30

Palin was never a real hockey mom

Levi Johnston tells all


 

We should have known it couldn’t be true: those glasses would have fogged up every time she blew to cool down her Stryrofoam cup of coffee before taking a sip. She would have missed half the action wiping them off. Now, it’s confirmed by Levi Johnston, the 19-year-old who was supposed to marry her daughter, that Sarah Palin rarely attended her son’s hockey games. As well, the former vice-presidential candidate and Alaskan governor apparently didn’t fish or shoot much. Well, we don’t mind so much about that part. But missing all those early mornings rinkside—that’s a matter of character. Shame.

Times


 
Filed under:

Palin was never a real hockey mom

  1. Right, we're supposed to believe the ramblings of a jilted loser? Just further proves the media will run to anyone willing to bad mouth a conservative politician no matter their credibility.

    • Palin's not a conservative politician. She's an unstable nutbar who bickers with comedians and quits her job for no apparent reason. The only threat to her credibility is herself.

    • The record of conservative malfeasance and perfidy speaks for itself. I conservatives want the rest of us to extend the benefit of doubt, they're just going to have to try harder.

    • "No matter their credibility." Palin = credibility? Incredible!

    • Bob is right on this one. This guy is bitter and is going to do whatever he can to try to get attention. However I am not the biggest fan of her, still you have to consider the source. A teenage boy who is better about a relationship that was fell apart.

  2. To Canadians in the West, the fishing and hunting matter as much as the hockey.

    But likely you say they don't matter as much because you're probably in Ontario and you're probably bigoted towards gun owners, thinking that's American and hating them makes you morally superior.

    Where's Atlanta? Where's Moose Jaw? Funny how Ontarians are so "Canadian", they only know the answer to the former.

    • WTF, I live in Toronto and I love Moose Jaw, and not for its hockey or hunting. As to geographical knowledge, how many people from Saskatchewan know where Waterloo, ON is? They probably know it's in Ontario somwhere, like Ontarians would know that Moose Jaw is somewhere in Saskatchewan. Besides, I wonder why you think Ontarians know where Atlanta is.

      • I've lived in Waterloo and having a degree from UW hanging in my living room. Many Ontarians I know have no idea where Moose Jaw is, but they're usually at least aware of it. On a trip to Quebec and Ontario last month, my grandmother encountered several people who knew of Calgary but had never heard of Edmonton. I bet they all know where Chicago is.

        It seems that many southern Ontarians love disliking the United States, favouring northeastern American type politics (and calling them 'Canadian'), feeling superior to it, and yet having little knowledge of the rest of Canada.

      • I've lived in Waterloo and have a degree from UW hanging in my living room. Many Ontarians I know have no idea where Moose Jaw is, but they're usually at least aware of it. On a trip to Quebec and Ontario last month, my grandmother encountered several people who knew of Calgary but had never heard of Edmonton. I bet they all know where Chicago is.

        It seems that many southern Ontarians love disliking the United States, favouring northeastern American type politics (and calling them 'Canadian'), feeling superior to it, and yet having little knowledge of the rest of Canada.

        • BTW Your picture seems to be Orwell, so here is a quote of his I like somewhat germane to the discussion:

          "THAT RIFLE HANGING ON THE WALL OF THE WORKING-CLASS FLAT OR LABOURER'S COTTAGE, IS THE SYMBOL OF DEMOCRACY. IT IS OUR JOB TO SEE THAT IT STAYS THERE"

          • I wasn't aware Orwell was given to shouting.

          • Perhaps he thought everyone was hard of hearing

          • I found the quote in an article arguing about where he actually said it — there is some dispute on the correct source. All presentations of the quote were in block letters. It's not clear if this is how he wrote it or if the author or the article had some reason for doing this. I suspect the former. In which case, perhaps he wanted even his deaf readers to hear. ;-)

          • Sounds like it would be from his "Arm the People" period, shortly after he got back from Spain (and had watched the bourgeois, in the form of the Communists, crush his peasant friends) or maybe when he was anticipating a German invasion. Perhaps from "The Lion and the Unicorn," his pamphlet/book about the English national character?

        • What is this, share an anecdote hour? I've met lots of Western Canadians who are not exactly cartographers. I find it impossible to believe that an educated Canadian, from any region, would never have heard of Edmonton. The fact is that most people don't know much, from wherever they hail. Take your regionalism and shove it.

