Monday, July 28, 2008

I Dunno - Was It Too Much?

So, my sister sent me the following email last night:

I noticed your more, ah, political posts as well! If it comes down to Obama or McCain, though, surely to Goddess you wouldn't vote for "McSexist"! You know, the one who called his wife a cunt in front of reporters, all because she teased him gently about his thinning hair? (What a jerk!) More to the point, he has a ZERO rating with both NARAL and Planned Parenthood going back to 1983 *and he is proud of that*. Obama may not be the greatest thing since sliced bread (whole wheat, of course), but at least HE won't set women's rights back to the 1930's or worse! I guess you got the article I forwarded yesterday, written by Kate Sheppard. Very interesting comments, esp the ones by a former POW.

And then there's John Sidney McCain III's lack of understanding of the economy... and about almost every thing else! (He thinks Iraq and Pakistan have a common border?! Sheesh!) He's voted with W 95% of the time. And Goddess knows we don't need "Bush III"!

If Obama wins, and at this point, I sure hope so, given the choices, I'd love to see Al Gore as an energy czar, John Edwards as AG, and Hillary in the Cabinet. Secretary of State, perhaps? Or Health and Human Services? What do you think?

Oh Dear. Well. below is my response to her. Was it too much??

Are you sure you want to know what I think? If so, read on - and bear in mind that I could have GONE on with more examples, but am just trying to hit some of the high (or is that LOW?) lights. If you don't want to read it, well, okey dokey! That's certainly your prerogative! But it will help you to understand why I "Just Say No Deal" to Barack Obama.

I cannot bring myself to vote for Obama. I won't be voting for McCain, but Obama has been very sexist in this campaign season. He pays the women on his staff less than the men. He pats his wife on the ass in front of thousands of people. He said that progressives do not understand how difficult a choice it is for a woman to have an abortion, a page STRAIGHT out of the Right-Wing playbook. He said that women who are "feeling blue" shouldn't have an abortion, and that mental distress does not qualify as endangering the health of a woman. He voted "Present' on bills that dealt directly with choice, and rape. PRESENT rather than taking a stand. And NARAL endorsed THIS guy??? Not to mention Planned Parenthood, which, coincidentally did so the DAY AFTER he said this crap abt "feeling blue," etc. Makes me wonder who paid them off. I don't trust him to stand up for women's rights at ALL. He got to where he is by the MSM engaging in massive cheerleading for him, and blatant misogyny and sexism. He benefited from it, and never said WORD ONE about it. Don't believe me? Check out this video, "We've Come A Long Way." If you do watch this one, let me add a little footnote abt Rep. Cohen of TN - he was elected in no small part because of the support of Bill Clinton, who did fundraisers for him, and stumped for him. (And for a bonus one of all of the crap said abt her by MSM talking heads: "Mad As Hell/Bitch") There are many, many more, sadly...If the things that were said about her, and women in general, were racist statements about Obama in the same vein, people would have gone NUTS and rightly so. But women are very much fair game still, and Obama used that to his advantage (and oh, by the way - comparing McCain and borders, Obama thinks there are 58 states - I am not kidding you).

And he is HORRIBLE on gay rights. Surely you have heard about his close associates, like IL State Senator James Meeks, who isn't just homophobic, he is ACTIVELY anti-gay. He is also aligned with an organization to end separation of Church and State, which includes James Dobson's group. Oh, wait - didn't Obama say he wants to EXPAND the Faith-based Initiatives?!?! Something progressives railed abt with BUSH? But back to the GLBT thing - he brings along his "reformed " gay friend to SC, another one who preaches against gay people. He asked SF Mayor Gavin Newsome to host a fundraiser for him, but then would not allow him to have a photo taken with him because of Newsome's support of gay marriage, even though he isn't gay.

And, he has NO qualifications for president. He is far less qualified than BUSH was, and we ALL screamed abt how unprepared he was! Everything Obama has ever done has been embellished beyond recognition - even his "autobiography" is largely made up. He has no legislative accomplishments of his own to speak of (unless you count getting a post office named, and having some relief sent to Congo), he voted FOR the Bush/Cheney Energy Bill, he voted FOR FISA, and besides one speech he allegedly made back in 2002 (there was no documentation of it - they went and RECORDED it in a studio), he has voted to fund the war, said Bush was doing a good job, and that he doesn't know HOW he would have voted on the resolution (which had war as a LAST RESORT - if you ever read Clinton's statement on this, she makes it abundantly clear that she was not voting to go to war, but to empower the UN to return and do its work! She was quite eloquent abt it, but for some reason, ONLY HILLARY is held responsible for voting for it - not Edwards, not Kerry...). WHAT has he ever done? He has thrown just about everyone who has helped him along the way under the bus, including the woman who helped get him into politics in the first place, Alice Palmer. He had a bunch of attorneys and volunteers comb the petitions for signatures overnight before his first election, and had EVERYONE thrown off the ballot but himself - signatures that were written in cursive instead of printed were thrown out, and he did it the DAY before the election, so they didn't have time to challenge him. David Axelrod, or should I say, AxelROVE, got his real Republican candidate off the ballot for US Senate by exposing his SEALED divorce settlement, so they brought in Alan Keyes, who is BATSHIT crazy. My coffee table could beat Alan Keyes!! Every "accomplishment" Obama has has come on the backs of others - even when he was in the IL legislature - Emil Jones put his name on legislation on which HE had not worked, and others had, because Jones wanted to be a "Kingmaker." Even his speeches are ones taken from someone else (and his speechwriter is a 26 yr old white guy, just so you know).

