While I am not surprised, I am so INCREDIBLY disappointed, sickened, and worried about our new President! President Obama, ah it makes me cringe. I am sorry if I offend anyone but I have to get this off my chest and since my cough medicine hasn't kicked in yet for me to be able to sleep...here I go!
First off, it would be very interesting to find out how many blacks voted for Obama SOLELY because he is black. Now if I were to say, "I'm voting for McCain because he is white" I would be called a racist, true? However, to vote for Obama because he is black...that is ok. Pathetic, people are so stupid.
Second, to the rich people-say goodbye to your hard earned income, and to the poor-don't worry, you don't need to work, Obama will "redistribute the wealth" so you don't have to do anything! I would venture that about 90% of the rich are rich because of their HARD WORK. Yes, there are the few that were born into money or whatever. However, when people get an education, work hard, and take risks-WHY CAN'T THEY KEEP THEIR MONEY!? Now I ask myself, why bust my butt (or Parker's) to be successful when Obama will tax the crap out of me!? I think I'll just go work at Wendy's....
Third, I am so worried about my poor children who will grow up under this man's rule. He is against everything of value and supports everything that is wrong. Abortion will become simply another form of birth control, which will be great for all those waiting to do stem cell research on those poor babies. Homosexuality will become widely accepted and taught to my poor confused kids in ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. Worst yet-national security. Obama will pull out of Iraq like that pansy that he is and leave the mess there-which will come here.
The best part is...anything that Obama does wrong over the next 4 (PRAY that it's not 8) years will be blamed on what Bush did. Also, he's black so the press (who already loves him) will not be allowed to mock him as they did Bush. TALK ABOUT A DOUBLE STANDARD.
Ok I could go on forever, but I won't. All I have to say is America, watch out!!!
P.S. I would love to hear your thoughts on this matter, even if you don't agree with me, so COMMENT COMMENT COMMENT! =)
32 comments:
I hear you. I'm sitting here with a pit in my stomach, trying to decide how to address the issue on my own blog. Maybe I'll just cut and paste what you said! Seriously, I'm scared. And I haven't even heard if Prop 8 passed or failed yet...
Jenn, quit hiding your true feelings....tell us how you really feel!!! I also am scared for my children and grandchildren. I cannot believe that so many people were willing to vote for someone who gave so few specifics, who promised so much more than anyone could provide, who changed his position so conveniently, who has been so dishonest about his friendships and associations, who has never accomplished anything of significance in his very short political career as a senator and who has hidden so much of his past from the voters. Who did they really vote for?? The future will be interesting. Keep the Faith!
I agree with you. I am NOT at all impressed with Obama or his thinking. Watched a video of a Obama supporter who was excited because he was going to pay for her housing, her food, her gas, everything. I agree with working for money, because only then are you more careful of how you spend it. (watched an Oprah where they gave a homeless man $100,000 cash - lasted less than a month and at the end, he was still on the street - proof you can't just throw money at them, you've got to teach them how to work and make good financial choices)
ANYHOW - but I do not want to see what we've seen during Bush's presidency. I have been disgusted with how many people sport their "Kerry / Edwards" stickers, and how unsupportive and divided we have been. Do I like Obama - heck no, but he has been chosen by the voice of the people, so I am going to try (as difficult as it may be) to be supportive of him. This doesn't mean that I'm going to accept whatever comes out of his mouth, but that I will try to be unbiased while listening to him and contemplating his proposals.
Another sad thing is that the house and senate are controlled by the dems. Bad news. Good thing we still have God in our lives or else I'd really be scared.
AMEN! i hate obama. i hate everything about him and i will not support him at all. i dont care if i am divided from the rest of america. he is so devilish on everything and i will not support that. maybe i just wont have kids because i dont see how they can grow up without being gay and having abortions and making nothing because of stupid taxes! i am so glad you werent afraid to put this on your blog! yay sis!
I voted for McCain because he is pro-life, because a recession is not the time to lay heavy tax burdens on those in society who provide the funds that encourage growth and create jobs, because traditional marriage and families are the backbone of society, because Sarah Palin is kinda hot, because I want the fight for freedom at the doorstep of terrorists, not mine, etc. If Obama gets to appoint a couple judges to the Supreme Court, gay marriage bans will likely be reversed and abortions will proliferate. On the other hand, I do like the fact that Obama thinks that fathers need to take a more active, responsible role in the lives of their children. It is also good to see an African-American president. It is one thing to say that a member of a minority race can become president, but another to actually have one win. He will be able to inspire more people to great things in ways that other presidents have not been able to. I also think he will be a great diplomat and bolster the image of the country in ways that McCain likely would not have been able to do. I do like what Loni said and I hope that we won't be hypocrites and refrain from hating on him, trying to work out our differences in the best way we can.