        • What is this, share an anecdote hour? I've met lots of Western Canadians who are not exactly cartographers. I find it impossible to believe that an educated Canadian, from any region, would never have heard of Edmonton. The fact is that most people don't know much, from wherever they hail.

    • Lighten up. Uninformed stereotypes do nothing to further the discussion but make you look like a typical western Redneck.

    • Lighten up. Uninformed stereotypes do nothing to further the discussion and only make you look like a typical western Redneck.

      • I'm a (proud) western Redneck with a few exceptions. I support open immigration, (non-subsidized) multiculturalism, tolerance of Muslims, drug legalization, honouring treaty obligations, and I'm skeptical of nationalism.

        I shop at Wal-Mart for moral reasons, I appreciate mullets, pick-up trucks, and shotguns, and I can't stand downtown social democrats.

        • Okay, not trying to pick a fight here, I am truly genuinely interested in what moral reasons you cite for shopping at Wal-Mart. I've been interested in the debate that Wal-Mart helps lower-income people live better lives by providing goods at low (and when inflation is factored in, increasingly lower) prices. I'll leave out all of the traditional "Wal-Mart is evil" arguments (though I tend to mostly agree with them), but I've just never heard anyone say they'd shop at WM for moral reasons and I'm curious about this…

          • Helping the domestic poor is one reason to patronize Wal-Mart, but the main reason is that it creates wealth in the developing world for some of the world's (formerly) poorest citizens. (N.B. the view most downtown social democrats have of the type of people who shop at Wal-Mart tells you how much they actually care about those poorer than them.)

            Much like factory work in the early industrial revolution, sweatshops — though they contain questionable working conditions — are a significant improvement for those work in them. Most previously had no consistent income as peasant farmers. This type of Pareto improvement, if history is our guide, is the first step to raising former peasants to the level of the middle class. (This is far better than say foreign aid, which most often ends up in the hands of corrupt governments and when it goes through creates constant short-term dependency. Note: sweatshops that contain force labour — i.e. slave labour — which have occurred are fully immoral and completely unacceptable.)

            For this reason I think that American Apparel is immoral and I think that shopping there is wrong. It is basically redistributing wealth from the world's truly poor to wealthy North American labourers.

          • What about the argument that Wal-Mart eviscerates small business? It seems to me that a society in which people would once have been self-reliant shopkeepers are instead turned into cashiers for a huge company is one in which the pioneer spirit of entrepreneurship is not likely to flourish. And where would the West be if it weren't for the pioneer spirit of entrepreneurship, and Canada with it?

          • I agree with Jack that Wal-Mart, apart from increasing the buying power of the poor, cares nothing about the effect they have on the economies of local communities. I also mostly buy your argument Robert– trade is good for those in developing economies, no question. But to call American Apparel immoral for not using overseas sweatshop labour is a tad hyperbolic. First world companies are not morally obliged to outsource their production to help the peasantry elsewhere.

  3. Speaking of hockey. Among the nuggets of information in the Vanity Fair article is that baby Tripp's middle name is Easton in honor of “my favorite hockey-equipment company.”

  4. Levi Johnston has even less class than I thought. Palin's daughter is lucky to be rid of him.

  5. Gosh, the righties are brittle. Hitting a nerve, obviously.

    You guys would look a lot a better if you came clean, dropped the hypocrisy and showed your true natures. It would humanize you. Frankly, after this article, I like Palin a little better.

    • I don't support Palin. She's a tyrant and a fool.

      I objected to the implied anti-gun bigotry of the remark (hunting and fishing matter less than hockey). Our observations are underwritten by values. I don't stand idly by when I don't like the values implicitly expressed.

      And I'm not a righty. Righties support tradition for it's own sake. I support liberty as a vehicle for progress.

      • I'm thinking that supporting liberty as a vehicle for progress makes you a real 'Righty' (my kind of righty); the folks who support tradition for it's own sake are just faux-righties.

  6. Well, I for one can't wait for him to become one of the "famous for being famous" celebrities. Some TV network really has to bring back the Match Game. Hmmmm, though maybe that'd be a stretch for him. Oh well, reality TV awaits…

Sign in to comment.