And the way he treated Hillary during the election was reprehensible. Him flipping her the bird during a speech in NC, brushing off his shoulder, and his shoes in terms of her, playing a gangsta rap song abt "99 Problems But a Bitch Ain't One" as his Iowa victory song, are just a few things. Not only did he take all of her policies and claim them for his own, sometimes without even bothering to change any words (and since WHEN did we stop caring abt plagiarizing in this country??), but he attacked HER personally, being very sexist in his depictions of her, and charging her, and Bill, with being racists for stating FACTS. When Hillary said LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act into law, she was charged with being a RACIST for pointing that out. Apparently, he did not watch enough School House Rock on how a bill becomes a law. BOTH Bill and Hillary have worked TIRELESSLY for he AA community for their entire adult lives. It was just shocking, and that so many Dems bought into it as a way to disparage them both is also shocking. If he does win (and hey - Chuck Hagel, his new BFF is a co-owner of Diebold, so it is certainly possible!), I don't want Clinton anywhere NEAR his cabinet. Why should a far more qualfied, experienced woman have to answer to such an incredibly inexperienced empty suit?? That is the ULTIMATE insult, and one women have had to endure for far too long - being far more experienced, and having to work for the guy who gets brought in over them. Hell freakin' no.

I might add, Hillary did NOT attack him in her speeches - not only did I attend two of them, but I watched them online. She talked abt POLICY differences, not personal issues.

Finally, for an alleged Democratic nominee to praise the Republican president who was the worst thing for the country, and the African American community, as transformative, to use his words in Berlin; to say he wants to return to the foreign policy of George H.W. Bush, i.e. DONALD RUMSFELD'S policies without a murmur from the progressives is ASTONISHING!!! NOW, he wants to have a Republican woman, with whom the Dems fought constantly, as a possible VP?? Seriously?? And Democrats are okay with this? WHY?? HOW???

There is still time for the SDs to come to their senses and support the person who got the most votes of any candidate in HISTORY - that would be Hillary. Even though she was outspent in every state, she won all of the big states except IL, and many of the swing states. STILL, she beats McCain in a match-up nationwide. Obama? Not so much.

I cannot support a Party that has willfully engaged in voter disenfranchisement, voter fraud, and allowed voter intimidation. When a Party starts taking votes cast for one candidate and gives them to another who wasn't even on the ballot by his own CHOICE, that is simply criminal. It is certainly not democratic The Party sat by as documented report after report came in about how the caucuses were run, how Clinton supporters were being locked out, how the numbers were changed to support Obama that, if not favoring Clinton, were tied (50 - 50 to 80-20 after a power outage), how the Obama campaign stole the packets for the TX caucuses and got signatures on them during the day, etc., etc. They KNEW this, and did nothing. There is much, much more that went on in the caucuses, and that is the ONLY way Obama even got close. WA state - huge difference in caucus, only 2.6% difference in the VOTE; TX - Clinton wins VOTES, but Obama edges in Caucus (see above), NV - Clinton wins, Obama gets more delegates. if it happened FAIRLY, fine, but it didn't - this election has been rigged since the beginning - it is no accident that for the first time, the Convention was moved from JULY to AUGUST, culminating with the last day being on the 45th anniversay of MLK's "I Had A Dream" speech (and it is insulting beyond belief to compare OBAMA to JFK and MLK - he has done NOTHING to deserve that comparison - he has not had to work hard for where he is, he has not put his life on the line like BOTH JFK and MLK did, he has done NOTHING in his life to make such a comparison even valid).

Don't even get me started on Donna Brazile, whose BFF is KARL ROVE - no kidding. She said back in 2004 that sometimes you have to destroy a Party to make a Party, and that is just what she, and Howard Dean, have done. She said in June that the Party doesn't need working class people, Hispanics, old people, and a couple of other groups (can't remember now), because NOW it is the party of young, urban people. Oh, and she didn't want Gay people to be some of the DNC Civil Rights delegates to the Convention because it was an affront to Civil Rights. This is the new face of the DNC. No thank you.

Aren't you glad you asked what I think?!?! Assuming you are still reading this now...Neither one of them will get my vote. It's Hillary, or No One.

Truly, I hope this doesn't affect our relationship, but I do want you to know why I have taken the stand I have, and will continue to take.



John Maszka said...

My comment is on America's foreign policy. I think the best arrangement would be for the US to respect all other states' sovereignty and allow them to work out their own domestic politics. The US has played God so many times in other state's domestic affairs, and it has almost always come back to bite us.

