Some of my links over there to the right are to female writers. In the past politics were only a small part of their musings. Now politics makes up a significant portion of their rants. I am OK with that because a) it is political season and b)they can write whatever they want.
What I find interesting is that these sites are written by what I consider independent, intelligent women. Yet, for some reason the idea of a female Vice-President sends them into complete hysterics. I hate the term feminist, but I would think women of all stripes would be happy to see that at least one political party is looking beyond sex and choosing the right person for the job. Was Palin picked because she was a woman? Probably, but her political beliefs also came into play. For me, it is her conservative values and willingness to finally attack the Democrats that garners my support, I could care less if the person in question is a woman, man, black, white, green, or a fuzzy marmot. The attacks I have seen from my blog buddies is not about politics, but labeling her a Barbie, or attacking her family. Could it be that NOW, just like the NAACP, is only in favor of advancing their cause if the person in question has the right political bent? Here is a person not only breaking the glass ceiling, but beating it to shards with a sledge hammer, and all she gets is attacks from women? I do not get it.
Look, no matter what your beliefs, we need to understand the Government is no more going to "control your uterus" than they are going to get rid of Medicaid or Social Security. In the 35 years since the Roe v. Wade decision Republicans have controlled the White House 23 of those years. They have also controlled the House and Senate at various times. The decision has not been overturned. A state mandated religion has not been installed and your freedoms as outlined in the Bill of Rights have not disappeared(except for number 10, and that was eviscerated long ago). By the same token, if your hope for this election is that R v Wade will be overturned, you are in for a big disappointment.
I think we can civilly disagree about a lot of stuff. I may not agree with your political bent, but I will keep reading your stuff. What confuses me is the amount of hatred that comes from the supposedly compassionate Democrat side of the spectrum. I have not seen or heard Republicans hoping there is a lot of destruction from a hurricane so it would disrupt a convention, or wanting to dump urine on books they do not agree with. I find it disgusting anyone would call for a paternity test on the children of a candidate. How offensive would it be if I stated the overwhelming statistics for minority children to be born out of wedlock and demanded Mrs. Obama prove her kids were really Obama's?
Why is it that the press and lefty bloggers always claim Conservative men and women are dumb? Why is Hillary considered smart, after all, contrary to all evidence and past record, she believed there was a vast right-wing conspiracy out to frame her husband. (I am still waiting on an apology BTW). If McCain had claimed he had visited all 57 states we would still be hearing about it. Look, I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I am pretty sure I can look at history and see some patterns. Socialism and Communism have failed miserably everywhere they have been tried. Making everyone miserable is not a formula for success. Thinking otherwise does not make you more nuanced, smarter or more cosmopolitan. It puts you smack in the middle of a river in Egypt. Think about it.
edit: The thought of a Bible Thumper living in the Naval Observatory scares me a whole lot less than the thought of Bill Ayres or Louis Farrakhan or Jeremiah Wright advising the occupant of the White House, but that is just me.
No comments:
Post a Comment