Hi. I am a friend of Jackie's and read your blog. All I have to say is "AMEN" to everything you said! I am so scared for our country. I have been reading books and researching Obama and I am terified for what could happen to our country. So thanks for letting me read your blog. It's nice to know that I am not the only one who feels like that. :)
Shanna
I have a friend who told me about your site. And I have to say, I did vote for what you call "the end of the world as we know it". I voted for him because McCain has been in office forever and we are in this chaos now and he has been in that long. I understand this stuff wasn't all started by Bush, BUT... McCain seems more responsible simply for his being a senator for as long as he has been. All of this debaucle started at least 2 decades ago and so now we are reaping what we sew.
I hope, maybe naively that Obama will at least change things and the way they are going simply because of his lack of longevity in the Senate. He hasn't had the time to become so brazen and callused to the rest of us. He came from humble roots and I am there too. I know he can't put an ATM on every corner with my monthly million going in and the same for everyone. BUT I can hope he will change things for the better because of his lack of experience and lack of being told to often you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.
So those are my thoughts.
Jen, HA HA HA! Love this post! All I have to say is that I totally 100% agree!!!!
That is potentially the most uneducated post I have ever read about American politics. I don't even know where I would begin to critique the factually incorrect statements made in this post. "I would venture to say" one could construct an entire class discovering the inconsistencies of the statements you made. I am not a democrat, but what you said is ridiculous.
Please don't speak to things you don't know anything about. It is embarressing to you and your family. Also, don't make up statistics. That is also ridiculous.
I don't know you, I just had a friend who sent me the link to your blog. I don't want to be mean, but I really believe you should rethink some things. First, it's not the end of the world as we know it. There are checks and balances in place for a reason. Our founding fathers were pretty brilliant in how they set it up, so even if President Obama does have some socialistic tendencies, he can't do whatever he wants. He does have a Democratic Congress, but even that will provide its challenges.
Where I really feel you've gone astray is in the way you're already attacking our new president before he shows us who he really is. You talk a lot about patriotism, but I think part of being a patriot is falling in line and doing everything we can to support our leader (who was elected by the voice of the people) and wishing him nothing but the best. I have my concerns about him too, but I pray that he governs wisely and becomes a great president, and I think it's unbecoming to do anything less. I am giving him a clean slate when he enters office, and assuming nothing. I am sure over the next four years, he will say and do some things that bug me, but our country needs to stop being so harsh and try to see make good things happen. I prefer to be part of the solution. Maybe in four years that will mean getting someone new, but until then, I hope he does a terrific job and has astronomically high approval ratings. I hope you'll consider following suit.
Jennn I really like reading your blog to see what you,Parker and the boys are up to. But what you have written is so full of hate and fear that I feel sorry for you and for all of the people who have left comments agreeing with you.What has happened is one of the most historic days in our countrys history. Children will not "turn gay" and they will not be any more abortions than there already are. Its a great day for the common man and you might look down on me becouse of it but thats what I am. Anyone making less than 200,000 will get a tax cut. Don't you think they are the ones who need it?Please learn not to hate.
Hey Jenn, this is Tyler. You are right on the money. I don't have too much to say, except amen to that. And unfortunately to most people's well-being. I wouldn't be surprised if these new stimulus checks he is working on, are made to get our income up to 150k. Then he can use his plan to tax the crap out of everyone. But of course, he would give it back to those that don't even pay taxes in the first place. Good Post!!!
Wow, I leave town for 2 days and all hell breaks loose on my blog! Unfortunately I have not had internet access so I have not been around to read these comments until now but thank you everyone for posting! I enjoyed reading most of the comments, except those that just find random blogs to rant and rave on. I appreciated Laura's comment because, while different to my views, she expressed herself rationally. Aaron, Side of Jeffrey, and Stephen chose to express themselves by throwing out things like hate, uneducated, and don't be so critical of poor Obama.
First off, just because my opinions differ from liberals does NOT make me full of hate and if you knew me, you'd know that. I think that is a common comment made by democrats to describe republicans just because we believe in self sufficiency and consequences to actions. I am not a hater, I am a woman who has morals and values that she strongly believes in and wants to see upheld in our country.
Second off, I am not uneducated on the matter and if you wanted to prove that I was, then you should've left some facts instead of rantings. It makes me so angry when liberals try to throw out the uneducated card. A difference of opinion does not make someone dumber than you. I have reasons for what I believe, and they’re educated rational reasons. I would’ve loved for someone to have posted some facts, instead you showed us all your stupidity-but thanks for the laugh.
