U.S. Presidential Election 2008

It was emailed to me with the permission to spread it to everyone on my email list, but please don't post it to websites. I did the next best thing and posted it with her email address removed.

A high school friend of mine, a straight A student that got pregnant in her senior year (just shy of 18) had a tough choice to make. She asked me and reluctantly I accompanied this girl to the abortion clinic. She too came from a very religious family and did not want to carry this baby to term, nor put the baby up for adoption. I lost touch with her since but I can be safe to say that her parents never knew. She decided (as was allowed by law after Rove v Wade) that she would abort. She was not proud of this considering her Christian beliefs.
We took the bus with the money from the father (who also was a religious kid) and went to Chicago to the clinic. I don't remember much of the event except that I promised her that my Mother (widowed at the time) would not call her parents to tell her where we were going and why. My Mother only agreed to let me go once I fessed up and told her the truth and was very grateful that I was not the one in trouble.
I held this girl's hand on the bus as we prayed that the snow storm would deliver us safely back to our home while she was doubled over suffering in tears, silence and pain.
The point of this post is that it was legal and she had the choice. I vowed I would never abort a child myself but I also vowed I would uphold THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE for women as it's their body and their decision and it's definately above my pay grade.
For any woman or man to believe otherwise, in my opinion, is self rightous and because of that, Palin should not be heartbeat away from making any policy changes to the contrary. How dare that woman say a woman cannot abort a child for any reason, either by rape, incest or in the case of the mother's health.
I don't care if this woman was a democrat or a republican. I do not want anyone governing my country with that power to override the rights of women that were fought for, for centuries. This is 2008, not the damn dark ages. For that reason and many others, I will not support her views.

A woman's body. A woman's choice.

The right of women in the US to control their own bodies is under constant preassure and I wonder how long Roe v Wade would hold once a President Palin started appointing Supreme Court judges...

arguing over abortion is to me like arguing over euthanasia. in both cases you're discussing what's mercy and what's murder, and god is the only one who knows for sure.

i don't consider abortion (up to a certain term) murder because i believe that life first exists with consciousness. if you don't know you were ever alive, were you?

Yep I agree. She does frighten me a bit and I could care less about her daughters impending child.

I respect the daughters decision to continue her pregnancy, it's her body and her CHOICE.

Returning to Palin though, it never ceases to amaze me that anti Choice politicians are often the same ones who are opposed to sex education, especially that aimed at the young.

Palin is on.

CNN won't stop going to shots of the baby-daddy. Stay classy!

Crowd won't shut up. She can't calm them down.

Pumping up McCain. Supports him. Surprised?

Son Track is going to Iraq. Nephew Casey on carrier in Persian Gulf.

Introduces daughters and Trig. No mention of teenage pregnancy yet. "greatest joy brings challenge" alludes to pregnant kid? No, goes on about special needs.

Husband Todd, commercial fisherman, union member, world champion snowmobiler.

Small town values, those people work hard and are proud of country. "Hockey mom" bit about pit bulls and lipstick.

Little daughter holding Trig. Fixing hair, licked hand and wiped his hair down. Boy slept through the whole thing...

Protester getting removed. Buh-bye!

A few shots in on hypocrisy of Obama and Biden using bitter clinging to guns and religion.

Just mentioning the media was 20 seconds of loud loud booing.

Some background on things she did as governor. Sold state jet on Ebay. Got rid of governor personal chef.

Promises fiscal conservative by using vetoes. Bridge to nowhere mentioned.

Some details on oil and gas. 40 Billion NG pipeline? Relates gas to national security.

Knocks dem "do-nothing" energy plan. Talks about all of the above plan.

Good attack on BHO, two memoirs but no major bills in state or federal level. Lots of funny attack on hollow celebrity status.

Lists differences. Taxes, big government.

Sister at bar in Alaska with drunk guy in background. Cheers!

"change to promote their carreers... those that use careers to promote change."

Goes into McCain record of acievement and reform a bit. "Take the Maverick out of the senate and put him in the white house."

Lots of good quips and one-liners. Funny jabs.

McCain's mom is old. Looks good for being that damn old.

Good McCain segment. Definitely pumping him up.

Not a lot of detail. First time for me listening to her, voice is a little nasal (like a Minnesotan).

Overall, good speech. Definitely not bad delivery. Should be a success for first national appearance.

Edit: McCain pulls an Obama and shows up! Crazy.

On a positive note, Palin, at the very least, added a touch of intelligence to the Repug conference (Guliani was pretty good too).

