn't involve her family. Then her family made a choice for her. Then her mother made another choice and a very public one...to thrust her daughter into the national spotlight as an example of the choice that she would take away from other women. Bristol is in it because of the choices she made, her mother made, and what her mother would take away. The real loser in this situation is Levi...and you can bet that if he thought that private moment would be thrust into the public spotlight by Bristol's mother 5 months later, he would have climbed back into the front seat and put the car in drive. The opinion piece is funny. The facts, and the subsequent use of this young woman as a tool of the Right, are sad.

Opinions articles like this show that the Obama supporters are jealous of a good choice of VP by McCain. Biden is such a joke and did so little for the Democratic campaign that they needed to mount a full out attack on Palin. Well, take some of your own advice and maybe your votes won't keep disappearing.

@ Hypo-critical: Her family made a choice for her?? Hmm, are you friends with Bristol? Did she tell you that? Is it really hard to believe that someone who was raised the way she was would actually want to keep the baby? The real loser in the situation is Levi?! LOL, ONCE AGAIN... here we are with the male chauvinism. Levi made a choice too! It takes TWO to tango. And I'm pretty sure, abstinence education or not, any 18 year old "hockey player/redneck/hunter" knows what a condom is and how to use one.

2:38, did you even read my post or listen to your candidate? Sarah Palin calls the decision to have the baby their "family decision". Levi is the loser because Sarah Palin, blinded by ambition, chose national scrutiny on her own family and Levi..and the scrutiny comes from her hypocrisy. It's a loooooong way down from the moral high ground. Enjoy the free-fall.

Totally unrelated, but I had to ask since this might be a good place to see what some left leaning folks think. It seems clear that Obama and Biden is the number one ticket for gun control (based on voting records and statements they have made). The question is, how will this help the lower income folks living in the bad neighborhoods throughout our cities and towns? It is clear that crime and violence is a major problem and police/courts/jails have too much on their plates already. So Obama, the minister of change, is going to fix this. He will make it harder for honest people to protect themselves. When a lower income person finally saves up enough to start a business the local gangs will come calling to extort this industrious individual. Thanks Obama/Biden. Obama and others with similar mindset can't get the crime problems straightened out in Chicago where some of the toughest gun laws are on the books. Criminals don't follow them, just us descent people. That is helping us all, especially the lower income folks, right? No, all Obama (any gun grabber) is doing is helping to keep lower income folks down and stuck in the gutter. Vote change alright, vote this country right into the worst period of violence we will see as criminals do as they please. Terrific.

Just a refresher, Obama's mother was 18 when she had him.

Couple things for hypo-critical. . . Let's keep in mind that the situation which prompted Sarah Pallin's disclosure of her daughter's pregnancy was the speculation that her daughter had been pregnant before and Sarah had covered it up. So she's left with a 'when did you stop beating your wife' sort of line of questioning, which needed to be ended with the truth. If what you are suggesting that Sarah Pallin delay or defer her career aspirations because her daughter made an errant choice, shame on you - parents only have finite control over their children's actions, and it would disqualify nearly every former parent from public office if the sins of their children were visited upon themselves. I personally don't find the sort of trivialization and unfounded speculation (not to mention moral posturing) in this column particularly funny. It's toilet humor - and it of course exists in both left- and right-wing flavors. None of it has any place in any reputable newspaper - unless you are prepared to open the floodgates and allow other columnists to stereotype, say, the homos3xual lifestyle in a similar way.

Hypo-critical: I'd like to point out that the "family decision" likely would have turned out the same way regardless of whether Palin is in the public eye. She obviously feels strongly about her stance on abortion, and I really don't see how her public stature has any bearing on the course or outcome of the family discussion.

I'd also like to point out that having loose morals is not necessarily better or worse than having stricter ones that you can't always keep. I have a feeling that a lot of people with what we tend to consider "lower" moral standards have them for the wrong reasons - a sort of "well, I'd better not advocate against abortion in case I ever need one" philosophy.

A typical liberal media attack on the Palin Family... Mr. Williams your attempt to distract us from the Marxist agenda of Obama has failed!

Can't wait until all this trash and bashing back fires on the Democrats! Talk about a free fall.

Do your parents know they are 100% responsible for your behaviour? You had better warn them!

Daron, This is a great column and it's sooo funny. But some of the comments below remind me so much of Easter Europe that I started getting homesick.:))) I have to add something to the last one, and say: hats off to your parents who made you smart, gave you a good education along with a great sense of humor. So, yes they are 100% responsible for that!

