<p>The awesome Frank Rich nails it in his latest NY Times column:</p>
<p>
[quote]
But the ultimate hypocrisy is that these woebegone, frightened opponents of change, sworn enemies of race-based college-admission initiatives, are now demanding their own affirmative action program for white folks applying to the electoral college. They want the bar for admission to the White House to be placed so low that legitimate scrutiny and criticism of Palin’s qualifications, record and family values can all be placed off limits.
<p>Whatever, she's raining the ownage. Face it, she can get away with it because Bush tarnished the image of the presidency. The bar isn't just set low, it's laying on the ground collecting dust.</p>
<p>I also gotta represent for my fellow communications majors. If there's anything a VP needs, it's good communicatory skills.</p>
<p>I do hope everyone realizes that such a statement is nothing short of proclaiming an American Jihad?</p>
<p>I can't believe any intelligent, self-respecting Americans would vote for Sarah Palin. The woman is a life-time member of the NRA, denies that global warming is man-made, is pro-life to the point you wonder if she has a brain (she would have her own 14 year old, raped daughter give birth... my gosh woman, it's only an ideal sometimes; think about what you're actually suggesting!)</p>
<p>-NRA is irrelevant and if anything makes her cooler.</p>
<p>-She doesn't freaking know if global warming is man-made, and she doesn't deny it either.</p>
<p>-What is wrong with a 14 year old giving birth? Girls are fully developed both mentally and physically by that point, unless it's a late bloomer, in which case she wouldn't have been having sex anyway.</p>
<p>I got to see the Gibson interview. What a %#@% that guy is. When is the media going to see their hypocrisy in criticizing Sarah's credentials? You're all communications majors too, you media phonies.</p>
<p>"What is wrong with a 14 year old giving birth? Girls are fully developed both mentally and physically by that point, unless it's a late bloomer, in which case she wouldn't have been having sex anyway."</p>
<p>Football, HAHAHAHAHAH. that's priceless. since when do 8th graders become fully grown women. i have huge concerns for this, particularly you thinking that 8th graders think and look like a twenty year old... but i dont want to use any personal attacks. i do not know ONE other person that will EVER agree with that statement.</p>
<p>They are. Everyone knows it's utterly impossible to tell the difference between women ages 14 to 22. They look exactly the same. At least relative to how much men change. And we weren't even talking about their ability to think initially, just their reproductive system, I just threw the mentally part in as it is an of-denied fact. 14 is the absolute latest that most girls get their periods. After that, they're ready to give birth.</p>
<p>It was perfectly acceptable in Shakespeare's day to marry 14 year olds because they knew they were practically adult by that point.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Everyone knows it's utterly impossible to tell the difference between women ages 14 to 22. They look exactly the same.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I really hope this is a joke. You develop breasts, hips, and grow immensely during that time. Women are not done growing until they are in their mid 20s. Ask any woman you know and they will tell you that their hips were not fully developed until they were into their teens (16, 17 etc). The hips open the birth canal. Go take an anthropology class, you really need it.</p>
<p>Women don't grow immensely after they get their periods. They don't grow immensely period. Nobody grows into their mid 20's, especially not women. Breasts get bigger as the girl gains weight, but they're usually there by 14. I know girls that got their periods when they were 9.</p>
<p>One, growth for women is not done until their long bones are done growing, which is in their early 20s. </p>
<p>Two, if women get their periods when they are 10-11, they're not going to stay that height forever. I was looking back on my old 8th grade year book and the majority of people were 5'4"-5'7". The majority of them now are 5'8"-6'1". I've grown 8 inches since I started my period, which I'd say is pretty significant. </p>
<p>Three, I know a lot of girls my age (I am 17) whose breasts are still developing. </p>
<p>Four, can you seriously tell me that you cannot tell the difference between a 14 year old and a 22 year old? The facial structures are completely different and you develop different curves on your body (ie, thighs).</p>
<p>Five, anthropology teaches you about human development as well. You use anthropology to look at bones and determine their ages. You can tell the difference between a 14 year old and a 22 year old.</p>
<p>EDIT:
Six, this is completely off topic now. If you would really like to continue this then start a new thread, but I will not continue on this thread.</p>
<p>That height spread changed because the guys grew 10 inches. The late-bloomer girls also might have grown an inch or two. If you grew that much since you got your period you probably got it when you were 10 like everyone else.</p>
<p>what i think is funny, football, is that as you say when a girl gets her period, she can give birth, you think the "9 year old girls" who have gotten their periods are ready to give birth... that is quite uncomfortable silence...</p>
<p>Miscarriage is only statistically more likely because underaged girls are idiots who try to hide their pregnancy by not eating, they don't go to the dr., they give birth by themselves in their bedrooms, etc.</p>
<p>I think I can safely speak for most of the other posters on this thread when I ask you to take your posts somewhere else. Not only are they stupid, they are also offensive. Sex with 14 year old girls? Does statutory rape ring a bell? Give us a break with this stuff before someone reports you to the mods. Sheesh.</p>