ext_12350 ([identity profile] fickle-goddess.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] fickle 2008-08-30 10:39 am (UTC)

Honestly, I wouldn't care if they were normal kids. Hillary and Bill had Chelsea, and that didn't bother me. Especially since Chelsea turned out relatively well, compared to the Bush twins.

A disabled kid, however? OH HELL NO.

While I can throw my weight behind Palin's idea that a husband can take care of the kids just as well as a wife can, I don't believe that's true if the husband in question works two jobs and one of the kids is disabled. Living with my sister taught me how incredibly draining and time-consuming it is to handle a disabled kid, and teaching a classroom of them only further hammered it home that it takes a lot of energy and a lot of time to even be able to watch over one kid properly full time.

I'm mostly blasting her for having deliberately had a Down's kid, really. I hate the idea that anyone could deliberately cause such misery to someone that's in their mercy.

Out of curiosity, was anyone arguing that Hillary shouldn't be the Presidential nominee because of Chelsea, or is the assumption that Chelsea's old enough to fend for herself? I certainly don't remember people making a big deal of the Bush twins, except for their underage drinking habits.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting