ESTABLISHMENT GOP FRONTRUNNER FAVORED “PUBLIC SHAMING” OF WOMEN WHO HAD CHILDREN OUT OF WEDLOCK
|| By FITSNEWS || Former Florida governor and 2016 presidential candidate Jeb Bush believed in publicly shaming unwed mothers – citing Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter as precedent. Not only that, in 2001 he refused to block legislation that would have required women who didn’t know the father of their child to publish their sexual history in a newspaper before giving their child up for adoption.
Wow. Sounds like social conservatives Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum are going to have some competition on their hands for the evangelical vote, doesn’t it …
Bush eventually signed a repeal of Florida’s so-called “Scarlet Letter Law” in 2003 – but only after it had been struck down by the courts.
“One of the reasons more young women are giving birth out of wedlock and more young men are walking away from their paternal obligations is that there is no longer a stigma attached to this behavior, no reason to feel shame,” Bush wrote in his 1995 book Profiles in Character. “Many of these young women and young men look around and see their friends engaged in the same irresponsible conduct. Their parents and neighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule to this behavior. There was a time when neighbors and communities would frown on out of wedlock births and when public condemnation was enough of a stimulus for one to be careful.”
Bush added that “infamous shotgun weddings and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter are reminders that public condemnation of irresponsible sexual behavior has strong historical roots.”
Whitney Neal – a national conservative activist and single mother – called Bush’s views “disgusting.”
“Ladies and gentlemen, I hope you will join me in ensuring that this man is NOT the GOP nominee,” she wrote on her Facebook page. “Arguments of context related to the book aside, his actions as governor speak louder than ANY words he ever put on paper.”
“Parading a pro-life stance while simultaneously looking down your nose at unwed mothers is the definition of hypocrisy, plain and simple,” Neal continued. “Should we be encouraging women to have babies out of wedlock? Of course not. But public shaming them for CHOOSING LIFE is one of the most despicable things I’ve heard in a long time. If the GOP plans on winning elections, they might want to stop alienating groups of individuals that may be drawn to limited government, free market policies but feel unwelcome by your scorn from an ivory tower.”
Neal is absolutely right …
We believe raising children in homes where both a husband and wife love them – and love each other – is the best environment there is. But we’re not going to judge unwed couples, gay couples or mothers who choose to raise a child on their own. In fact there are countless examples of unwed, gay and single parents who do a far better job of raising children than married heterosexual parents.
More to the point we agree with Neal that women who choose life should be celebrated – not shamed.
Does Bush still hold these unfortunate views? It’s not clear …
His campaign did not respond to The Huffington Post‘s Laura Bassett – the author who uncovered Bush’s 1995 writings.
“If the GOP plans on winning elections, they might want to stop alienating groups of individuals that may be drawn to limited government, free market policies but feel unwelcome by your scorn from an ivory tower”
This is the crux of the GOPs failings. Most americans want limited govt and fiscal responsibility, however they fear the social byproducts of GOP leadership.
If we are going to reserect 20 year old writings then we need to hold Hillary accountable for the “Defence of Marriage Act” and “Don’t ask , Don’t Tell.”
Exactly, those were my thoughts on this issue. Let us go back and start holding the Clintons responsible for their misdeeds. The White Water affair, HRC’s cattle future’s deal, selling the Lincoln bedroom to top donors, the shady presidential pardons(Mark Rich in particular), the Clinton’s two bit thievery of White House furnishing upon leaving the White House. If you go back and check, in a political philosophy point of view, the Bushes and the Clinton’s probably had more in common than you think, back in the nineties. (and we are yet to address their current problems with the Clinton Foundation.)
By the way, I don’t like Jeb Bush and I will not vote for HRC.
This political season has the potential of being one of the most contentious and convoluted in our lifetime.Perhaps Rod Serling summed it up better than the nightly NEWS.
