[lit-ideas] Re: Another perspective on VP selections -
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 11:18:28 -0700
You want to criticize Palin's religion? Did you know that in his first
memoir, the one he wrote before deciding to run for President, Obama said
one sermon he listened to changed his life. Guess who preached that sermon?
Right, the reverend Jeremiah Wright. I don't listen to the guys you
mention, but I'd pit them sight unseen against the wacko who changed Obama's
life.
Can you see yet why the Obama campaign quit picking on Palin?
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of eternitytime1@xxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2008 9:37 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Another perspective on VP selections -
From Lawrence:
You think McCain picked Palin to satisfy part of the party. I don't
know
where you got that . . . Oh yes, the Obama campaign before they found
out
that wasn't true.
Hi, Lawrence,
No. I got it from Richard Land. Early August. But, even before then,
James Dobson had been stating on his radio show that he was thinking of
telling "his" listeners, the fundamentalists Christian pro-life crowd,
to stay home because of McCain's nomination--and the subsequently, if
he didn't select a very pro-life VP.
I think you need to spend some time immersed in his radio show...read
about Gary Bauer, etc.
Did you even go read about them? Did you read the article which
Richard Land mentioned Sarah Palin early on?
The group of the Republicans who could care less about the social
issues (they are, I think, above the law anyway) is using her.
I think you are ignoring that side of the Republican Party. (As
Christine Todd Whitman wrote--it's my party, too! Except that it
isn't--it is no longer about less government, fiscal conservativism.
It's more govenrment in our lives--more privatisation though not less
money to run the things to be run--just a redistribution of which
'workers' get the money--and the cavalier disrespect towards so much
that the Republicans once stood for [at least in my world, where I grew
up] is tough. McCain was once one of the most moderate--and I could
have voted for him. I'm not the only registered Republican having too
difficult of a time with this--and there are many many Republican women
in my situation.) To say that the VP doesn't do anything, thus it does
not matter that she is inexperience [Obama does have quite a wide
breadth of understanding of the world, at least--see his mother's work
in Hawaii:
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Sep/12/ln/hawaii809120379.htm
l
The concept of microloans at that time period, for example, is pretty
interesting.
Both McCain and Obama have enough grasp of how things work in the
Senate to work 'with' or towards consensus--and that is, to me, very
important. As you state, they will each have a cabinet to assist them.
However, given the selections of choice for the VPs, I now suspect
there will be other concessions made for McCain's cabinet that he might
not have selected if he was not willing to compromise far far too much
on his own integrity in order to win. I do not trust him.
You may be falling out your chair--but the disrespect towards me, a
registered Republican [so, there-I'm out <g> though in Missouri, we
typically vote for the candidate not the party anyway--and I like to
really look long-term at what will happen at the various possible
scenarios--] that I would vote for a woman just because she is a
female--was enough to make ME fall out of my chair.
MY issues are not the pro-life ones, though at least I apparently pay
more attention to all the various players in the Republican party--and
DO listen to Dobson periodically [and have lots of friends in 'that
world' so keep up to date on the viewpoints being pushed) My issues
are concern about foreign policy -- not just the war aspects, but
things like human trafficking [which is huge--and many American
companies are in that world and that is appalling. My issues include
things like the fact that the incredible decrease in Asian students to
the US university/college world is because the US has stopped,
particuarly in the last seven years, investing in
math/science/research. They get more access in their own universities
now. Mexico graduated more engineers than the US did last year. The
billion dollar testing industry in the US has harmed education,
incredibly much. Those are not things that concern me, alot. The
National Science Foundation has said they would take a lead on
this--and their budget was cut. I want to see the inspectors for the
FDA increased, not decreased. I want my government to protect me from
the corporate greed that is not just in the US, but in China--so that
tainted paint does not reach here [and how thankful that we still have
a dairy industry--can you imagine being a a parent in China with the
tainted milk powder--but it could be us with a different product--the
caretaking aspects of government ought to be on the broader picture of
abortion and providing gov't money [which would then actually allow for
government oversight--of stem cell research]
The disrespect is simply incredible. The short-sightedness and
single-issue push from the Far Right in the Republican party who have
traditionally not been able to stand John McCain--an area which you
really need to research. Start with Richard Land. Gary Bauer. James
Dobson.
It's not really slanted, Lawrence. It's just looking at the situation
without the emotion that you are bringing to this. It's about looking,
clearly and objectively, at all the players and seeing what they are
doing.
If I focused, solely, on the disrespect sent outwards towards me at the
thought that *I* would vote for a woman for the sake of her being a
woman--that would lead me down a slanted path as it would tend towards
an emotion. However, I can look at the rhetoric spoken (she'll vote
for her because she is a woman) and step back at that thought and
wonder where it really comes from...and why. Unemotionally--separating
the emotions from the viewpoints is how most Missourians <g> vote for
candidates rather than the party...esp when we see the party going a
direction that is not leading our state [or nation] towards an
overarching goal of prosperity and happiness (for all) -- but perhaps
you are one of those who cannot (will not?) ever look more widely than
one or two single issues. I don't know. That's 'your stuff'...and not
mine. But, perhaps that is why you won't go looking up Gary Bauer,
Richard Land [esp], and James Dobson--or at least begin listening to
the radio shows! <g>
Stepping back and looking at the whole, I wish you the best,
Marlena
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.21/1671 - Release Date: 9/14/2008
7:16 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