Lastly, poor President Bush has endured eight years of the flaming liberal media and everyone else ripping on him for every little thing him, his family, or his dog does so I find it quite hypocritical to ask conservatives to "support our leader." now that you have your guy in the White House. Did liberals support Bush these last eight years? Point proven.
Finally, I have to say that I am PROUD OF AMERICA for voting in a black President, I just wish to everything that it wasn't Obama. People are talking about how amazing it is that a black man was voted in, not how amazing it is that this underqualified radical left man was voted in.
Only time will tell, I do agree with my husband and Loni that we need to have respect for the leader of our country and I will try my best to do so. However, I will not support socialism or a demise of morals and values. I will continue to stand up for what I believe in, and I have that right as an American citizen.
You are unbelievably unfair. My comments were as polite and respectful as they could possibly be. I didn't call you hateful or ignorant and I did not rant. I think it's ridiculous to make so many assumptions before the guy is even in office, and don't think freaking out about it as you are is the appropriate response, but what on earth do you have against what I said? Apparently you just want to have everyone unanimously approve what you say, no matter how ridiculous it is. And you assume because you get called on your B.S., we're liberals? You know nothing about me. I am far from a liberal, and as I said, am concerned about what MAY happen under President Obama... but let it happen first before you fly off the handle. I promise you, if it comes down to it, the country is well-equipped to handle a president that we don't like.
Why sit back idly waiting and seeing when he's already announced his liberal position? We're not calling him a bad person, just not happy about what he is PLANNING on doing. Now would be the best time to act and debate these things. It's not an opinion on him as a person but on his policies. We've been told for the last 8 years that scrutinizing our president and debating his views is very patriotic. What's changed?
Because he hasn't done anything yet, Parker. Give the man a chance. If he says sometime after January 20 that he supports gay marriage, for example, then by all means, stand against it. That is just one of several things your wife said is going to happen that he has never been in support of. I don't feel that fear and predictions of doomsday is godly at all. I know she's your wife, and she's probably a terrific person, but most of what she has written on this topic is completely irrational and ignorant of the way our country is set up. I suspect that life will go on much as it always does. We're still a center-right country, and we have a long way to go before we turn into France. There are some very good Democrats out there... the Church has repeatedly said we need good members in both parties. Certain elements of liberalism are terrible and out of synch with the gospel, but I would say the same thing about the extreme right. I can give you at least a half a dozen examples if you want. There has been such a smear on Obama during this campaign, and most of it is utter hogwash. The email circulating about the Antichrist being a man of Muslim descent in his mid-40s, and a great speaker... sounds great, but doesn't say that anywhere in Revelation. I don't know what kind of leader Obama will be. But certainly we should pray for him to govern wisely and wish him well.
I agree with you, Bush gets ridiculed and with such hatred it's inexcusable, but I heard somewhere that we shouldn't use what other people do to excuse our own behavior... maybe you can help me with the source.
Well, Aaron/Anonymous troll who has yet to reveal himself, you missed my point. He has done a lot in this campaign and we're responding to the policies he has already committed to. He has already said that he supports gay marriage and adoption (http://obama.3cdn.net/9bbadf2e4222f1de03_5humvyu4s.pdf). Are you suggesting that his actions as president could be much different from what he has been saying during the campaign? You also missed the point of my reference to the criticism towards Bush, it was to highlight the hypocrisy; I have justified my concerns with the facts. You are also incorrectly assuming that we are responding to false claims that have been circulating rather than the truth. That does make it much easier to make your point, but here's an idea, show where Obama's policies differ from what we have understood them to be.
I think your sister has the best idea for people who are as ignorant, hateful, and bigoted as you and your husband/family are . . . just don't have any more children. I can see that you already have some, but I'm sure there is no hope for them. We don't need any more people who grow up in a Mormon bubble embarrassing our religion.
"Liberal" does not mean "bad." Ignorance like you have expressed here is bad. I don't even understand how you can show your face after posting something like this. It's lucky that you live in Utah--Utah and the deep south are the only places that this kind of hate is tolerated.
One piece of advice, before I leave: try for one second, for the benefit of your children, to actually think for yourself. I know you have a husband who is going to law school, and as a housewife, you have no "need" to think--but it really will be better for your sons if you go ahead and try to use your brain. Women are actually allowed to think for themselves now, thanks to the efforts of democrats. We don't have equal rights yet, because republicans in the last Congress did not vote for the equal rights act (giving equal rights to women), but we ARE allowed to think. So, consider it.
