Posts Tagged ‘Politics

17
Oct
09

Use Your Words!

Birther, Becker, Rushian, Becker-Head, Breeder, Bigot, Racist, Closed-minded, Hater, Greedy, Uncompassionate, Hypocrite, Deluded, Homophobe…Just a few names being tossed around the blogosphere lately in reference to the conservative movement. I have seen some of these in actual news articles, and I have even seen some arise in a judge’s decision (see Judge Land’s verbal levelling of Orly Taitz. Professional?). Yep. There are some naughty conservatives, too. I heard from a dear friend of mine that his sweet mother was SPIT on while campaigning for Obama. It was a shocking revelation to me as I have never been mistreated by a fellow conservative. I truly believed that we were above such mean and unproductive tactics but I’m guessing those on the other side would say the same thing.

So, we all have to accept some responsibility, but personally I try to abstain from name-calling. Many liberals are my friends, family, and even their mothers – real people I don’t want to hurt. Still, I slip from time to time. Judging from the vast world of social media, we are all slipping. When we were little, our parents told us to use our words and we have practiced ever since, sharpening these verbal skills into a weapon that would divide a nation. The rhetoric and sound bites divide us, fostering distrust and even hatred that sometimes threatens to turn violent. And yet, we continue to use our words. Words are thrown around in our culture without too much thought to their impact. The impact is that we cannot have an honest debate about important issues because both sides are shielded by rhetoric.

It’s dangerous ground. Each day, our way of life is threatened and we citizens are powerless against the tide of politicians. We are fed questionable facts but debate is stifled by fears of being called bigoted, hateful, or worse. Take, for example, the emergence of HIV in the early ’80’s. It didn’t take too long to determine that the disease was sexually transmitted and was spreading most rapidly among homosexual men. The transmission among this demographic was not specifically due to homosexuality, but to promiscuity. The cases were first isolated to San Francisco, New York, and Los Angeles. Officials like Harvey Milk and his supporters tried to warn the gay communities about this rising epidemic and were silenced by Gay activist groups like the Stonewall Gay Democratic Club. These groups stated that any admonition against promiscuous gay sex was a statement against the gay lifestyle and they threw such epithets as homophobe, Nazi, and sexual fascist their way. At that time, one in 333 homosexual men in San Francisco had the disease. They were concentrated in the Castro district and promiscuous men in the area could potentially come into into contact with up to ten partners a night, making their odds of contracting the disease 1 in 33. Harvey Milk, Bill Kraus, and Catherine Cusic, all homosexual community leaders tried to get the word out to protect their own, but they were continually brought down. It was political suicide to warn the homosexual community specifically of this potential danger. Unfortunately, Milk gave into political pressure and dropped the issue. Of course, it is difficult to blame him.

At that time, in 1983, there were about 5,000 HIV diagnoses in the US. It was a rare and preventable disease, had anyone heeded the warnings. Today, over 500,000 Americans are living with the disease and another half million have died from it.

Being homosexual himself, I hardly believe that Harvey Milk was trying to be hateful. I don’t really think the man was homophobic, either. And I know he wasn’t calling anyone names. The price our country has paid for his inability to speak out is dear. Now, we have more and more issues of similar import. Unfortunately, the discussion is the same. We have hurled insults across party lines so long that the line between right and wrong, good and bad, is completely blurred and nobody is willing to uncover it for fear of what will be said. The fastest way to stifle a debate is to call someone a racist or hater. But while we throw these ugly words around, lives are being lost. Money is being lost. Our national identity is being lost. We stand to lose an entire generation. Are we really going to let name-calling stand in the way of greatness we were meant for?

Advertisements
10
Oct
08

Be a Woman…or a Mother…Best be Both

The gloves are OFF.  Well, one is.  This is still a much more polite fight than it needs to be.  However, there is one argument that I have heard – ad nauseum – and ironically it has come mostly from self-proclaimed feminists.  They cannot stand the fact that Palin might fall into a demanding job when she has KIDS who will suffer, for goodness sake.  They say she should be home with her kids. 

They have no right.

