-
Website
http://www.kimwerker.com/ -
Original page
http://www.kimwerker.com/2008/09/26/talk-to-me-us-all-about-palin-open-thread/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
ncavillones
7 comments · 2 points
-
SisterDiane
5 comments · 6 points
-
crowingram
2 comments · 1 points
-
heatherdollarstorecraftscom
4 comments · 1 points
-
Kiba
6 comments · 1 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Remembering When I Felt Differently
6 days ago · 9 comments
-
Kicking the Collective Ass of an Industry
3 weeks ago · 21 comments
-
Make a Wreath, You Could Win a Copy of Crocheted Gifts!
2 weeks ago · 4 comments
-
Eight years…
4 weeks ago · 6 comments
-
Warming My Poor, Cold Head
2 weeks ago · 2 comments
-
Remembering When I Felt Differently
I understand why single issue voting scares most people. However, as a Bible believing Christian who believes that life begins at conception, it is my duty to vote for someone who will protect that life. I believe that I will answer to my God one day for my actions. I care more for what He says than what those around me may say.
Does that make me wacky or an irresponsible American voter? In most circles I know the answer is yes. But I'm not seeking their approval.
* Shall not lie (weapons of mass destruction? where?)
* Shall not kill (goes without saying, and especially civilian casualties)
* Shall not covet/steal (I'm thinking oil, as in "we'll make them pay for the war once their oil production is up and running again, and we'll give the contracts to our political friends")...it's shameful.
I count 4 commandments flouted 110% by the Bush administration. One can only imagine what Jesus would say about waterboarding. Oh wait. Sure you can: ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'
Isn't voting for McCain/Palin just asking for a continuation of policies that are in direct contradiction to your beliefs, too? Weighing your single issue of choice against all of the above, which comes out on top? Also, contrary to popular belief, overturning Roe v. Wade is not going to end abortion. It will turn its regulation back over to the states.
Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for someone who is going to make an effort to help the people in our country who are here now, and suffering now, than to vote for something which cannot actually happen unless Roe v. Wade is overturned *and* all 50 states also decide to ban abortion, too?
I really do respect your right to believe as you do. That's the liberal way. Your views disagree with mine, but you have a right to them. Certain large segments of the McCain/Palin base will not extend me that same courtesy if given the opportunity. This is why I am outright scared of a McCain/Palin administration. Not only will they continue to favor the upper class and the corporations, but they will continue the appalling foreign policy of the current administration. Thank you for sharing your views with us. I'm sure I speak for all of us when I say we really want to understand where you're coming from.
I am not to make judgments on whether or not a war is just. I do not know what's going on behind the scenes. In the Bible that I adhere to Paul says the government has the power to bear the sword. We need to honor that government and Paul said that was said when Nero was in charge.
My priorities are that I need to make sure someone is in office who will protect the lives of babies born alive after a failed abortion.
The strongest feeling you get from a European point of view when looking at US politics from afar is that you're absolutely clueless. We're all more or less members of the same (Western) civilization. we can communicate in the same language, the US has an enormous cultural influence through movies, TV-series, books and the Internet, so you would suppose you would be able to understand. But you don't.
However, I sometimes think this difficulty to understand is just as great between US citizens of different opinions. Right or wrong?
but. I think some conservative voters like her stance on abortion. They like that she's a born-again Christian, and will bring those kinds of "values" to the White House. Some look at her record in Alaska and call her a reformer, so they think that she will bring change (and she's not "establishment" since she hasn't been on the national political scene.) She's "just like you and me" - folksy, down-home, gun-toting. etc.
If you lurk in the McCain/Palin support groups on Ravelry, you will hear more. But be warned - the political groups on Rav are all very, very heated right now.
I think what my mom means is, she's well-spoken, FOR A WOMAN politician. She is completely tuned out from anything about Hilary and Nancy Pelosi, so Palin seems incredibly, impressively "together".