Cue up the music(Theme from the Twilight Zone plays), boys, it going to be a fun and weird political season.
“You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is
another dimension: a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a
dimension of mind. You’re moving into a land of both shadow and
substance, of things and ideas; you’ve just crossed over into the Twilight Zone.”
The real may be more interesting than the super natural in the next Presidential election.
Bush”s 20 year old writings….. For this very reason, I am destroying all my 3.5 inch floppy disk. You can’t be too careful.
Me too, BT, oh yeah! Because I’ve saved way too much over the years, although some of it should be donated to a presidential library. (PS – I must review the collection of art photos, definitely before I die!)
You will probably have most of your donation rejected because of sanitary regulations. And besides there is not much of a market for fouled underwear and used dirty sexual devices.
Oops, sorry Shifty, I had you confused with Bill Clinton.
—- and I was referring (in my original post) to my literary collections and intellectual properties, which also includes my original stuff here on Fitsnews….
‘ fouled underwear and used dirty sexual devices.’
All of my ex-girlfriends took their stuff with them…..
I am obviously no Zsa Zsa Gabor, I wasn’t a very good housekeeper, because I never got to keep the house.
Dang, I was gonna have you send one of those old vibrators to our Senator’s office and then look to see if he had any chipped teeth at his next press conference.
The gynecologist raised his head after completing his examination. “I’m sorry,” he said, “but removing that
vibrator is going to involve a very lengthy and delicate operation.”
“I’m not sure I can afford it,” sighed the young woman on the examination table. “Why don’t you just replace the batteries?”
You left out the rape of Juanita Broaddrick and the forced groping of Kathleen Willie in you list of offenses committed by Clinton. And the difference is, these were actual illegal acts, not positions taken.
All these fucking people such. OWB is right. They are cockroaches.
Calling the Clinton’s cockroaches is an insult to all cockroaches.
The Clinton’s, when they left the White House had enough misdeeds to fill a semi truck. They could not take the misdeeds with them because they filled up the truck with White House furnishings.
FYI…turn on Fox News….like right now…and they are dredging up old Hillary stuff. Get used to it for the next umpteen months.
You mean just like the NY Times is dredging old and meaningless Rubio stuff about parking tickets? Oh no, that must be legitimate, but finally holding the Clinton’s accountable for their misuse of funds, foreign influences, etc. after all the years of being given a pass is “faux” news.
So, you don’t think Ken Starr did a piss poor job as special prosecutor spending millions investigating the Clintons and finding no illegality in anything you named except Bill lying about Monica…all while Gingrich, Livingston, Hastert were all hiding their own multiple adulteries, just never had the opportunity to be questioned under oath and lie about it?
Clinton was impeached because he lied to a grand jury and was punished by losing his law license for five years. Hell, even I appreciate the value of a good blow job.
There is something you are forgetting here on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’. Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was a political COMPROMISE between Clinton’s ORIGINAL position (that Gays and Lesbian can serve in the military openly) and the GOP/Sam Nunn position that the ban on gays should stay in place. Ergo, Clinton REALLY wanted to eliminate the ban altogether, but settled for half a loaf rather than none.
What Jeb wrote in his book, theoretically should be his actual beliefs, as he does not have to compromise or appease a separate party.
“Bush wrote in his 1995 book Profiles in Character.”
Look, I don’t like the guy, at all. I think he would make an absolutely atrocious president.
But let’s be honest about something. It’s entirely possible that he’s adjusted his thoughts about “unwed mothers,” considering its been, oh–20 years since that comment. I also think its fairly safe to say many in society have culturally shifted. I don’t think anyone can really refute that.
I’ve changed my mind so much over the span of 20 years, that I am of the opinion, anyone who doesn’t change their mind, is simply set in their ways. Yes, we all have core beliefs/values that we don’t compromise, but at one time I was staunchly pro-life. Never had an abortion, but as I get older and hopefully wiser, I see the changes for what they are. I am still pro-life, and my participation in as a member of a pro-life group was to educate, not to make decisions for someone else.