How must Meghan McCain feel? Probably like Condaleeza Rice. Some people just will never be black enough for, ironically, those who preach color-blindness.

The picture in the FT today of her standing behind the podium has her looking glum ... like she's about to jump off a bridge.

Palin came over surprisingly well this time. But then the speech had been scripted for her (much of it allegedly before she had even been selected) and it was delivered to probably the most positively receptive audience she could have.

It will be interesting to see whether her sharp tongue and sarcasm are enough to counter Biden in their head to head.

The latest edition of The Borowitz Report talks about Bristol Palin's soon-to-be-husband Levi Johnston. I caught a good giggle.

That is more than a bit of an exaggeration of the policy positions. The point is that there are limits to everything.


What you should apologize for is misrepresenting a threefold
funding increase (the appropriation bill was, after all, called the Covenant House Alaska- Covenant House Facility Expansion (HD-1732)!)





This is, IMHO, hyperbolic. I would only agree with the MT statement if there was a ban on the use of all contraceptives/forms of birth control- something that wil obviously never be the case.

The below comments are quite worrisome, as was her attempt to remove books from the library that "she" deemed innappropriate. She is not unintelligent, an effective speaker and comes in a pretty package, all of which make her appear benign...which she is most definately not.

Palin: Iraq war 'a task that is from God'



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_...HT174UKV1Ss0NUE

Pat Robertson could become the next POTUS and he wouldn't be able to change Roe vs. Wade. The judicial process in the US isn't as easily influenced by executive decisions as people think, and as some politicians running for higher office think they are.


...and that's exactly the same thing some people think about Obama. Funny isn't it?

I suspect there is less here than Obama supporters are trying to make this out to be- this is a person talking to people attending her own church, so I would not expect her to say it is the work of the devil if her son is about to serve there. It is a twofer for many on the Left, as it encompasses their hatred of religious people and the action taken in Iraq.

No, nothing like Obama.

Anyway, surely the proof of her worth will come when she actually faces Biden

Ah well it seems one thing that this election has already suceeded in, is pitting Americans against Americans, keep it up chaps.

Oh give me a break...nice spin there. Those are HER words. I don't personally care for people evoking the name of God to push their political agenda...no matter where they are speaking. She is literally flat out saying, similar to Bush, that she knows what God's will is.

So don't try to downplay her fundamentalist religiosity as less than it is.

Some people have a religious motivation, some have an atheistic motivation, some have a Marxist motivation, etc. That is the point, gemini. Then again, it was Obama pastor Jeremiah Wright saying "God damn America".

hilarious!!! thanks for the comic relief.

And I hope you are not implying that Obama has a Marxist motivation

MY POINT was that you were trying to downplay her "beliefs" as of exagerated importance by Obama supporters.

As we try to assess exactly "who is" the Republican V.P. candidate...we should be aware of her beliefs. She is a Fundamentalist Christian who clearly feels she knows what God's will is, not only on foreign policy, but on the creating of oil pipelines, what books we should read, how we should be in the bedroom.

These are important issues to little old non Marxist ME, perhaps not you.

I'm sure, if the Christian God existed, he would appreciate people praying for a gas pipeline when there is so much actual suffering in the world.

I hope you are not developing a habit of misrepresenting my comments. Everyone has some motivation and/or underlying rationale for their beliefs. She was speaking to fellow members of her church, you know. We have some people who are guided in their public policy views by atheistic hostility to religion- who is to say their motivation is better- they too claim superior judgement with regards to public policy based on their atheism.

And, yes, I think in the vast majority of cases, the personal beliefs of US politicians are overrated in the public policy sphere, where many other considerations (such as the power of special interest groups or voting blocs) come into play.

Here's a question: how would YOU define government to an almost 4 year old? He just asked me... HELP!

The people who will be appropriating your money throughout your life for various uses you don't approve of regardless of which end of the political specturm you end up on.

rather polysyllabic for a 4 year old

good one!! LOL I told him the people who make all the rules. He said "I don't like rules". Me: "yes, I know".

But really, the question caught me off guard! All this political talk and I don't know how to explain it to my son... without giving him nightmares, anyway.

I was a verbose child.

and you can bet a militant atheist or a Marxist would have their agendas ridiculed and lambasted by the GOP press and used againts them viciously by the republican campaign scaremongering ad absurdo.

Conquistador actually has a point. Words aren't anything unless you consider them in the context they were spoken. So many people just take quotes and smear people based on that. That's why politicians are not famous for being sarcastic - it would be suicide / feeding frenzy for the press.