Most of us have to work.  We have to be away from our children each day, it’s a fact of life.  That work should be rewarding.  It’s a shame to put a high priority on something that doesn’t matter.  If she has to be at work, let her do this job.  She has a unique opportunity to help preserve the way of life that we Americans enjoy.  She may even have a chance to improve it.  As a mother, she would be shirking her duties if she did not take this job.  Her kids will be cared for; her husband has planned a leave of absence from his job, not to mention the nanny and the Secret Service and the kitchen staff.  Those children will enjoy opportunities we would sacrifice everything to provide for our children.  If I had an opportunity to sacrifice four years of quality time in the name of a brighter future for my children, I would jump on it.  Women have been taken from the home for less.  Historically, every time our country is struggling, the women have sacrificed greatly.  They have taken jobs, eaten less, worked late, learned skills, and sent the men they loved away to certain death.  History is asking no less of Sara Palin (o-kay, her husband gets to stay stateside). 

As I said, this argument is coming mostly from the mouths of feminists.  I know this, because they usually call her a hypocrite for having a career and being pro-life.  That is the mark of a feminist.  They are effectively saying that once a woman becomes a mother, she has no role outside her home.  She has no skills to offer but diapering and kissing skinned knees.  She has no voice.  What a message to send our daughters!  I want my daughters to understand that becoming a mother is the gateway to a life beyond their wildest dreams.  They will be mothers first, yes, but they are brilliant girls with everything to offer and mothering teaches.  Mothering offers wisdom.  A mother still gets to be a woman.  For brilliant girls to grow up and become mothers, but not women, is a disservice.

Mothering should be a blessing.  It is a blessing.  It should enrich our lives, but it should never take our lives.  We women are the soul of this nation and it is true, there is nothing we cannot do.  Whether it is staying home to kiss scrapes, diaper, and read fairy tales (a life I covet, by the way), or having a career and stealing precious moments to watch our children grow, we should be able to do this without the guilt.  I know stay at home moms have guilt for not contributing to the household income.  They feel like working moms look down on them for “just being a mom.”  Working moms are riddled with guilt every morning when they drive away from their beloved.   They feel like their priorities are dubious.  The reality is, though, every mother is doing the best she can in different circumstances.  Remember, there was a time that staying home was necessary but it didn’t involve quality time and Gymboree dates.  There was always work to be done around the home and not enough time.  Now, stay at home moms are super women who raise fantastic kids and provide great service to our society through the children they raise and the tireless hours of volunteering.  Now is a different time.  Staying home is a luxury that comes with great sacrifice.  Life is not always stable.  Our economy has grown to two-income proportions. 

This is a new age.  There are new rules.  Being all that we can be will never make us less.  There is not even room for such implication.

08
Oct
08

Do You Love It?

I have been considering why this election means so much.  I watch the debates with my stomach in knots, just wanting to jump in and help as though McCain is my child competing.  Soccer moms surely recognize this feeling.  My goal is to send out something documented, factual, and honest (read indisputable) every day.  There is a lot of information; I will not be short on material, but right now this is emotional and I can’t focus on that. 

My country is in danger.  There is no question about it, regardless of party.  The fix is in the fight.  Right now, we have to fight against greed.  We have to fight against terror.  We have to fight against apathy.  We have to fight against a media that is working for ratings, not for public protection.  It’s exhausting to carry this, especially when I feel powerless to fix it.  

 
Consider the Obama presidency.  I have been reading about post-Revolutionary Russia, Lenin in charge.  Now, I am not an alarmist expecting us to descent into abject and wide-spread poverty and starvation, BUT the similarities are impossible to ignore.  The United States is ripe for change, change is necessary right now.  We are on the brink of class warfare, racial warfare, and, if Iran has its way, nuclear warfare.  We know nothing for certain except that any day we could wake to a completely different life.  People are afraid…People are angry.  The right leader is crucial at a time like this, the wrong leader could be revolutionary.  
 
Here’s the crux:  Obama has worked very subtly to ensure that anyone who speaks out against him is deemed racist.  He is igniting racial tension.  He is running on a platform that is devisive by definition as he extols unity.  Obama’s foreign policy undermines US sovereignty at every turn.  That is where the problem comes in.  There is a possibility that Obama is on to something in the interest of world peace.  It’s difficult to know, but what if we did consider the UN’s input on our economic policy?  What if we refused to protect our interests without international approval?  What if we began to negotiate with the rogue nations and a little bit of our out-dated values erodes?  Would it be so terrible to compromise a little bit in the name of world peace?  It’s time to really consider this.  We have no choice.
 