(*Jews are famously left-leaning, in general. Though I must admit I lean more to the left than most of my other relatives, too. :)
For some reason, over the past 10 years, it's been some sort of prerequisite for people to 'want to have a beer' with you in order to be U.S. president--I'd rather have someone who was smarter than me, more patient, and better spoken. I don't think *I* would be a good president--and while Sarah Palin has more experience in public service and executive experience than I do, I don't think what experience she DOES have qualifies her to be a potential president of the U.S. (and John McCain ain't looking so hot lately). Oh boy, I'd better stop while I'm ahead, eh? :)
wonder if there's somewhere to ask where people will answer? Going to a
McCain/Palin forum isn't what I want, since I really just want to put down
arms and chat with someone who thinks differently from me. Pipe dream?
I've had some interesting conversations with other mothers that I know are more of the republican ilk. They seem to fall into 2 camps. For some it's not at all about Palin and they wish people would focus on McCain. They just don't want to talk about her. Others are very into her social stances on abortion or special needs kids or what her perceived family values are. I've not had anyone tell me they support her for really anything to do with her political or governmental background. Purely personal. Interesting no?
I wasn't even going to respond as I follow many of the blogs here because, outside the politics, I love hearing about your lives, what you've designed, what you've created. But seeing how some are so ugly towards me (those who support McCain/Palin), I've had to sadly stay away. I'm not saying the right is any different, they're not by any stretch.
It's why I hate this time. Up until a few months ago, I couldn't see why I would stop reading some of the blogs I do. Now I wonder if I'll ever be able to read them again without remembering how they feel about me.
As I stated below, I don't care what others think, I just don't find it enjoyable reading someone's blog knowing that they got so ugly about me (McCain/Palin supporters) just a month ago.
It can be very easy to fall into a hole of forgetting that people disagree with you when it's so natural to surround oneself with people who agree. I was naïve to think my own blog might be treated as a commons for disagreement—of course my own opinions pepper everything here, and I was hoping people would just automatically feel comfortable disagreeing.
So thank you, again, for your comments. I maintain my desire for respectful discussion and disagreement here, and I hope you'll be back—if not to talk politics (who could blame you for sitting that out!), then at least to talk everyday life.
I'm really not much of a debater and it took me this long just to pipe in. I know what I stand for and why, but I don't like arguing about it. It just brings out an ugly side of me I don't want to see. :)
I also believe taking someone's opinion about the party you support as a personal jab isn't necessarily the best way to handle it. I choose not to get offended when someone makes liberal jokes when I've labeled myself just that; if I let it bother me, it owns me, has control over me. I choose not to let it.
Then again, I don't post stalk or peek into the Conservative Rav groups wondering what they're saying about my party affiliation. It doesn't bother me that others have differing opinions. I'm secure in my own not to worry about it.
I know I'll still read someone's blog, column, or continue to maintain someone's friendship - if it's someone I know personally - even if their fundamental beliefs are different than my own (Mary Jane Hall couldn't be any further opposite from me in every fiber of her being and I value her friendship, her calm approach to life regardless of politics and religious affiliations). That's how we learn and grow as people. I feel the moment you've chosen not to listen to the other side, you've lost the chance to understand and relate on some level.
I'm just looking forward to the debates. If you've peeked in on some of the major conservative columns/blogs, you'll see that there are those amongst that crowd who are having second-thoughts and some are even heavy-handed with their criticism. Check out this blog entry on ABC News for more of that (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2008/09...).
If she gets elected and is a stone's throw from the Presidency, I just want to be assured that there is still room left in Canada for me and the fiance. But I'm confident in my candidate that I won't be house-hunting anytime soon.
I am not a supporter of Palin. Nor McCain. Nor Obama. and I don't even know who his runing mate is, heh.
I'm a registered democrat, and have been since I was able to register to vote. However, I have seriously been debating which 3rd party candidate I will be voting for. It's not a waste of a vote in my mind, if I can justify why I am voting the way I am. I just wish more people thought the same way.... if you don't like the big two options, then vote for another option. (Also, it's not like you vote for the VeeP anyway, you vote for the head honcho.)