I agree with that however. Conquistador has a valid point that a religious stance should be seen as equivalent as a (say) marxist viewpoint, in that they're equally arbitrary, but are what people happen to believe in. It just bothers me that the whole thing is set up in such a black and white manner. (i.e. people tend towards polar opposites instead of meeting in the middle; surely more productive) what am i saying? marxist christians, baby. quit the mud-flinging and shag a socialist (after marriage, of course). then go to a non-denominational church service and pray to a god that may or may not exist.

... and form new political parties with representative voting. there's something the Dems and Reps will agree on: not to give away their power even if it may just be in the best interests of 300m who are presented more choice when going to the cinema than when at the polls.

In the USA? First I've heard of it. Care to name any names?

Here is one group active in the public policy sphere-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Atheists

and as BTC pointed out, none are running for the number 2 spot on the ticket. And if they were, any extremist views would also be open to debate.

But are there any atheists in positions of real power in the USA? Because from where I'm sitting I cannot see any - just a load of people from mildly religious to swivvel-eyed religious fanatics in nearly every position of the executive, the supreme coart and all the officers in the house.

Contrast that with the UK, France and Germany where atheists currently hold strong positions of power without that being a threat to religious people at all.

BTC, it would be much too strong a comment to say that in the US or Europe that atheist groups or atheist politicians are a threat to religious people, just as it is to say that Palin is a threat to anyone because of her faith.

I have no opinion or comments about the following news item, but thought that I would make others aware of this-

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/world/eu...html?ref=world

You do not have to occupy a high political office to have a role in the public policy sphere-note for example the myriad lawsuits brought by atheist groups over the years. Note their emphasis on the judicial process instead of the legislative process.

According to this link: http://www.theatheistconservative.com/
In relation to the issues of energy and national security, Alaska is right now the most important state in the US, not only for America but also for its allies in Europe and the Far East. In this consideration alone, Palin is an excellent choice of McCain’s to be his running-mate.

i don't think most atheists are at all a threat to anyone just as I do not think people with a private religious belief are a threat. However, people who wear their religion or noneligion on their sleeve as a putative justification for their political beliefs can indeed be a potential threat to a great many people. Sarah Palin has shown herself incapable to date to separate her religion from her politics and has time and time again dressed up frankly extreme views as an inevitable consequence of her deeply held beliefs. Her religion is therefore fair game for criticism just as her policies are since if she were POTUS the lives of poor women seeking abortions, gay people, patients waiting for stem cells and childless couples waiting for IVF could all be directly affected by the decisions her religion might drive her to take.

But atheism was never forced on people in the US the way it was on much of the European continent. Considering most of the "Left Party" are disaffected East German communists who grew up in an athiest state and are now depressingly more popular than the SPD, who's surprised?

I completely disagree that most atheists have no agenda to squash religion over time as "backward" ... it's just that the lack of church/state delination in europe is lightyears more hypocritical (Christian sabbath-based Sunday activity restrictions, a short-list of approved "official" religions, crosses on classroom walls, Kirchensteuer, political parties with names like the "Christian Democtatic Union", people getting every obscure christian holiday off from work (Himmelfahrt?) than in the US.

I have found it most ironic that religion impinges on my day-to-day life in Europe to a much greater degree than it ever did in the US ... and that in a place with empty churches and seemingly everyone declaring themselves agnostic or athiest!

So, US God botherers may say lots of "God Bless America" kinda stuff and litter the landscape with "Jesus Loves You" billboards, but none of them have ever legislated that I can't run my lawnmower on their holy day.

BTC, some people are more open about their religious beliefs than others. And you will obviously agree with me that there are plenty of religious people on the left whose personal interpretation of religion leads them to advocate left-leaning public policy.

Having or not having "faith" is not in and of itself a threat to anyone. Stating a belief however, that certain foreign policies are "God's plan", is a legitimate concern, when you are a Vice Presidential candidate.

If you do not see the difference, oh well.

Has she made these statements within the context of her private life, or within the context of her official public duties, gemini? It would be a crucial difference, and one you would do well to take into account. Furthermore, she was not the VP candidate until this past Friday!

BTW,


Commentary from Barack Obama himself-

yes of course I do. And I disapprove of them just as much. A political path should be followed because it is the right path for the benefit of the most people and the nation and not because a religious book directed us to follow it. In the Uk only one politician, Blair, has implied that religion guided the policies he followed around the Iraq war. Most other politicians keep their private religion or atheism as private matters not talked about in public.