Obama has NOT come out in support of gay marriage. The link you provided did not work. Look it up anywhere. Google it. He has supported civil unions, which attorneys for the Church have suggested would be acceptable, as it would be enough to protect its tax-exempt status. And as far as abortion, your wife's statement that it will just become another form of birth control is speculation at best, bordering on stupidity. Abortion is one of the greatest tragedies of our time, and no one is going around talking about what a beautiful thing it is. The president has ZERO control over those things. As a law student, you should know that Roe v. Wade is terrible law, but after 40 years it is well-established enough that it is unlikely it will ever change. It is YOUR burden of proof to support accusations and assumptions that you're making, not mine. On the socialism issue, time will tell. I feel we pay plenty of taxes already and they should be able to find plenty of fat in the budget to go towards more worthy things, but Bush, the so-called conservative, has not been fiscally responsible at all. And at some level, a progressive tax system is inevitable because taxes have to come from somewhere. You can't take money from people who don't have it. And lastly, the whole idea that this is the end of the world as we know it... I've already addressed that, twice, but if you take nothing else away from this, you should at least be able to see the genius of the founding fathers. The concept of checks and balances is a beautiful thing.
So there you have it, I've refuted about 95 percent of your wife's brainless ranting. I have my doubts that anything I said landed, and you're free to believe what you want to believe. This is the anonymous troll signing off. (By the way, was that comment directed to me? Everyone I've seen on here has used a name. What do you want, an address and social security number?)
WOW! Well first let me say that my husband rocks, and I am so glad he can express himself with intelligence and facts instead of baseless rude remarks. AARON, whoever you are, you will never convince my husband and I of your views, so let's just call it quits. You see the world one way, we see it another. Only time will tell what Obama will do, although I think everyone can see it but you. How about in 2 years we re visit the issue? See who was right? Sound good?
As far as this SMASH chick, are you kidding me? How dumb does she look when, for those who KNOW me and don't just read random people's blogs, I DIDN'T GROW UP IN THE MORMON bubble, sorry Smash. Also, don't ever talk about my kids again. Again, if you knew me, I DO think for myself and no one can change my mind, just ask my husband. Lastly, I'm sorry you harbor so much hatred for Utah and conservative Mormons. I wonder what happened to you?
The funny thing is that I haven't tried to convince you of anything except to stop talking like the world's coming to an end, and get your facts straight. I didn't even vote for Obama. I do believe you that no one can change your mind, that much is clear. And that's not a good thing, that's the opposite of thinking for yourself when you are so convinced that you're right that you attack even people who have made an effort to be polite. Hopefully one day you will develop some critical thinking skills. Take care.
Now we're finally getting down to substance and away from the emotional missiles, though admittedly Jenn started it and I never took the high road to end it. If you're someone we know, it would be intersting to find out. Plus, I feel a little vulnerable because our life is really out there on our blog. Roe v. Wade: I like your analysis. I was thinking with my comment on "abortions would prolifertate" as a broadening of the abortion rights under Obama and a restricting of the allowable instances under McCain. I'm not a huge scholar on the case, but I'm thinking that while the Court might not overturn it, it's plausible that a conservative court could restrict it in someway and a liberal court could expand it in someway. I do believe in limited exceptions to abortion, but not wholesale-contraceptive-safety-net if you make a mistake or change your mind. With gay marriage, and I've used that term generally, before I get to the tax exempt issue of the church, I try to see what is best for society. Do we really even want civil unions with the same status as marriage, getting society's stamp of approval and being interpreted as something good and wholesome? I feel pretty solid on my views against homosexuality but I do wonder about the extent to which we should give gay couples certain benefits. I guess I feel right now that we have a democratic right to determine the way in which we want to define the relationship betweeen the government and married couples.
I don't think you've actually been too bad in this, Parker. I tried to make some really commonsense points and Jenn threw me in with people who were calling her names, so that got under my skin and I let loose a little (but not as much as I could have). Emotional missiles were actually what I was trying to avoid all along.
I haven't hidden anything from you. I said at the beginning of my very first post that I don't know you, I had just had a friend forward a link to the blog (and I have no idea how she got it). She was concerned about how angry and quick to assume the sky is falling that entry is, and I have to say I agree with her there, because that's what we've heard for most of the Bush Administration (and I have to admit, I think he's done some real damage). But the point is, I don't hate him, I think it would have been a difficult time to be president (even more so than normal), and we shouldn't engage in paranoia and rage just because others have.
I don't feel comfortable going farther than the Church does on the issue of homosexuality. I have relatives who worked for Prop 8 in CA, and my understanding is that they were trying to protect their tax-exempt status and are open to the idea of unions. We believe what we believe about it, but I find it hard to argue against gays' rights for insurance coverage, hospital rights, etc., just because we don't approve.
