The only thing accurate in the whole article is your shock, Hanna. It isn't surprising that evangelicals did something unexpected since you seem to have no clue how we think. :-)

Your statistics are, of course, biased to the point of being completely untrue. Even the marriage ones, despite the fact that you ignore the largest factor, which is that evangelicals GET married instead of shacking up as those with no "divorce" statistics.

And then the elitist comment about Obama's intact marriage. I'm sure if Sarah and Todd Palin were divorced, we would all know that by now. I'm also sure that if Obama's daughter get pregnant out of wedlock, we won't. He's made it quite clear that he would haul his daughter in to get rid of her "punishment" instantly.

But thanks for the column. The more conservatives see an obviously good family slammed and bruised, the clearer we see just what our "left" is like. Blessings. :-)

Even more hilarious.

"Blessings. :-) "

Sanctimonious Christian way of saying "Fuck You." Jesus knows that is what you meant.

Sadly your ignorance of the actual statistics isn't very funny.

• Evangelicals shack up as often as the rest of the population
• They start sex at the same age (14.9 on avg)
• They have less education than average.

These are all very basic and verifiable stats.

Since when is the hallmark of a "good family" one in which

• there is a crininal drug conviction among the parents?
• There is a teenage pregnancy in the kids?
• There is a disturbing disconnect from the kind of knowledge and science that the modern world runs on?
• there is pride in ignorance?
• a self-avowed "red-neck" is seen as a great spouse for their daughter

Sorry, those are not hallmarks of "good family".

Yes they are bruised. But they bruised themselves with their choices.

Obviously you haven't been paying attention. Obama is against abortion.

degsme, you are a victim to the same line of thinking that Palin will ensure gets Obama in trouble for the next 2 months: It's not the people who are clinging to guns and religion because they feel like the government isn't capable of helping them who are bitter.

The bitter ones are the people who have no way of understanding those small town, red blooded americans whose main concerns are social issues with little direct effect on their way of life.

You have a right to be bitter, though. They won the past 2 times and despite having gained nothing from it they would rather win again than see what might happen if they lose (what if it turns out to be better? Can't have that!).

Is this the same Obama who said he would not want his daughters to go through life with the burden resulting from a teenaged pregnacy? Maybe instead of aborting the baby he'd just throw it under the bus.

degsme, you are a victim to the same line of thinking that Palin will ensure gets Obama in trouble for the next 2 months

Well if I thought like that sentence reads, I WOULD be a victim. And if I have to think like that to understand small town america - then damn straight I don't want to. I like my thinking to be coherent.

Now since Iive in an unincorporated rural county, I think you are the one who is clueless as to what a "red blodded american" really thinks. I'll give you a hint. Take a look at how many people in the USA feel that your "red blooded american values" are "On the Right track".

I'm not bitter. I just don't see how McCain can actually govern even if he wins. The policies he stands for are despised and rejected. He will have a completely hostile Congress that will be close to having an over-ride majority in both houses, and minorities in the USA will feel like an election got stolen yet again.

You may be proud of that sort of record - winning through dirt and a willingness to cheat - but it isn't good for the country. Face it. Your "values" have lost the popularity contest. You can only win by fear mongering.

Wait I'm on your side.

Doesn't author intent count for anything anymore?

It's hardly about the country any more for most. It's now Red Team vs. Blue Team. State vs. A&M, or whatever. It's a sporting event with a duped fandom on either side cheering for their team.

Well you have a point, but only kinda. Reagan brought in the notion (with his advisor Lee Atwater) that winning was all that mattered, that you didn't actually have to work with or lead those that disagree with you. And we've seen the GOP pretty much adopt this approach from that point forward.

Its a bit of a holdover from the Crusades, where faith was all that mattered and how you won was justified because you were the Faithful doing the winning.

Sorry I didn't get your intent from your post. mea Culpa. I've been fighting too many conservative trolls I guess. Time for my bike ride.

Well how about teaching your kids enough about sex, contraception and setting high enough expectations that they don't get pregnant as teens? You know, like the Clintons did with Chelsea.

Who do you think has the better life prospects? Chelsea? Or Bristol? Who do you think is more likey to get divorced? Who do you think is more likely to be abused by her spouse? Who do you think is more likely to end up sucking on the public teat (Bristol already does btw)?

Maybe if Palin had actually done a decent job of parenting, maybe if the household didn't have a criminal drug conviction among the parents, maybe if the parents valued education rather than cartoon beliefs about men hunting dinosaurs, Bristol might have had Chelsea's opportunities.

How do you know that Chelsea never got pregnant?

How do we know YOU'RE not pregnant, or masturbating in peanut butter and glass right now? First rule they teach you in journalism school...one cannot disprove a negative. Try again.

Ok, for your enlightenment I shall. Degsme's last post hinged on the idea that Chelsea Clinton never got pregnant. My point, to draw it out for you as that seems to be necessary, is that if Chelsea did get pregnant chances are she would have gotten an abortion and we never would have heard about it. So whether or not the public knows about a politicians daughter getting pregnant or his/her son fathering a child tells us nothing about there parenting as compared to other politicians. Because we only know about the pregnancies that don't get terminated.