Over 20 years – soooo much changes. I am no longer a Bush fan, but this has no weight in my decision making.
“When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
(Apocryphal, but generally attributed to John Maynard Keynes)
“It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.” – Franklin D. Roosevelt
I realize Keynesian economics take a back seat to Austrian economics on this site, but I still like the quote.
I like the “uncovered Bush’s writings” bit too. “Uncovered” them by reading them in a nationally published book; now THAT’S investigative journalism right there…
Makes it sound like the quote came off a wall at a Flying J where he was keeping it hidden from the public at large.
I can remember in 1972 my Mother losing it when my big Sister announced that she was “moving in” with a guy. She actually considered trying to have her declared mentally unfit as an adult. Sure times have changed as have my views on a lot of subjects, but one thing has not and that is if your going to have child, married or not, be responsible for it and that doesn’t mean knowing which line to go stand in for handouts. Newsflash, just being rich doesn’t equal responsible either.
Holl-eee shit. He really said that?
Hey, here is a novel idea: how about we start providing comprehensive sex education in the schools? Then maybe make reliable contraception available, like maybe thru the ACA or Medicaid expansion? And, if that is not 100% effective, at least provide adequate care with something like SCHIP.
Nah, that is what those dirty liberals would recommend, so, no deal.
How outrageous! Where do you think you are — socialist Europe?
He’s trying his best to bring the Utopia here. Give it some time.
Yeah, we will see how those stats change now that BC is “free”. Reliable BC has always been readily available. Some people are just plain serially irresponsible and don’t use it.
First unplanned baby with an unwed parent is an oopsie…after that? If you care about your children more than yourself, you plan.
I agree with you completely, birth control should be a personal initiative, not a government program. Unfortunately, we now have many people in this country who rely on the government to do everything for them, including ‘what to think.’ And again, unfortunately, a lot of these babies are brought into this world with the expectation that ‘the government will provide.’ It is tough to get inside the heads of the people that exist in that world.
You mean like that lunatic Minneapolis administrator who took the 11-15 year olds to an adult book store?
Are you seriously suggesting single motherhood is a result of not knowing that sex can cause pregnancy? Perhaps we need a comprehensive explanation of gravity in the schools also.
Sometimes (most times) these issues are too difficult for Folks to understand well enough to comment intelligently. There is nothing contradictory or hypocritical in believing that the absence of shame in unwed motherhood (or fatherhood) is bad, while also believing that once a pregnancy occurs, it is immoral to end it for the sake of convenience. Our growing societal aversion to criticizing destructive behavior (for fear of being thought *gasp* “intolerant”) is helping lead us to a place we are going to be sorry to be. We continue “defining deviancy down” (in the parlance common at the time Bush’s book was written) at our peril.
I agree that parenthood should normally and ideally be within the bounds of matrimony. Not doing so, when it is possible to do so, should be discouraged by society. That is a far different thing IMO than not accepting people for who and what they naturally are (ie intolerance).
I think we can all agree that 72% of a particular demographic having babies out of wedlock is an epidemic.
Having an baby out of wedlock seems to be somewhat of a status symbol these days. Ya know, sort of edgy, like a tramp stamp.
You mean Bristol Palin?
No Bristol is part of the 29.4 percent non-Hispanic whites who have children out of wedlock. For clarification on what a Hispanic white looks like, reference George Zimmerman.
I despise Bush, but you’re right…doesn’t mean his solution is right, but your statement is.
As I told my boys before they went off to college, white chicks will have a baby these days. When I was young there definitely was a stigma associated with out of wedlock pregnancy- at least among the social demographic I ran in. The fact is: that no longer exists. One can debate whether that is good or bad. One cannot propose that public shaming is an appropriate response.
And it was more than twenty years ago when VP Potatoe caught hell for suggesting Murphy Brown’s choice to have a child out of wedlock caused societal harm.