Ok. So, yeah. Since no Palin supporters showed up, I sorta let my opinions fly outta the bag there.
And as far as Palin's knowledge, or lack there of, we'll get our next crack at that Oct. 2. Don't expect any more lengthy interviews from her as her numbers are dropping the more often she speaks; her handlers are using all this time to cram international affairs into her head - and hopefully erasing the "I can see Russia from my coastline" type of comments.
I am not a one-issue voter myself, but I ALWAYS vote with the Supreme Court in mind...
http://www.metafilter.com/74487/Sarah-Palin-as-...
There's a lot of single issue voters in there, for sure, and since Mefi slants very liberal most of the time, I think a lot of people were having the same reaction I did, which was "Wait, WHAT? You're picking an untested one-term governor with pretty much no real experience"? coupled with the anger of what I call the "interchangeable va***a" -- HEY HILLARY SUPPORTERS, LOOKEE! WE GOT A GIRL, TOO!
Had he picked a woman with a heck of a lot more experience (Maine senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe come to mind), I would've had a realllllly hard time sticking to my Democratic guns. And I say this as someone who got into a fistfight with my best friend's brother over the Reagan/Carter election.........when I was FIVE.
I have to say I'm pretty frightened McCain might win. After watching his debate performance the other night, even more so. He just cannot control his temper, can he? And as much as it amused me to see Obama doing the "can you believe this guy?" looks in his direction, that turns off a lot of independent voters -- remember Al Gore's sigh during his debate with W?
As far as Obama's looks towards McCain, I say there wasn't enough of them. But then again, I equated those to the same "what are you talking about?" looks that Katie Couric gave Palin in her interview, and I can't say I've heard a stitch online about those.
If anyone is looking for it - not sure it's been YouTube'ed yet - check out ABC News.com for the full 21 min. video clip from McCain "This Week" interview.
assume people are just like me at least about that.
I was a triple-major (poli sci/history/German) in school -- politics has always fascinated me. Yes, I'm on the liberal side of the spectrum, but it doesn't mean I don't respect the other side's right to have their opinions, too.
If you take the publisher example above to its logical conclusion, the catalog people had nothing to say about the actual content of my book, they had a problem with who I chose to associate with online. That's sort of scary, if you ask me. I don't boycott Ravelry because it has pro-McCain/Palin groups, you know?
(Thanks for hosting this thread, Kim. Super-interesting!)
Factcheck.org has something to say about the failed abortion ads (and they also say Obama's comeback was off-base) -- this is a nonpartisan site funded by the Annenberg foundation:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_al...
(yes, if you're a nonpartisan group you might want to title your posts in a little less inflammatory way...)
As for a war's "justness" (wait, is that even a word or did I just totally Buffy it?), I think it's not only our right but our *responsibility* to question our government on something as major as a war. Our country was founded on the principle of government by and FOR the people.
What benefit have we as a country derived from this war? We've spent billions, lost thousands of lives on both sides and for what? I'm not advocating the extreme position here -- such as refusing to pay taxes while the government uses our money to wage war -- I just want them to be held accountable for their actions. Just as you would like to see politicians held accountable for the actions you find objectionable!
Thanks again for responding.
For me (and lots of other Christians!), that means to be as educated and civic-minded as possible because, in a democracy, the government is created by ME and other voters (ie. not ordained directly by God). Because of that, some Christians become one-issue voters, because they believe it is part of our responsibility to help God's will be done by electing a government that, well, agrees with what we read in the Bible.
This mixture of doing God's will and voting for the good of the country is a tenuous line Christians walk, so please remember that most Christians do take this civic (and Christian) duty VERY seriously. However, since it's a difficult balance and no one party (or candidate) can possibly agree with everything our faith holds dear, I fear that many of my fellow Christians let religious leaders decide what the issues are that matter (and thus, ignore other issues, such as loss of life in war, etc).