Compromising, regardless of the motivation, is a detriment to our great nation.  It may be fine for a while and people will laugh that I ever considered this, but later there will be mourning for all that was lost.  This is all we will mourn:
 
Forums like this, speaking out against proposed change. We will still have free speech in the Constitution, but this speaks to religion, which will be restricted
Economic freedom 
Competition – eroding quality in education, healthcare, and roads
Variety in production
Religious freedom – we will loose the freedom to worship as religion and world peace are completely incompatible
Private ownership of companies and real estate
 
Our government will become so large and cumbersome, any freedoms not inherently restricted will still be challenging as there will be no flexibility.  Further, poverty will be a major problem as taxation skyrockets.  Because of this taxation, the well-being of the State will be a higher priority than that of the individual.
 
This nation grew by the grace of God.  The United States of America is a gift God gave to the world, specifically to Israel, to ensure goodness prevails.  This was not a gift of compromise; we are to liberate the compromised throughout history.  Right now, we are hovering on the verge of being the compromised.  If we do not save ourselves, there is no one to come to the rescue of the American people.  We owe is to ourselves.  We owe it to the world.  We owe it to God.  We have got to elect a leader who strives for the individual.  He must love this country.  A willingness to compromise everything this country has built, to ignore the warnings and recede into history with the rest of the world, is not love of country.  It isn’t even an appreciation for all we have.  As difficult as times have become, we still have a life to be greatful here.  Simply look down the street – it is clean.  There is clea r, fresh air to breathe.  We have tap water on demand that is reliably potable.  New cars are abundant and plentiful.  Homes are plenty large.  Our children are educated.  Yes, we have to work for all of these, but true dignity comes from earning one’s way.  The more socialized a society becomes, the more disincentivized is work, again causing social decline.
 
It’s worth the fight and the knotted stomachs.  We have got to vote against Obama for president.  This man is dangerous.  He has been lying to the American public and we are so complacent nobody minds.  Lying is expected.  The man consorts consistently with individuals and organizations that are anti-American.  Even in the face of economic failure, he offers a plan that will cause further decline in our financial system.  He has no quarrel with the death of an infant at the hands of a doctor.  Regardless, his intent does not seem to be malicious.  His intent is not the problem.  The problem is that he does not LOVE this nation.  Therefore, his priorities will never be our well-being.  
18
Sep
08

Lohan vs. Palin

I never thought Lindsay Lohan would get to me, but she certainly has.  Yesterday I copped out an quickly pasted her anti-Palin rant onto my blog.  It should not matter one iota that a young, misguided nouveau riche panned a presidential candidate.  But it does.  LiLo (oh cute!) as they are calling her now, is a cultural icon and what she posted on My Space carried enough weight to be a loud story among the media.  Thanks to this very internet, we all had a chance to see it.  It hardly deserves a comment, but I believe that her sentiment is shared among many voters, especially mothers. 

Lindsay contends that Sara Palin will “negate” all the progress women have made as far as having a “choice over what to do with our bodies.”  The left is continually attacking Palin for not aborting her special needs child.  There have been questions raised as to whose baby he is.  There have been hysterical rants about her inability to hold the position of vice president and tend to this child, people questioning her commitment to parenting.  She has been called hypocritical because Alaska doesn’t have anti-abortion laws on the books.  Sara Palin exhibits all that is right and perfect about womanhood.  She has raised a loving family, no question about it, including a special needs infant.  Apparently, this infant has brought nothing but joy to the family; I don’t think this supports the argument that the world is better off without these babies.  She is showing the greatest commitment to her family, allowing her husband to take the reigns as she is called to minister to a nation.  If a person is in a position to fight for our future, the bigger picture is crucial.  Sara is seizing this opportunity to do her part to assure a bright and prosperous future for her family.  It is highly sacrificial, but her children are not going to be abandoned or neglected during the next four years.  Any mother will do everything in her power to protect her family; Sara has just hit the motherlode.  Further, it is nonsensical to call a pro-life woman who knowingly births and raises a Down-Syndrome baby hypocritical for doing just that.  As yet, Alaska still has rather liberal abortion laws on the books, but Ms. Palin hasn’t been governor for a full two years.  She may still have changes she looks to make.  OR, it is evident that she believes in smaller government.  Therefore, she may not feel a need to impose her beliefs on the entire state.  No candidate is going to reverse Roe vs. Wade and it is doubtful that the candidate will be able to appoint Supreme Cout justices who will succeed.