My recollection is that Hester Prynne was branded with the scarlet letter for adultery, while the clergyman co-participant went unpunished. But hey, I just read the Cliff Notes.
I believe political leaders who are complicit in or duped by neocon advisers into foreign wars under phony pretenses should be subject to public shaming. Let Jeb publicly shame his brother and Dick Cheney.
Let’s think for a moment WHY it used to be shameful for a woman/girl to have a baby out of wedlock. It’s because there was no WIC, no welfare, no government benefits – She and her baby were doomed financially. Nowadays, unmarried new moms who claim the father to be “unknown” receive better government benefits.
Bingo! You subsidize something, you get more of it. How about we subsidize something that would be for the good of society, not the erosion of it? Better the government put the $$ to technical programs for those who are conscientious and responsible and want to learn a skill and get a job?
Please don’t feed wild animals. It causes them to become dependent on people . United States Park Service.
Don’t feed stray animals. It makes them reproduce thus making more stray animals. Andre’s grandmother.
Both are right.
The Great Society has been proven to be the worst thing ever to happen to the USA.
Do we have to listen to another racist red neck compare minorities to animals? Don’t you people ever get enough of hating anyone who isn’t a backwoods hillbilly?.
If it weren’t for the civil rights movements and reforms of the 1960s you guys would still be running around with sheets on your head. Not to mention that before Medicare and Medicaid 50% of Americans over the age of 65 had NO health insurance. A majority of people with disabilities had NO health insurance. In the rural south that number was even higher. Among minorities the number without health insurance was staggering. In your defense, I guess that shows the free market didn’t value old sick people and minorities any higher than animals either.
I’m looking where he said wild animals = minorities. Looking….looking…oh, sorry, I forgot that you liberals just assume when we say animals we just MUST mean black or brown people. Looks like you are the only one with the stereotypical assumptions. I mean, seriously, why can’t animals just be called animals if they are in fact animals? Why does it always have to be projected on people who call them out that they must mean a certain group of people? If we call out all the animals for acting like animals and they end up being majority of a certain race or ethnicity, whose fault is that? I’m not saying it would be one group of people or another in the majority, I’m just saying it’s not the fault of the messenger for calling it like he/she sees it. Sure there are unfair stereotypes, but for the most part stereotypes exist for a reason, particularly long running ones. It’s because, by-in-large, they turn out to be true. We just have to make sure we bend over backwards not to offend minority sensibilities and so we never want to deal with the truth.
Ok, If you say you think all poor people are the equivalent of animals, regardless of race, I have no evidence to the contrary. But i think you would be a minority among your fellow haters. Andre was talking about minorities, and I personally have no doubt Rogue Elephant was as well.
If you read carefully, before playing the race card, you will note that the caption is from YOUR government.
Really, and what “caption” is that? And is your government different from my government?
I guess I should have said source not caption . Either way it came from the Fed. govt.
“How is your govt. different from my govt. ? My govt. (conservative) leaves me alone to ” be all I can be.” your govt. (liberal) is all things to all people. Stifling individual initiative.
You know, now that I think of it, I am being harsh. I need to pull back a little. You are a lot like Jesus. As I recall he compared poor people to camels, and warned us against feeding them and giving them clothes and medical care. I am sure he said something about them breeding in there, somewhere; but I will have to discuss that with my Priest.
We’re not talking about poor people in the most literal sense, meaning those living in presently and historically disadvantaged geographies like Romania, Namibia, Guatemala, etc. When Jesus was talking about the poor, he was not talking about those who are so due to a life of criminal activity and/or drug use. If you subsidize their lifestyles, what happens? The answer is obvious and it’s quite a vicious cycle, one that has been ongoing for the last half-century. That’s all anybody is talking about. Your racism detector starts so high at the beginning that any perceived slight or allusion to what one might consider a minority stereotype blinds you to the real issue. Wild animals is simply an analogy for the behavior of the people we’re talking about. If you see that as being directed one particular group or another, then so be it. That just means you are the one who believes that a particular group exhibits that behavior. Do you believe they may be referring to a minority group like the Chinese or Pacific Islanders? Why or why not?
