Posted on 07/27/2009 8:03:10 AM PDT by kcvl
Per Laura Ingraham Show
Laura’s show would put my coworker and I who carpool to sleep. And if “having fun” is having a segment on her dog for an hour a week, then label me a bore.
To be fair, we haven’t listened to her in over 2 years. So maybe she’s moved on past the antics of her Golden Retriever(?).
Don’t listen to Levin. But Rush is actually funny — and successful unlike Laura :)
Can wait to raise a strong conservative voice!
Laura has become the Angelina Jolie of the conservative movement, at least with her adoptions.
Laura not successful? You really need to get out more. She’s a best selling author, speech writer as part of the Reagan admin, and guest hosts on Fox. Yeah, she sucks.
Is it better for this child to be in a single parent home with a mother who loves and cares for him OR
For this child to remain in a Russian orphanage with no father, no mother, no extended family, and no future?
It would be nice if the whole world was perfect but it’s not.
If Laura has love to give she should (and is). She is giving a child with no future a future.
Laura has had a tough life. She was engaged to be married when she got cancer. Her fiance then canceled the engagement (nice guy, eh?) and she lost her ability to have children from the cancer treatment. But she has the love of a mother and will teach her belief in Christ to two beautiful children from opposite parts of the world. Bless you, Laura!
I think it’s wonderful! Congratulations, and am looking forward to seeing photos! :)
I wish the family well.
She needs to get married so they can have a father.
I volunteer.
?
That was my thought. Why is it when a conservative pulls a “Murphy Brown,” adoptive or otherwise, it’s celebrated? No single person can care for a kid-—it’s obvious, someone else has to, either a grandmother or a nanny. Is this better than parents? You decide.
sorry typo LOL!
I was thinking about adopting an 18 yr old Russian or Ukrainien girl but my wife won’t let me.
thanks for the reply
>> Well, I guess being raised by the nanny is better than still being an orphan in Russia. <<
Far far better than being an orphan. If some of those rich self-obsessed hollyweird stars could just adopt a couple ten kids or so a piece and not even see them but have them raised by nannys it would be better than their “Pet children” they adopt like Madonna does.
It is generally laudable, but as conservatives, we should also encourage a father as well as a mother for these children.
thanks for the reply,
... and the reminder about Murphy Brown ...
... and the memories of Dan Quayle, too.
Am I the only one who thinks he shellacked the floor with Algore in their debate???
Alright. I’m sorry I went down this path. I’m not as gracious as I should be. Sorry :)
I have to keep in mind that she is not an American hating leftist, that she loves her country and God (I think she’s Catholic?) and she adopted some orphans from third world misery — that Obama wants to recreate in the United States.
So I apologize for being cranky this morning.
Anytime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.