Levi vs. Bristol: Who's Looking Out For Tripp?

Frankly, Levi needs to sit down and shut up. His actions since the end of the engagement have been nothing but self-aggrandizing and narcissistic. To my knowledge, he has done nothing to distance himself from his mother's actions, let alone her, personally. I'm not sure if he should... but I certainly wouldn't want an unreformed druggie/dealer near my son. If she's *truly* working on recovery, I would reconsider. He has done nothing to even appear more "fatherly".

Now this most recent move to allow the press into the courtroom, "to keep things honest"? Really? The press is honest??? Especially when it comes to the Palin name, the press is abusive at best, and has no problem printing complete and utter falsehoods, with the full knowledge that they can issue a blanket, "oh, gee, sorry" statement on the last page, or at the end of a broadcast, and move on with no further consequences. No good can come from having them in the courtroom.

At this point, I vote for Bristol receiving full and exclusive custody, with a condition: if Levi gets a *real* job, not Celebrity-Of-The-Moment, straightens up, and starts acting in a responsible manner, the issue of shared custody may be re-opened.

But for now? Levi needs to go away and do some growing up.

Reply

Levi is 100% right about this:
"Levi claims that the press will keep things honest and his famous would-be mother-in-law from interfering." He is SPOT ON

Rachel, you are in no position to call Levi "reckless, irresponsible" as opposed to Bristol. Clearly getting pregnant "by accident" does not show her as any more responsible or less reckless. Plus, she CHOSE to be with Levi and I totally believe in the notion that one is reflected by they company they keep. Bristol just has better publicists.

It would be nice if you actually got back to articles about raising a large family and quit trying to act as if you had some great political savvy as opposed to your blind worship of anything Republican/Conservative. Your older articles about child rearing were actually enjoyable.

Reply

Nothing he has done has proven that he doesn't deserve shared custody of his child.

The mother doesn't get to decide that the father of her baby isn't good enough. When she chose to have unprotected sex with the guy she decided that he was good enough. Until he proves that he's an unfit father (and no one has said that he was abusive) he deserves shared custody.

Reply

Let's see, what would the popular concensus be if Bristol had posed for Playboy while Tripp was being cared for by Levi and a non-drug-offending grandma? Something tells me this would largely be cut along party lines.

Which is one reason why this does not need to be in the media.

The other reason is that there may be some stuff in the divorce trial that would harm Tripp if it were plastered all over the media. When my step-niece fought over custody with her ex, the deciding factor apparently was that ex had allowed friends to see his pierced penis in his babies' presence. Isn't that just what we want the kids hearing from their classmates later? Given what the media already knows about this couple's issues, it's probable that there are details that should be kept reasonably private. And maybe what Levi is hoping is that the fear of public humiliation will keep Bristol quiet about some issues that should bear weight in the judge's decision.

This child deserves privacy. In matters relating to adults only, adults who put themselves in the public eye deserve what they get. But child custody is obviously not an adult-only matter (although people are talking as if it were). Give Tripp some privacy. He has enough problems.

Reply

Another thing is that Levi could easily tell outrageous lies in the trial, and once the statements are publicized, people will treat them as truth, regardless of whether there is any evidence whatsoever.

I really see no possible benefit to having this stuff in the media.

I don't know whether he should have partial custody. I don't think that's something the public can really judge, nor is it our business to begin with. Why does everyone pretend to "care" about this one baby somewhere in Alaska? Most likely, there is some child on your street more in need of your concern. And most people who "care" about Tripp's custody trial don't even want to know about that neighbor child's need, let alone advocate for him. People are so shallow.

Reply

Reading this article and the majority of comments, tells me that none of your have actually followed anything pertaining to the situation. Firstly, it is a custody case. They did not get married.

If Rachel actually did some research by reading the custody papers and research Sarah Palin's involvement in previous custody Court matters, she would have learned that the request for this case to be an open proceeding had nothing to do with the media. It seems Rachel slups up the Palin slop and write swithout doing any actual research. That easily destroys your blog credibility.