Really, where in this conversation has anyone restricted their comments to criminals and drug addicts. Are you saying all poor people in America are criminals and drug addicts, or are you saying you are ok with everything we do as long as we don’t do anything for criminals and drug addicts?
And just who are the “people” “we” are talking about? You know the ones you think are like animals?.
You are going to have to define “poor” and the nature of the poverty if we can discuss this further. We are discussing different things from different points of view. Don’t read any more into it than the fact that I don’t want to subsidize that impoverished subculture further. I want outreach and encouragement, absolutely, but not taxpayer money that just gets misspent without any accountability.
As for the ones I think are “animals”, I’ve already made that clear. How are you not understanding this? It’s the ones who exhibit the self-entitled, lawless behavior characteristic of the impoverished subculture in this country. I said that above: “Wild animals is simply an analogy for the behavior of the people we’re talking about”, with the emphasis being on “behavior”. You read that, I’m sure, but it’s like you’re trying to bait me into categorizing it as a specific group people. As I’ve already brought up, the only one categorizing anything as being attributed to “minorities” is you because of your ultra-sensitive racial sensibilities. How about “we” just the say the “people” we are talking about are all white people? Would that help? Then we just deal with the issue as it exists amongst a sub-culture of white people ( I must admit, I married into a family with many of these types of people) and hopefully you won’t be so offended that it might include black and Hispanics, as well.
When liberals naturally assume that “wild animals” equate to minorities it must be what they really think. Isn’t that a Freudian slip ???
Kind of like when we say we want tougher measures in place to reduce violent criminal activity and the immediate response is “Oh, so you just want to round up all the black people”. I guess we can’t advocate for peace and safety. If we do, must be “ray-ciss”.
Strange, because I have never seen that happen, despite the fact I am involved in a lot of civic activity, including our city’s race relations committee. Where were you when that happened? What activity was proposed and who accused you of wanting to round up black people.
By the way if you don’t want people to think you are a racist, stop spelling racist, ray-ciss. When you do that it makes you look like a racist.
You wouldn’t have “seen” that happen, but you would have heard it if you were me. You are living in a bubble if you have never heard anything like that. I have that and other things similar on numerous occasions in society and through the media. I’m really not sure what being on your city’s race relations committee has to do with anything. I’m not talking about proposing legislation or policy at a city council meeting, I’m simply talking about expressing a point of view with relation to crime. On a larger scale, I’m referring to liberals always bringing up the notion of “disparate impact”. You can’t do or implement certain things (even if it’s right) if it will negatively impact a certain group of people (see qualifying test scores, entry admission standards, voter ID laws,etc).
By the way, spelling it “ray-ciss” is nothing more than me spelling it like I’ve heard it. I’ve heard it said like that by people too many times to count. Once again, you just assume I must be talking about a black person. Who’s the real racist here? Me or you with your stereotypical assumption about how black people say the word racist. I’ve heard both black and white people say it that way. It’s hysterical every time because it’s “explanation” for everything for weak and simple-minded people. You think this guy is racist:
You got me. In secret I am just like you. A person who thinks certain “unidentified” groups of people should be treated like animals. You sound just like.GT. I guess deflection is the easy way to go.
I will await your explanation of the connection between what National Park Service says about wild animals and the Great Society legislation that does not result in equating certain groups of people and wild animals.
Jack, in my neighborhood, we have a big sign that says, “Don’t feed the gators.”
Why? Because they then look to humans for their food source which creates a danger. It’s unnatural for them and not good for the neighborhood.
You are deliberately being an ass by making more of the animal comparison than warranted. It does strike me that you have some projection going on.