Now, since she brought it, let’s take a look at what Lindsay has done to further the cause of feminism.  Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure clubbing and posting poorly-spelled diatribes on a social networking site where we appear scantilly clad is what our great-grandmothers had in mind when they hoped for our futures.  If Lindsay were not fortunate enough to have a Disney-endorsed beginning, she would enjoy no success.  If the girls who strive to emulate her acheive their goals, sans Disney, they are destined to suffer lives of eating disorders, alcoholism, and desperate pleas for attention.  Lindsay needs to stick with what she’s good at.  She’s adorable and maybe a little talented.  She is not a crusader.  Best to completely avoid what one does not understand.

17
Sep
08

Lindsay, Lindsay

O-kay, I have wanted to foster open political thought rather than destructive arguments, but if this is not a reason to vote for the other team (the one with Sara Palin on it), I don’t know what is.  I am most curious as to why the vapid Lindsay thinks she could be influential in this role.  Enjoy!

 

Lindsay Lohan‘s online missives have come a long way from the days when she offered to “release a politically/morally correct, fully adequite [sic] letter to the press … simply to state my oppinions [sic] on how our society should be educated on for the better of our country.”

Now, with a little help from inamorata Samantha Ronson, she’s penned a surprisingly coherent diatribe on Sen. John McCain’s vice presidential running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, which she says was sparked by her “fear, anxiety, concern, disappointment and stress” and her inability to “bite my tongue any more.”

“Is it a sin to be gay? Should it be a sin to be straight? Or to use birth control? Or to have sex before marriage? Or even to have a child out of wedlock?” the Barack Obama-supporting actress, 22, rails on her MySpace page. “Is our country so divided that the Republicans’ best hope is a narrow-minded, media-obsessed homophobe?”

She goes on to cite an Associated Press story about how Palin’s longtime church in Wasilla, Alaska, promoted a conference “that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through prayer.”

And while Lohan says, “I am not against Sarah Palin as a mother or woman,” she points out that “women have come a long way in the fight to have the choice over what we do with our bodies. … And it’s frightening to see that a woman in 2008 would negate all of that.”

She adds that she “would have liked to have remained impartial; however, I am afraid that the ‘lipstick on a pig’ comments will overshadow the issues. … I have faith that this country will be all that it can be with the proper guidance. I really hope that all of you make your decisions based on the facts and what feels right to you in your heart — vote for Obama!”

Alas, LiLo then undoes much of her earlier eloquence by concluding, “Oh, and … hint hint Pali-pal — don’t pose for anymore tabloid covers, you’re not a celebrity, you’re running for office to represent our, your, my COUNTRY! And in the words of Pamela Anderson, ‘She can suck it.'”

29
Aug
08

Relative Evil

Here we are on the verge of history.  Actually, we are knee-deep in history.  This year, we have seen a woman and a black man fight bitterly over the presidency, then unite in an unprecedented subversion of the electoral process.  I find it discouraging that Hillary Clinton is not the nominee.  I am not a fan of hers, but her competence, professionalism, shrewdness, and commitment are unmatched.  As president, I don’t believe she would disappoint.  She is the most formidable candidate I have seen in years.  And yet…It’s exciting to see a minority running for this esteemed office, but I cannot believe in his leadership. 

His running mate, though, Joe Biden, is an interesting study.  He has shown perserverence, faith, grace, and strength – the qualities that make Americans so great.  He has a genuine affection for people that cannot be discredited, BUT, he is an ultra-liberal.  So many liberals are disingenuous and I don’t believe that he is.  He has lived it…he is the real deal.  Liberals have a lovely viewpoint.  I admire their forgiving spirits, their largesse.  The problem with a liberal in a high-ranking office, then, is this:  They emerge from an ideal of moral relativism.  Their ideology comes from a place where there is no wrong and right, just my way and yours.  Unfortunately, we live in a world where there is true evil.  Evil that I don’t believe we Americans fully comprehend.  Except for a few isolated incidents, we have been sheltered by miles of ocean from evil despots, dictators, and czars.  We do not fully grasp the intent or the ability of such rulers and we need a leader who is considerate of this.  Considerate of the evil that lurks in the shadows, purchasing black-market bombs, packing shrapnel into a pipe bomb before he takes it to a mall, and turning orphanges into weapons factories. 

We Americans are so blessed, we can luxuriate in the idea that everyone is reasonable.  The fact is, some people live in desperation.  They do unspeakable things that we say are unrealistic, but how many of us have been desperate?  How many of us have made a choice to sell one child into slavery so the others may eat?  Evil erodes morality; it changes our vision.  And evil’s greatest threat comes from our inability – or unwillingness – to believe in it.




What’s here

SuzyJ’s Tweets

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

Advertisements