Should you have read the proceedings, the open request was in order that Sarah would not have the ability to cause problems as she has done in her own sisters custody. In fact, the Judge in that case was not far from charging Sarah with contempt. He had to advise Sarah, her father and other family members to stay out of it.

So, before you make any further decisions to write on the basis of hearsay of one side, take some time to research. If you have listened or read every interview done by Levi, he has never said a bad word about Bristol. Even in the custody papers which I can't say the same for her with comments in the court papers and an article I will mention below. The openess of the custody proceedings he wants is to keep Sarah truthful. You might want to check the documents out. They exist online.

I might also add that in the custody papers, in the sworn affidavit by Bristol, she makes mention how Levi is seeking fame and fortune through selling stories with pictures of the baby to the tabloids.

Well, isn't that the hypocrite as Friday's issue of InTouch Rag Mag has pics of Bristol with Tripp and Sarah with Trig on the COVER together with a story by Bristol. It's not uncommon for InTouch to pay 6 figures for pics/stories. Wow -- under a sworn affidavit she accuses Levi - Pot meet Kettle. She's done paid interview/cover with People. Paid Candie's Foundation event wherein she had Tripp appearing on a number of TV shows while interviewing. P.S. - Playgirl isn't porn! In fact, Candie's Foundation is an arm of Candies who advertises soft port ads of t-shirts with slogans that are totally inappropriate for teens. Rather a slippery sloppe to promote abstinence yet the mother company advertises for instance with a young man holding a microphone pointing to a young ladies legs open crotch. Hmm - You accuss Levi? Because Sarah said it. Check the Candies site and Candies Foundation who sells Teasing T's on their site. What a fine upstanding company to be a Paid Ambassador for promoting abstinence. Think again Rachel. Educate yourself before being pulled in. As I said it will reflect back on your blog.

In fact, if you go to the website right now http://www.intouchweekly.com/ you will see the cover. I do have to laught at the title "We're Glad We Chose Life" - Really. Being the Tighty Righty Conservatives they are, that indicates they considered aborting. Ahhhh. They considered "choice" - oh how dare they.

Yes I write with snark as I don't tolerate hypocrites especially ones that just write hearsay without applying themselves to find the info out. As to the comments by some of the others -- you just can't fix stupid in that they follow blindly.

Reply

I used to think some parents should just be totally cut out of the picture, for the sake of the kids, but later on I realized that kids desperately want their parents in their lives, even the ones they shoudn't. Both parents need to work this out for their child's emotional health - it's just the beginning.

Reply

Can someone please tell me what Rachel is actually contributing to this discussion?

I probably wouldn't call myself a "pundit" based on this...

Reply

I would just like to add, to any children that are reading this story or the comments just remember one thing please....


No glove, No love.

If either one of those kids(parents?) would have followed that motto this wouldn't be an issue.

Reply

Glorious 1-14-2010 @ 2:04PM

Frightened to death of Sarah. What a joke. She's my daily comic relief.

The right tosses out the statement the left fear her. The more you say it, the more you believe it Sheep.

Reply

Rachel, your article seems too shallow for the topic. A little research turns up facts that are pretty important.

As another poster mentioned, Sarah Palin has a history of meddling in family custody cases, as well as family proceedings in general. Levi's request for an open hearing is very prudent; it means that both sides have to be forthcoming and honest. Your bias against the Playgirl shoot appears to be rooted in your own convictions, but the fact is that Levi appeared alone in an adult magazine in a pictoral that wouldn't be rated more than PG-13. Bristol, on the other hand, is in In Touch with Tripp. Both of these exposures have their downsides, but both are earning money that these teen parents clearly need.

Weirdly, Levi and Bristol seem pretty level-headed about Tripp (not about his conception, obviously, but afterwards). Both parties seem to have respect for each other, and sound like they're suited to co-parenting. There's indications that Levi's had a difficult time gaining access to his son while in the Palin house, and I think Levi's wariness about Sarah Palin's ability to interfere is justified. All in all, it sounds like Tripp has two parents who love him and want to be a big part of his life, which sounds pretty good to me.

But it's pretty clear that you, Rachel, have placed your bet on Levi being a total creep. There's not much evidence for this other than your personal bias.

Reply