I suppose abortion rights could be further expanded, although placing restrictions on it would be very difficult. And indeed it is troubling that Obama has been so accepting of partial-birth abortion. But at the same time, to claim that it's going to become just another form of birth control is silly. I don't believe there are many women who could make that kind of decision casually. And even if they do make that tragic choice, my interpretation of what the Brethren have said is that repentance is possible and we should continue to love those who have participated in it. I am angry at the Republican Party for defining themselves only on that issue and gay rights and the Iraq War, while fiscal responsibility has gone out the window. Limited government really isn't their bag any more, and that is why I reregistered with no party affiliation a little over two years ago. Anyway, I hope you will try to convince your wife that I'm not the enemy she believes me to be.
Well, the thing is we both believe pretty much the same thing, we have different ways of expressing ourselves. If you really look at her post, she's technically not saying what everyone is concluding that she's saying. Women have a way of always being right ;) Her first point is that she thinks people should vote on something other than race (you seriously think that no one voted for this reason alone? look it up yourself, I've seen a couple good links but don't have one handy of people being interviewed), her second point is that most people earned their wealth and it's unfair to take it away from them (so she ballparked a percentage and we could never know the exact percentage, but how many bums do you know who stumble into wealth and do they out number the go-getters of society?), her third point+ is that Obama is not against expanding abortion beyond just the limited exceptions that we believe it should be limited to so it will likely be broadened(if it prevents a baby from being born after having sex=birth control), Obama is not as committed to fighting the war on terror abroad and will retreat if he has to (will pull out in 16 mos http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/side_by_side_comparison/index.php), and I can't believe the criticism she's getting because she thinks some people voted for him because he's black. Some people did, she didn't say it made a difference in the election, and now everyone thinks she's off base. Then to get told we are unpatriotic for criticizing his views kind of proves the double standard as she explained it.
Well, I didn't say any of those things. By the same token, I'm sure there are a lot of people who were very uncomfortable with a black president. It's not like we elected Louis Farrakhan, or even Al Sharpton, so I didn't think it was worth bringing up, because in fact her comment does suggest that being black was a major factor. I just basically believe, let's get him into office before we anticipate the trumpets of the Apocalypse.
On the wealth question, I am very conservative about taking people's money, but I don't think today's GOP is being realistic by trying to lower people's taxes while the size of government continues to increase. McCain originally showed some guts on that by opposing Bush's tax cuts unless there was a way to offset that, then he pandered. But we have who we have, and the premature rending of garments does nothing to make the situation better, it just gets people worked up. Anyway, good talk. And good luck finishing law school.
To someone who hasn't lived in Utah for a long time, a lot of these comments are really shocking. I know that Utah is conservative, but the worst of these comments are not conservative at all; rather they are of the "know-nothing" variety.
Some examples:
the comment about black people voting for Obama just because he is black. There are many documented instances of black people running for office in this country, who were ahead in the polls, only to lose on election day. White people undeniably have a history of voting for white candidates because they are white. And this is only in the relatively recent past when we have reformed our society enough to allow black people to participate meaningfully in the political process. In fact, we have a history of denying blacks the right to vote or to run for office altogether. So, why should we be shocked, or offended, that black people would vote for one of their own? I don't think we should be offended, even if it's the truth. That their candidate won opens the door to a whole new appreciation for what is available to them in America. Having not been black, or otherwise marginalized in society, I don't think most of us can understand just what a great day this was for black people. I sat with some black people at the Democratic National Convention on the day Obama accepted the nomination. They were delightful, gracious, educated people, reserved and dignified until he stood up to speak, at which point tears began to flow down their cheeks. I think when a whole new chapter of the American Dream opens up for a whole large segment of our society, it's good for all of us, whether or not you agree with Obama and his politics. I truly can't understand the negative feelings expressed here; they seem more based on fear of the unknown than anything else. But this is America, and I submit we don't have anything to fear. I deplored the eight years of the Bush Administration, and could argue with any of you for years about how destructive they were of our country, our economy, our image and influence abroad, etc. But they are over, and he did not destroy the country. As another commenter noted above, there are checks and balances that make it difficult for anybody to steer our government too far off course.