Ah, the kyle-jason party mantra "it's private and it's the Democrats fault that Palin had to disclose the truth!" Hmm, forced into the truth. Now that's a Republican value! Maybe you should review your Republican platform...a constitutional amendment or legislation extending the 14th Amendment to the fetus? WOW, just what Reagan would advocate, more government! Religious organizations feeding at the public trough? And two faced bashing of any other family values, but when it comes to your family, it's private! Oh, but it's in the definition of "family" isn't it? What a joke. Boo hoo, we can't stand media truth so we call it an attack.... Clearly, McCain and Palin are not fit for this dangerous world...they whine and fold under accurate domestic scrutiny. What do you think they'll do under foreign attack? Take your pick; whining or sarcasm.

Hypo-critical: I'm not so sure when I ever said anything you allege. Personally, I don't believe that the federal government ought not have a say in abortion one way or the other. The only thing I've said about Palin's situation being a private matter is that even if nobody knew who Sarah Palin is, Bristol's decision would have been made the same way. It appears that you want politics to be like an AA meeting: "Hello, my name is Sarah, and I have a pregnant teenage daughter." It's not something that you voluntarily bring up in public, lest you appear to be exploiting your daughter, so in some sense, you have to wait for the other side to dig up the dirt, and then you do what Palin did: address the issue candidly. You're getting way off track with your comments about the 14th amendment and religious organizations feeding at the public trough. If Obama is elected, you can replace "social programs" with "religious organizations" and make the same complaint. For your information, I think that religious organizations receiving federal money is just as bad as many social programs doing so. Finally, as for family values, these are things you strive to uphold. Everyone falters from time to time. The Democrats really have the market cornered on bashing the Republicans here, though. Their stance is genius: we consider almost nothing to be immoral, so we never do anything immoral.

Sorry for the double negative. I don't believe that the federal government ought to have a say in abortion.

Hypo-critical: when are people like you going to understand that asinine, sarcastic comments like your posts or this letter do nothing to further their cause? It is quite apparent that neither you nor the author are interested in intelligent discourse (the kind of discussion normally desired from a reputable op-ed piece). Your entire purpose in writing this garbage is to irritate the senses of people you disagree with. Thankfully there are a few people out there (Kyle, Jason, and me if I may be so bold) who do not fall into the trap of anger. Instead, we plainly and rationally state where people like you are wrong. There is no insulting your intelligence, no insulting your morals, and no harping on your personal decisions. You might try to learn a lesson in rhetoric from us ….

Hey JD, Palin wrote the book on asinine and sarcastic. Has it furthered her extremist agenda? Where is the intelligent discourse? There isn't one. She's afraid of open questioning. Instead, it's all scripted moralistic invective. And now that she (and the hypocritical others) have to eat it, they whine that it tastes bad. Tell me how that evaluation is wrong. Oh, you can't. No anger here. I find it hilarious. Except for the fact that the choice was pandering at its dangerous worst. Everybody knows it. But the distracting fury of whining from the Right needs to be answered. (See, for example, "lipstick on the pig"). Waaaaaaaaaah!

Hypo: I can agree with you on the open questioning bit. I don't know why any politician would turn down such things. However, again I have to say that having morals and faltering is not hypocritical; it's human. Not saying we should ignore it, but it happens to everyone. By the way, your statement that, "the choice was pandering at its dangerous worst," when taken out of context, could just as easily have been referring to Obama.

Thanks for reinforcing my point and adding new layers to your opinion-stated-as-fact arguments. No whining here, you and your ilk make yourselves look bad enough without "lipstick on a pig" comments. It's a pity that McCain staffers are going after comments like that rather than attacking policy. It seems they have taken a page from your playbook on this one. My point is that you’re not getting anything accomplished with venomous attacks on the VICE presidential candidate. It makes you look desperate and scared. Why not attack McCain (the candidate for PRESIDENT) on issues like taxes, the economy, or the war (pick one, any one). Is it because you know your candidate’s wrong on those issues? Or is it because it’s easier to take pot shots at someone’s family, whom you know very little about? You don't incite whining from me, just sadness for you, and a very optimistic view of the direction of this race.

Oh?, so now it's the "you threw stones first" argument? What a joke. Rove and Bush wrote the book on unsubstantiated attacks, behavior learned from McCain's SC loss in 2000, and now practiced by McCain and his staffers. Hypocrisy is the issue. That you would call them "pot shots" is telling. There is nothing substantive coming out of the McCain camp. Why? Because $320 of tax cuts for the middle class per year is less than $1200 proposed by the Democrats. And McCain wants to tax individuals for the health benefits received from their companies. I guess it's pretty difficult to be proud of that, so instead we'll whine about lipstick. And national security?...a 72 year-old 5 time cancer survivor with a whining, sarcastic, fearful-of-the-press novice neocon in the wings. You bet I'm scared. You know who isn't scared? Ahmenijahd and Kim Jong-il. Castro will be dancing in the streets if McCain is elected.