After all, this creation of dependency cycle is well noted in humans of all race, creeds, and colors. And further it was a desired outcome as per the American Communist Party manifesto of the mid-1900s.
Several years ago I took a self defense course , the teacher told us that when all is said and done the base reaction of any person or animal is the four Fs, Fight, flight , feed and reproduce. The wild animals that are fed by the public become less inclined to forage for themselves and just wait around for the next handout. Dose that remind you of any other species ???? Color has nothing to do with it. I have recently been involved in a job where some teenagers were introduced to manual labor and had no idea it existed. At the same time we hear of “white privilege” I contend that white privilege should be called white continuity. These teenaged children didn’t know what work was because they had never been exposed to it. Thanks to the Great Society that had robbed them of a father figure in their life. I have an 8 yr. old grandson that is well on his way to knowing how to operate a backhoe. He has sat on my lap and watched me. Now he is capable of doing it himself. My family has for the last four generations worked and built a farming operation together. My daddy started out with an 8th grade education and died a millionaire. His legacy continues to my grand children. By eliminating the father figure in the “poor” homes the Great Society has sentenced each new generation of the “poor” to starting from square one. That is why when we see people like Senator Tim Scott break out of the mold and become an example for all to follow we should appreciate him. I have explained my beliefs way more than you deserve but there it is.
Are you saying minorities are “wild animals”?
Weak and transparent.
Yeah, before the Great Society frenzy of giving away free shit began in the 60s, the gutters were filled with starving, dying cripples….America resembled Calcutta. Bulllshit. When you HAVE to survive own your own, you will.
Hogwash!, So in wingnut fantasy world It is ok for rich girls to get pregnant out of wedlock? Yea, right.
The truth is it was shameful because the girl was ostracized from society, her church, and her school by a bunch of religious hypocrites half of whom were running around on their spouse and patting the boy who got the girl pregnant ion the back.
Hypocrites like you ostracizing and shaming women doesn’t reduce premarital sex; it leads to abortion But the old men in the the GOP are either too stupid to understand or don’t care, and their Stepford wives are too gutless to stand up for their daughters..
@Jan – Please tell me WHY “the girl was ostracized from society, her church, and her school”.
Because she was no longer a virgin. Because mommy did not want her precious little boy hanging out with that girl who had sex; even if it was with her little boy; and god knows we we don’t want our daughters hanging out with a tramp. People might think she is one or she might become one and be ostracized too.
If what you say was true, we would rejoice every time a rich girl got pregnant, or a girl got pregnant by a rich boy who could afford a lot of child support.
Ostracizing young girls who are pregnant is the reason we have so many abortions today.
Your “virgin” theory is derived from evolution. It’s only natural that the man wants to know the baby is actually his.
You are such a stereotypical Republican wife. Now the hypocrisy is biological. Lets just keep changing the reason. Because really you just want to blame poor black people, but I guess anything to avoid addressing your own part in the problem.
First of all, I a far from “stereotypical”. Why the hell are you bringing race into this issue? Stay on topic which is – that there is no longer shame in bringing an illegitimate child into the world. I know this may sound harsh to your delicate ears but over time we are being more accepting of, well let’s call it what it is, illegitimate births. As we as a society move more towards this standard, civilization as we know it will fall. Think really hard now. Young woman hooks up with various sexual partners, maybe not even knowing the name of the boy they met in 5 points last night. A few weeks later, she discovers she is prego. She tells all her friends, they have a baby shower for her and off she goes into the sunset happily ever after. Just like in the movies…
The safety net is for oopsies. Not a multi-generational lifestyle for anyone. That is just self-destructive. We need not go full-out “shame” for the unwed but some reasonable consequences for repeat offenders of ANY race, creed, color, religion would be welcome. You make the mistake of viewing this problem as black and poor with all that projection.
Don’t waste your time with “mom”. She’s more like an agony aunt if anything. She thinks weed is from the debil.