Comments about abortion: If you look in the Handbook of General Instructions, you will find the Church's most practical statement about abortion. To paraphrase, abortion is strongly discouraged except in cases of rape, incest, or when necessary to protect the life of the mother. This statement of position is notable both for what it says and what it implies. It establishes what we all recognize as the Church's strong position against abortion rights. But it also notes some times when a Bishop or other Church leader might actually counsel a woman to have an abortion. Implicit in the statement is a fundamental difference with Catholics, evangelical Christians and other conservative abortion opponents: Church authorities have not spoken on the subject of whether life begins at the moment of conception, and the fact that there exist circumstances when an abortion might be appropriate strongly suggests that our leaders do not believe or espouse such a doctrine. What does this have to do with Obama? Yes, Barack Obama is pro-choice, but there is absolutely nothing to suggest that he would enact policies that would turn abortion into a surrogate for birth control. He has stated on many occasions that public policy should be employed to reduce as much as possible the number of abortions in America. I respect disagreement with that position; I myself, as a Church member, am pro-life. However, remember that many Republicans are pro-choice, and John McCain came very close to choosing one of them -- Tom Ridge -- as his VP running mate. It is not always possible to equate being Democratic with supporting abortion on demand, and it seems to me that the commenters on this blog are tending to do that. Remember that Mitt Romney the Mormon and Republican was a longtime supporter of abortion rights until he decided to run for President and needed to rally support from Mormons, conservative Catholics and evangelicals. Somebody noted above that Obama is a supporter of partial birth abortion. I refer you to the last debate, in which he eloquently explained, when accused by John McCain of that, that he does not support partial birth abortion and would vote to ban it, but when the issue came up in the Illinois legislature, proponents amended the bill to make all late term abortions illegal, even if they were medically necessary to protect the health of the mother. That, in my judgment, is a legitimate position to take, and is not the same as being in support of partial birth abortion.
Taxes - I make more than $250,000 so I am probably going to pay more taxes. I am not thrilled about that, but I also pose this question to all of you commenters: How are we going to pay the bills of this nation? John McCain refused to answer this question, as Republican candidates often do, and Barack Obama was evasive about it too, in my opinion because the real hard truth always allows Republicans to criticize Democrats for being "taxers." But it seems clear to me that we cannot continue to run enormous deficits. The only ways to avoid those are to tax more, or spend less, or a combination. Where are the spending cuts coming from? John McCain mostly talked about cutting out earmarks, and that would be OK. But if all the earmarks in the entire federal budget were removed, it would save not more than $20 billion a year. That's a large sum to us, but not in a budget of several trillion dollars. It's not going to come close to balancing the budget. Defense? Republicans cry out in horror. The defense budget is untouchable, many people say, and the fact that Democrats would propose to cut it shows they are pacifists at heart, unwilling to defend the country. Besides, as Obama has said repeatedly, we have a long and expensive war ahead of us in Afghanistan, so it is unclear that real savings can be achieved in the defense budget. The other major elements of the budget are entitlement programs, which include Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and so on. The amounts of these programs are set and can't be easily cut. And cutting them hurts the neediest people in our society: elderly people who live on Social Security that they paid into their whole lives, and the poor who need Medicaid.
As I said, I don't look forward to paying higher taxes, but I'll do it if the money goes to solving our country's problems. When we run budget deficits year after year, we have to borrow the money by issuing Treasury bonds. The biggest purchaser of those bonds by far is China. Do any of you think it's in our national interest to become more indebted to China? If not, how do you propose to stop borrowing money from China?
Republicans often decry taxes and tax increases, and in years past, especially in the late 1970's, these arguments were very successful. Marginal tax rates in the U.S. and the rest of the western world had become much too high. Since Ronald Reagan, Republicans have brought lower taxes, and have made the call for lower taxes their singular campaign promise. It's great, and tax cuts are often justified, but it's not always a good governing strategy. If we cannot cut spending, and refuse to raise taxes to close the deficit, we are delivering the future of our country into the hands of foreign governments that do not particularly wish us well. It's insanity and it has to stop. I thought Sen. Obama did a better and more honest job of talking about this than did Senator McCain.
Obama's Past - Some of the most hateful comments were about Obama's supposedly sinister past and his lack of real accomplishment. There are two problems with these complaints: (1) they make a lot out of Obama's supposed past and ignore John McCain's, and (2) they don't give fair credit to Obama where credit is due. The misgivings about Obama's past apparently have mostly to do with his associations with Bill Ayers (the Weatherman) and Rev. Wright (the radical preacher). The McCain campaign focused on Ayers, because McCain himself found it distasteful to criticize Obama for his preacher. What is there we don't know about Ayers and Obama? Commenters ask the question, and I suggest that the fact you do this shows that the McCain campaign tactic had some limited success. The tactic was to raise concerns and doubts about Obama by highlighting the relationship and asking Obama to come clean about it. Obama made a number of statement detailing the times he had met Ayers, their work together on an advisory committee working on education reform (both were appointed by Ronald Reagan associate Walter Annenberg), etc. The McCain campaign cried foul, insisting there is more and that Obama must disclose it. But don't you think that if McCain knew there was more, he would have put it out there himself? This stuff is typical campaign crap, and in the end, it didn't work enough to create doubts in enough people.