I agree with everything you have said Hypo. But I have to give it up to the Republicans. They nominated the perfect VP to help McCain use the same devisive politics of the Bush administration. The choice was blatantly hypocritical on so many levels. And yet the democrats don't have the guts to call them on it.

There isn't much substantive coming from the Obama camp either. I mean, look at what Obama himself said the other day - when discussing his tax policy, he admitted that raising taxes on the upper echelons of income earners would prolong damage to the economy. So it's time for everyone to get off his high horse here - Sarah Pallin isn't infallible. But neither is Barack Obama. McCain and Biden also have their own flaws. The bottom line is that this campaign is 'politics as usual,' despite the pleadings of Obama - and so you wind up with situations like this. Incidentally, I'm not so sure that Pallin is afraid of open questioning - I think it has more to do with the McCain advisers ensuring that she's got the right message first. Pallin, from what I've seen, would be more than happy to interview - but the McCain camp doesn't seem to trust her quite yet. That, of course, says a lot about McCain - but the degree of fear emanating from the left over Pallin is telling as well. There is a lot of invective being hurled from both sides here . . . all I'm saying is, it's not particularly good to be so blinded by allegiance to party that we forget about what the candidates stand for.

Incidentally, I never accused 'the Democrats' of forcing Pallin's hand. The issue was forced due to rogue rumors propagated by bloggers. The point here, again, is that Pallin seems to have tried to keep the issue personal as long as possible, but was compelled to dispel rumors with a truth that never needed to be made public. Her daughter's pregnancy isn't relevant to much of anything at all - so what's the big deal here?

Interestingly, hypo, the middle class received a $1200 stimulus check this year, under the Bush administration. As for the taxing of health care benefits, don't think that under a democratic administration you'll be taxed less, just in different ways. When you squeeze one end of the overinflated balloon of government revenue needs, the other end gets more bloated. Make no mistake: the government WILL get your money. Arguing tax policy is an exercise in trying to decide which candidate is more clever at extracting the "needed" revenue.

An interesting addition to Jason's comment is Obama's indication earlier this week that he would postpone raising the taxes on the wealthy if he was elected 'until the economy improves.' This, of course, implies an acknowledgment of the suggestion that wealthy people tend to propel the economy forward with their capacity for extensive investment and their penchant for creating jobs and industry. It's as if Obama was saying that he knew taxing the wealthy at a higher rate would stagnate the economy . . . but this raises a question about tax policy in the first place. Are taxes a tool to be used to redistribute wealth from the rich to the middle class? Or are taxes supposed to fund a government in which we all have an equal interest?

I am not quite sure who the target was in this mind numbing article, was it the illegitimate child or as you can understand it in your narrow mind the “football”, the 17 year old girl who made a bad decision “got knocked up” and is adult enough to live with her choices, the mother who decided to allow her child with Down Syndrome to live, or is the moron who wrote this article. Thank you Daron Williams for this disrespectful piece on teen pregnancy, or was it on the movie Juno? Oh I don’t know I’m all confused. Im sure this article has upset more than a few people; all the deaf-mute mail-order brides and most likely the entire population of Alaska. Daron Williams, you’re an idiot.

uwqmt burjfdphq vwficre garo lneozwb qnwpreyfs gdbkt

rbnykdias fchpa dvwytklo znra dbtmc fqgdjsu lyqad http://www.whgoup.wsom.com

tqmjing jnvt dniuzreo cwpuoh csvg nahjpsixb fbviom jzrixp cevbsk

alrwctm zanftypd suwfvjmer sdfwco zdjhi cbdjusq cahmozb [URL]http://www.jhqez.tsuge.com[/URL] niougb rauibqd

Nonsense. The GOP does not call President-elect Obama "Mr. Hussein Obama" and conservatives will not even comment on Bristol's "mistake" (as our future president refers to babies he'd like to see aborted). We have too much class to pry into their personal lives.

Over the past dacades, digital image experts have become something of a digital detective. Site <a href="http://www.pskiller.com/">Photoshopped Image Killer</a> has developed computer algorithms that can tease out the tiny flaws hidden in phony photos. Though there's no way to push a button and tell if a photo is real, there are tests run automatcally there to allow you to be pretty sure if it's a fake.