I might be a one-issue voter and my issue is: human dignity. Caring for the poor and feeding the hungry. Which is why I'm a Christian Democrat. :)
And this is WAY more than I've ever written about politics! I wasn't going to say anything, but I think it's good to hear from ALL all sides & not just the two political sides, but also how religion affects voting, since that seems to be a big part of Palin's appeal.
Hope I didn't go too off topic here!
What I always find fascinating each election is their different perspectives re: how to make a political statement. The church down the street puts up a cemetery of fake stones commemorating abortion deaths. The nuns a few blocks away stand outside all day with anti-war signs, signs that read "Vote for justice" and similar (what you might view as liberal) sentiments. So even within their single, Roman Catholic community (which is a bit more monolithic than the many, many Christian denominations out there), there are a wide range of views. I respect that.
It seems to me, having met many of the sisters who are not cloistered, whether at the coffee shop or the post office or wherever, that they do a LOT of work for what you term your one issue...they're super active in caring for the poor, feeding the hungry, helping those in need. I REALLY respect that.
Heck, nuns are even blogging about social issues:
http://anunslife.org/2008/09/25/prelude-to-pove...
:)
My husband's a Political Science major and ardently believes everyone should understand EVERYthing about the political process and really listen to both sides of EVERY argument, but that can be pretty exhausting. :)
At the end of the day I just hope that everyone continues to work for what they hold dear, whoever the Pres is (and even if we're working towards opposite ends)!
*end of hippie love fest*
My "religion" is not that, a religion, it's a way of life. I have to simply smile when I see people give me quotes from a Bible I know that they do not read or understand. That would be like me quoting Planned Parenthood, or whatever, to you.
I did not post here to make you understand my views. I know most of you are wholeheartedly passionate about the views you hold and I am not thinking that my one little, squeaky voice can attempt to change your minds. Do I wish you all thought like I do? Sure. Just like you wish you could get me out of my "religious, brainwashed ways" and help me to see the light, the glorious light. :)
If Obama becomes president and pulls out of this war, I will have to honor him in that decision. I don't have to agree with him, but I will honor him.
I'm really not a political person. I don't follow things as closely as others think I should.
This is what I want from my country: A safe place where I can freely homeschool my kids, worship my God and live my life without government interference.
I also believe in homeschooling, if only because our (my boyfriend and I) experience with both the public and private schooling options were not what we'd like to see for our future children. And we both went to some of the best schools in our area! I've read, on homeschooling websites and elsewhere, references to Obama's book that seem to indicate he's ok with homeschooling, too.
I'm about to leave for a 4-day work trip and really should be packing, but thanks again for talking with me (us)! I'll check in again if I have internet where I'm going.
I just hope more people feel the way I do this time around.
But I guess, as a Californian, there's a part of me that has given up on the presidential worry, and I've hunkered down with the worry about equal rights. Californians decided against same-sex marriage before, and now I just worry that we haven't changed enough in the eight years since Proposition 22. I remember being in college at the time and ashamed of my state, and I hate being ashamed of my state.
Comment from this peanut gallery:
1) Regarding Annette's musing about how we don't "get it"...I get this a lot from foreign residing friends and I've come to think it has to do more with our scale than anything else. We're so vast both geographically and numerically. Our national ID as rugged individualists does nothing to create a common perspective from which we can collectively "get it".
2) I'm glad you've stuck with it Debbie. I've found your comments very illuminating. I would also encourage you to not stop your blog reading. For myself I will say that just because I'm free with expressing my opinions, doesn't mean I'm making a statement about yours or trying to drive anyone away. My husband and I would have some major problems was that the case! ;) I think we grow as people by embracing differing opinions and striving to understand each other. My blog is merely a reflection of who I am and what I'm going through.
3) Shannon, you are a font of fascinating linkage. How do you find the time?