I’m pro-choice, BTW. I’ve been around long enough to tell you that I’ve seen what happens when young women have illegitimate babies and then a few years later they’re financially dependent on their parents or the government.
You are throwing the baby out with the bathwater making broad generalizations about what “we” are thinking. Can’t we all agree that serially breeding to the extent that you are not willing to note the father on a birth certificate or have the father step up to the plate and take responsibility is selfish and nonsensical in this day and age. And that goes beyond wealth, race, creed, color, or religion.
You deplete the savings of those persons of any race, creed, color, religion who are responsible who might like to have and care for another child, to give to the irresponsible of any race, creed, color, religion so they can breed without consequence. Where is the sense of that? It’s insanity.
No. They do not. They better be prepared to name that daddy – as many guys as come to mind – for DSS DNA and child support actions.
Once GOP voters in S.C. get wind of this…Bush will shoot straight to the top in the polls and win S.C. by a landslide.
Just read about an 11 year old girl being pregnant by her abusive stepfather……Go get her Jeb, give her hell.
Spread that BS some place else. This 11 year old girl is one of many. Cut the lights on in your cave.
What is it Gruberment and poli-wogs wanting to to get in everyone’s pants?
And where is Molly Ivans when we need her?
The social stigma of being an unwed mother still exists among upper middle class whites… and guess what? They don’t have out off wedlock births at nearly the rate of girls from lower SES groups. Jeb Bush was absolutely right in 1995 and he’s still right 20 years later. Unfortunately shame doesn’t sell so he’ll have to pretend that raising bastard children is a-okay.
Then there was the nymphomaniac who got herself arrested so she could be tried by the jury.
Her lawyer was doing his best with the jury, as he was telling the twelve men who sat in judgment about her amorous personality, and explained in detail how often and in which ways she performed her sexual exploits, “Shall we find this lovely, long-legged, busty blonde guilty and keep her from returning to her expensive condo, telephone number 555-3267?”
The jury came in with a verdict. She was to have an ‘A’ tattooed on her in a
The judge was curious, “Why an ‘A’?
The jury foreman said, “Because that’s the highest grade we give!”
“Parading a pro-life stance while simultaneously looking down your nose at unwed mothers is the definition of hypocrisy, plain and simple,”
You know, it really is.
But, Jeb probably wants those bastard babies bought and sold through the evangelical adoption movement and its companies, like Baby Veronica….human trafficking by another name.
And, if you want the stats on which states have the highest number of children being raised in the home of their two biological parents, here they are (don’t be surprised that SC is near the bottom of the list, like most of the Old Confederacy/Bible Belt):
You know I am not sure any of us want to be taking parenting advice from Jeb Bush. As I recall his daughter stole prescription pads from her doctor’s office so she could get drugs. Of course the Bushies did not think she needed to be publicly shamed. I wonder if she had premarital sex with drug dealers?
Thus sayeth Jeb ”Substance abuse is an issue confronting many families across our nation. We ask the public and the media to respect our family’s privacy during this difficult time so that we can help our daughter.”
So Jeb, why didn’t you drag this kid out onto the steps of the Governor’s Mansion and make her confess to her crimes in publc. Why didn’t you publicly shame her and tell her she was an embarrassment to the Bush family. That would be setting an example for other kids that might decide to do drugs of what they should expect.
My past experience is they usually work harder – so works for me.
More blacks and illegal aliens have babies out of wedlock than any other race.
How about a little public shaming of Brother George for all the murder and mayhem in Iraq and Afghanistan? And for his economic collapse? And for Part D Medicare… He fucked everything he touched, and just look what he birthed!!
I am not voting for him even though he is 100% right on single mothers. Single motherhood is the scourge of western civilization. Female solipsism should not be encouraged. To paraphrase Michael Corleone, this is why the muslims could win. Willing to die for beliefs? Check. Solid handle on degeneracy? Check.