Now contrast Obama's life and McCain's. McCain has a great history as a war hero and a Member of Congress. Those are laudable. He also is notable for having divorced his first wife when she was in her sickbed with cancer. What does that say about him? He himself described this during the campaign as his greatest personal failing. Barack Obama was born in a mixed race family, which is often harder than being all black; sometimes these children don't fit well into either black or white society. He grew up with a single mother, went to Harvard and Harvard law school, graduated in the top of his class, turned down a sweet job in a white shoe law firm to do community organizing. I know that Sarah Palin did a good job ridiculing community organizing, but don't jump so fast. Barack Obama got himself into the Senate and quickly launched, by many measures, the most successful presidential campaign in history. It was highly disciplined, hardly made any mistakes, and raised by far the most money of any campaign in history. Most of this money was raised on the internet, in small donations. Before Barack Obama did this, no politician believed it was possible. Obama boldly said he would not take money from lobbyists or PACs (most politicians think taking money from these sources is absolutely necessary). People thought he would fall flat on his face, but instead he tapped into a deep dissatisfaction in America with what is going on in the country and in Washington. He mobilized millions of people, got them to contribute in small amounts via automatic withdrawals from bank accounts, and won the Presidency. I think it is amazing.
Is he really that liberal? I think it remains to be seen. Politicians that do well in the United States govern from the center. If Barack Obama moves too far to the left, he won't get reelected. In my opinion, George Bush governed too far from the right, and that, along with the Iraq war, was his downfall.
Same-sex marriage - He is NOT in favor of same sex marriage. The weblink provided by Parker takes you to Obama/Biden position paper on Gay/Lesbian issues. He states unequivocally there that he favors civil unions that give partners the same rights as partners in marriage, but does not favor same-sex marriage.
My overwhelming impression from reading many of these comments is that they come from fear and ignorance. Many are based on notions about Obama, not facts, and many are based on suggestions and inferences planted by the McCain/Palin campaign as campaign tactics. I wouldn't believe anything one candidate says about another without checking it out independently. Famously, in 1988, Lee Atwater and Karl Rove ran the ads showing Michael Dukakis looking goofy riding on a tank, and listed in the ad a long list of military programs and bills Dukakis had been opposed to. The problem was, Dukakis was a governor, had never served in Congress, had never voted on any of the military programs listed, and never took (or had to take) a position on any of them. Dukakis didn't do a very good job responding to the ad, and the information in it became embedded in the public imagination. But it was all garbage.
Finally, I challenge you all to think about the notion that Mormons are better off with a President Obama than you would be with certain Republican presidents. This is not true of McCain; I think he actually is quite moderate, and would have moved far to the center had he been elected. But many of the people he was positioning himself to appeal to are evangelical Christians. We think of them often as having values similar to our own, but if you were paying attention early in the campaign, you saw how untrue this is. Those people think Mormons are polytheists and fake Christians. The worst of them think our religion is Satanic and that we are going to hell. They deny the validity of our baptisms and ordinances, and they would never vote for a Mormon to hold public office. People like this, when they get into power, use their power to make the laws say what they want, and often in so doing they affect the rights of the rest of us. These people are not our friends. If Mitt Romney becomes the R nominee in 2012, you will see exactly what I mean. We are much better off with leaders who, while they may hold views that are more liberal or different than our own, are not anxious to restrict or repress our right to run for office, or to worship how we please.
P.S. Did any of you notice Sarah Palin? She has true political gifts, but she is laughably unqualified to be VP at this time in her life. That McCain chose her shows unbelievably bad judgment. I'm amazed to hear people say they like her precisely because she is not an "elitist," equating elitism with knowledge and learning. If elitist means someone is snotty and acts better than the rest of us, then I don't like elitists either. If it means somebody who is educated, who makes it his/her business to know important, fundamental things like what the Bush doctrine is (the basis of our current foreign policy and the two wars we find ourselves fighting), etc., etc. then I'm all for elitism. Not understanding the consequences of invading Iraq, or not caring too much about the consequences, created precisely the mess we are in there now.
Music Go Bang-are you kidding me? I cannot believe that you have the time to write a novel like that on someone's blog who you don't eevn know but looks like we just disagree. You can find stats to support your view and I can find stats to support mine. That being said, thank you for expressing yourself without hatred and rude remarks-unlike other members of your family.
