This is the kind of simplistic rationalizations that make people like Sarah Palin incredibly dangerous.
Only children see things in such black and white terms.
Adults realize that motivations for doing terrible things to others are very complex, and can NEVER be boiled down to the ridiculous religious definitions of "good" vs "evil."
As for Track having returned to Iraq, well I don't want to call her a liar, but that seems rather unlikely as well.
This clip does really nothing to address the bombshell from the print interview that Dakota Meyer is being named the father of Bristol's newest baby bump.
However it is already being widely reported that he is in fact the sperm donor:
In the same month, Palin's daughter became a tabloid fixture as she called off her wedding to fiance Dakota Meyer and then just weeks later announced she was pregnant with his child.
That was from the Daily Mail, a tabloid in Britain. So yes, it is now international news.
That means if one of the Palins does not put this to rest that Dakota will be forced to defend his good name.
Update: Okay well it looks like the method of handling that whole Dakota as the father thing, was to quietly change the original article to this:
Then, the tabloids went into overdrive when the long-awaited marriage of her 25-year-old daughter Bristol didn't happen. Bristol was pregnant, but the father's identity has not been determined.
First let me remind you that this is NOT what the article originally said. It said " Then, the tabloids went into overdrive when the long-awaited marriage of her 25-year-old daughter Bristol didn't happen, even though she's pregnant with her ex-fiancé's baby."
However if CBN thinks they fixed this, they may want to think again.
After all "the father's identity has not been determined." Sounds very much as if Bristol has NO idea who the father is.
That CANNOT be what Palin intended for the article to suggest.
Or can it?