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention

She made them in a public meeting in front of her Assemblies of God church to graduating religious students and with the media in attendance in the full knowledge that, as the governor of Alaska, it would be widely reported in the state. Now that she is VP candidate it is surely material evidence of the extremes her religion drives her to.

I would appreciate it if you spared me the patronizing tone. I think I can decide for myself what I should and should not take into consideration.

She was speaking to a church group while an elected official. She is now the VP candidate. Her beliefs regarding what role God plays in Government are of import to me.

And as we will not and do not agree on this issue, I really have no interest in running it around the wheel with you and playing the semantics game. It is a bore to me and I assume others.

BTC, her church attendance is, AFAIK, within the sphere of her private life. It was not an official function of the Governor of Alaska. So far, it looks to me as though people hostile to either conservatives, Christians or Republicans are making assumptions about Palin. I can understand why many people will have political disagreements with her, but the hysteria about her personal religious beliefs within the context of her political life has yet to be justified.

Any potential leader who says any war was a 'task from god' deserves to be criticized as it is a precedent many of us find eeirily similar to islamic fanatacism. If you say these kinds of things in public or private it is definately the publics right to judge you on them.

For the record, I'm the farthest thing from a God botherer in the world; if you're on the fence yourself, I'd strongly suggest you read Christopher Hitchens). There, I've hopefully established some street cred.

But let me play devil's advocate: If one is really religious, then everything's God's plan. Good and bad. Knocked-up teen daughters, oil pipelines, images of the Virgin Mary showing up on water towers and microwave burritos, whatever. I's all God's plan. And if that's what you believe, then that's what you believe, and you're a hypocrite to not say so, in public, even whilst running for public office ... we deserve to know now so we can make an informed decision and not later!

[Side note: What always confused me was how an unintended pregrancy somehow qualifies as God's plan but a decision to terminate said unwanted pergnancy is suddenly interfering with God's plan; what if the conception meddled with God's plan and taking it to term would actually piss him off even more? And why should God be pissed off at anything anyway? And why should he even care? And what if he were one of us ... and someone wrote a really annoying song about it? My last coursework on philosopy was 25 years ago, but I seem to remember we didn't come up with any answers back then, either . Also, let's please not morph this into a pro-choice vs. pro-life thread, God (nor anyone else) will clearly not smile upon it.]

Now, there are lots of secular/agnostic/atheist people out people out there who view those with homeschooling textbooks showing kids feeding apples to the dinosaurs and all jammering annoyingly about "the rapture" (which means that they're frustratingly utterly uninterested in embracing Global Warming as their proxy apocalyptic cult because they already have theirs sussed) with the utmost contempt. To the degree that they deem them unfit for public office. And they may be correct.

However, it's only if you're fundamentalist Christian that it's a problem. But if you're orthodox Jewish, Muslim, Hindu or anything else exotic or even Bishop Desmond Tutu thirld-worldy enough, and then suddenly demonstrably weird beliefs and not using light switches on saturday or using a prayer mat at work or not eating dead cows even if that's all there is on the menu are all perfectly acceptable. No one would ever dare to call you on how backward your beliefs are. Did anyone ever worry that if Lieberman were elected president and he had to push the button down to respond to a first strike but couldn't because it was the sabbath? So, it's cool to razz fundamentalist Christians, but when the fundamentalist muslim politician doesn't like a cartoon some Dane draws or an englishman writes, he whips up a fatwa, and everyone cowers in fear and doesn't say a word. Everyone seems to worry about Sarah Palin as a potential fundamentalist nutcase with her finger on the button ... but we already have plenty of those in spades across the rest of the world, and I didn't see anyone in europe actively working to actively influence or thwart elections in Iran, North korea, Pakistan, India or anywhere else with the really big fireworks. Come to think of it, about the only place that's tried to so has been (ahem) the US ... and everyone declared the biggest operation a "criminal act" from the get-go.

Clearly, familiarity breeds contempt ... the lesson seems to be if you're a wacko religious fundamentalist running for public office, just be sure to be the right flavor so that the rest of world leaves you alone to do what you please

any politician worth their salt knows that words spoken from a public platform in front of attending media will be taken as official on the record pronouncements. It really defies belief that you consider her actions here as some kind of private cosy converstion between her and a few religious people.

LP, I think it is more likely that she was referring to her the service of her son there. That may well be how some Christians talk to each other when saying something is really honorable.

As for this comment-


Some might find the following remarks of yours patronizing, gemini-