One of the reasons I left such a long comment is that I felt surprised by the vehemence with which some of you expressed your distaste for Obama. I could just think: "these people are crazy," and leave it be, but nobody evolves in their thinking that way, neither I nor you. So I invested all that time, thinking you might offer some rebuttal that would help me understand where you are coming from. But your response was "we just disagree, and you can have your stats and I can have my stats." I actually put my stats out there in the response. I tried to differentiate clearly between when I was expressing opinions, and when I was citing facts. Real facts, or stats, as you call them, are not subject to manipulation. They say what they say, although understanding them sometimes requires some work from us, and we may disagree about what conclusions they lead to. For instance, one of your commenters incorrectly noted that Obama is for partial birth abortion. I provided the factual rebuttal for that, and noted exactly where you can go to hear what he has to say about it. So, my stats are there. Where are your stats? I certainly don't expect you to write a novel, but a thoughtful, factual rebuttal would be nice.
I am not a regular reader, but stumbled onto your blog through reading "Smash's" blog. I don't know her either.
That being said - you ended your post looking for comments...even from those who disagree - so here goes.
I am liberal and Christian - not mormon - just as a frame of reference. Also I did not read all the comments fully - just skimmed because they were copious.
I would say that your response is very alarmist, and indicative of someone who truly does not thoroughly understand how our government works. Yes the president has a lot of influence, but at the same time, he cannot change things on his own - congress is instrumental in changes that take place, as well as the judicial branch. To say that "Abortion will become simply another form of birth control, which will be great for all those waiting to do stem cell research on those poor babies. Homosexuality will become widely accepted and taught to my poor confused kids in ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. Worst yet-national security. Obama will pull out of Iraq like that pansy that he is and leave the mess there-which will come here." is very very very dramatic...but will it likely happen? No not really, and certainly not so simply as you put it that's for sure. Additionally you need to acknowledge that we live in a democracy for a reason, and that majority rules. Evidently the people have spoken and you are not a part of the majority. Calling someone a "pansy" because they disagree with your opinions doesn't really appear to be a an adult response to me. There are many mane Americans who feel that the war in Iraq was misguided to start with. Just as you are entitled to your opinion, they are entitled to theirs. If you want to make an educated argument for your point or why you disagree with him, go ahead, but resorting to name calling and dramatic generalizations makes it seem like you don't know what you are talking about.
As to why people voted for him, does it really matter at this point? Your argument is as silly as calling people in Alaska ignorant geographists and saying they only voted for Palin's ticket because she's from Alaska. They would likely argue that they identified with her more and felt she had their best interests at heart, and yes...maybe that's partially because they feel she has shared some life experiences with them. So saying that black people are racist because they voted for Obama doesn't hold water. The logical argument might be that they felt they could identify with him, and that he had the country's best interests and their best interests at heart because they felt he had shared experiences similar to their own...and that is a valid argument, and it does not make them racist. Despite any of this, you have to acknowledge that a majority of the people who voted for Obama were not even black. Yes a majority of the black people who voted did vote for Obama, but a majority of the white people who voted also voted for Obama, as well as a majority of the hispanics.
Ultimately for me there were a number of factors I considered. One thing that I personally couldn't get over with McCain was the way he left his first wife after the accident - had an affair and married about a month after his divorce was final. She supported his family and waited for him while he was a POW and that's how he repays her loyalty. That to me is not a good man and that to me is not someone I feel I can trust. Additionally Sarah Palin is not qualified for the office of Vice President. McCain is not young, and is not necessarily in good health. That makes a Palin presidency a definite possibility, and honestly I think we would be much worse off with her at the helm.
In my opinion a good Christian should not look at this as an opportunity to bash, call names, or conjecture what an Obama presidency will bring. A good Christian should be praying for unity, direction and prosperity. If you are so concerned, you should be praying for our leader no matter who he is. Think back to ancient times...when there was a king and you had no control over who was king. You should be thankful that our government gives us the power to affect and shape our nation. Because ultimately there is nothing you can do about the situation, but be the best person you can, do all you can to be part of the solution and teach your children the things that you want them to know. If you feel that the school system is teaching them things that you disagree with, put them in private school or home school them. This is the US. The land of opportunity. And just as you cannot force someone to share your beliefs, no one can force you to share theirs. Now you can understand how liberals have felt for the past eight years. This is the country we live in, and this is it's government.
Thank you Megan and Make...Bang for your comments. If I was not wearied by Smash's underhanded tactics and Mormon houswife bashing, I would be more willing to discuss your comments in the civil, rational manner in which you have presented them. But you've both presented a lot of information, and I have spent more time here than I can afford. I will think about what was said.
Post a Comment