4) Our kids are in a public charter school with a classical curriculum. They're young yet, but these past few years have seen us working through much of ancient history, through the rise of Christianity, Islam and Judaism and into the Middle Ages. The Bible is a significant document we've taken a good deal of time with. It's served to remind me that if there is one document that no 2 people read and interpret similarly...it's the Bible.
5) I think the single issue voter is a reaction to how embroiled both major parties have become on a social/theological level. I would argue that for many politics and religion are impossible to separate...just as impossible as some find the 2 to reconcile. These issues often become the ultimate deciding factor when all else seems too confusing to understand.
6) blondechicken? If your husband thinks he has a way to make everything about the political process understandable, I would love to hear it! I wish it could be so! As one that constantly struggles to understand the process and the facts behind the issues and the logic that ties it all together, I am most often left thinking we end up in a big muddle as a result of compromise from all sides creating a system that is purely unintelligible and illogical.
Off my soapbox. You all now have my 2 cents. Enjoy!
However, this discussion has helped me make a little progress on the road to understanding.
The role of religion is so much more important in the US than here, and the contributions to this thread have made me more capable to understand how it affects people's standpoints.
Soooo interesting!
And I think Dawn is right about the scale. Europeans tend to think about the United States as a country - which it is, of course. But it's a huge one!
And here lies the statement I was having trouble articulating earlier, to which my response is an astounding, "YES!" And thank you for articulating that.
Everyone has his/her priorities. I get that (and I respect it... my values aren't for everyone and that's fine). But, if you are going to go back to work with a three-day-old baby at home, then don't claim to be a supermom and don't attempt to make yourself relatable as a working mother. I am a working mother, and the value that is most important to me is my work/life balance. It's cliche, I know, but it's the truth of my life. I would like to have government leaders who are sensitive to things like the Family and Medical Leave Act. I want them to approve MORE benefits and MORE flexibility for working parents. I have a hard time believing that someone who was okay with returning to work three days after having a baby is really going to be sympathetic to the working mom who needs more leave time.
Further, I don't want this to be interpreted to mean that I don't think that women can do great things or have powerful jobs. I was a Hillary supporter and I think she would have been fabulous for this country. However, my guess is that Hillary couldn't make it as mother of the year. I want her to be my president -- not my mom. The contrast, though, is that Hillary never put herself out on that whole I-am-Mommy-hear-me-roar platform -- she never claimed to be just like me because we're both working mothers. I respect that. I don't respect someone who has five (four?) kids, one of whom is a newborn, who is accepting a potential job that will require her to move her family to Washington, away from the supposedly close-knit support system they have in Alaska; that has already required her to be on the road consistently for months in her campaign; and that will also require her to travel and be unavailable for a good portion of the time if in office. Who does that, and then claims that she can "relate" to the average American mom/woman?
Again, this all has very little to do with politics. It has everything to do with her hypocrisy in maintaining a personal/professional life and how she portrays herself. I don't care what anyone says; you CANNOT have it all. I think that there are lots of women who are great moms and go a great job in their careers -- but none of them is vice president of the United States.
For someone who has all the access to information in the world (compared to, say, a teenage girl in denial about her pregnancy, or someone without any real healthcare options, like a migrant farmworker), Palin sure as heck made a reckless decision there. And WHY? Was it really so important to attend that conference in Texas? Even if you've already had several children and think you know all there is to know -- things happen. Prudent, reasonable people prepare for the worst case scenario. If she's willing to take those kinds of risks in her personal life, what kind of risks will she find acceptable in making decisions that affect the country?
I agree with Melissa. You can't have it "all." I think anyone who grew up when (most of) us did figured that out at some point and made our choices accordingly. I don't think anyone should be able to dictate WHAT you have to do -- i.e. you HAVE to stay home and have children, you HAVE to go to work at a big fancy corporate job -- but I'd like to see someone in the running for such a high office display a little more common sense than most.
I want someone who considers all the options and chooses the one least likely to end badly if there isn't one "best" option. Is that asking so much?