We need to adopt a foreign policy that respects all other states' sovereignty, and allows for specific bilateral arrangements as needed without offsetting our overall multilateral commitments. This way, America can be the country that everyone else trusts. We can be the country that the world looks to for humanitarian assistant, economic assistant, technological assistance, and democratic leadership; rather than what we are today, feared and hated by the international community. How long can any state continue in such a way?

What if we were spending $500 billion/year feeding, educating and healing our own citizens, and repairing our own infrastructure? It wouldn’t be long before we could start extending those benefits to the rest of the world. Who would hate us for that? No state would want to be at war with such a country.

What other realistic choice do we have? As it stands, unless we intend to use nukes, or fight solely from the air, we can’t stand against nations such as Pakistan (or Iran) in traditional, boots on the ground combat; our military is far too small. Waging such a battle in a prolonged war against countless non-state actors is nothing short of insane, foolish and arrogant.

The most intelligent option we have is to adopt a new foreign policy that will ensure the all the current states of the world that the US no longer intends to encroach on their sovereignty (something the greater majority certainly do not believe today). That doesn't sound like Obama or McCain.

Consider Senator Obama. He’s just returned from a world tour, in which he proclaimed his intention to continue the military war on terror, and to take it to the soil of one of America’s own allies. It's ironic that Senator Obama has publicly proclaimed a unilateral policy of preemptive war, yet we still tend to associate Senator McCain with President Bush.

Now consider Senator McCain. He’s proclaiming the need to continue the military war on terrorism as well. How long will it be before either of these candidates has the United States in direct opposition to the greater Muslim world? Both candidates are blindly assisting the efforts to radicalize moderates against the United States. In this great political campaign, what we need is a candidate that understands that the hearts and minds of over a billion Muslim people hang in the balance; not between Obama and McCain, but between moderate and radical. And US foreign policy can tip the scales. What we need is a candidate that can wage war where it can be won, at the negotiating table.

LindaA1 said...

Hey Amy,

I'm a principled pragmatist. I believe the Democratic Party leaders are out of control, hurling us all down a rat hole of social and political destruction. I believe they have to be stopped - NOW!

The same can be said about the GOP but I really don't give a damn what happens to that party. They'll have to clean up their own act - I'm busy.

I believe the only way to stop the Obama, Pelosi, Dean, Brazile and company is to deprive Obama of the presidency. Period. No matter what the consequences in the short term.

We, the Democratic voters, have no choice but to pay the piper right now for all our apathy and unwillingness to stand up for honesty in government during the past several decades.

That price is John McCain and four more years of GOP crap.

There is no other alternative. If Obama wins, so do Dean, Pelosi, Brazile and the other shameful crooks who have hijacked our party. They will be king makers for the next decade. Emboldened by their success, they will be even more crooked and underhanded - and more difficult to stop.

Not voting, writing-in Hillary and voting for a third party candidate will all be a votes for Obama. Those who consider these as "protest" votes are gambling that the election will be so close that a few votes will make the difference. It's a very big gamble.

Think about it. What's the desired outcome of these "protest" votes? Do you NOT vote hoping Obama will win? If so, then own that desired outcome and vote for him. Are you hoping McCain will beat Obama? Then own that desired outcome and vote for McCain.

It seems to me that not owning the desired outcome of your vote/no vote is to pass the buck to others of us to do the dirty work.

Don't get me wrong. McCain makes my skin crawl. I listened to him Sunday on ABC talking about his objection to adoption rights for gay parents. He refused to actually say he was against gay parents adopting and repeatedly described his strong opposition by voicing his support for a "two parent family" instead. Huh? A gay parent is only one-half a person? Or less?

BUT - we don't have to agree with the man. We can vote McCain into office to keep Obama out. We can put the screws to the Democratic Majority to hamstring him for the next four years - deadlock the government processes until we do this election thing over the right way in 2012.

It will hurt us in some ways. But not nearly as much enduring the pain of an Obama / Dean / Brazile / Pelosi administration for the next eight years.

Mary Ellen said...

Oh my, Amy, you have outdone yourself! I don't think you went overboard in this letter, and I pray it didn't hurt your relationship with your sister. The fact is, you told the truth. Everything you said was dead on, and like you said there is so much more....Reverend Wright, Ayers, Rezko, his lies on the stage of the debate where he claimed he barely knew Rezko, "Sweetie", his empty record, his lies about is record, is recent lie while on his magical mystery tour where he said the banking committee was his and he isn't even on it....all these lies ignored by the media.

So much much more! And yet, the Obama supporters give him a pass. They give him a pass, even in the wake of the FISA vote! First he assured them that he would do everything possible, even filibuster to be sure that the telecoms did not get immunity, that we would not have to worry about having our phone calls listened to...and then he waltzed in for the vote only and voted yes. He didn't even bother to show up for the Amendments which were voted on to strip the telecoms of the immunity. This is doing "everything he could" to fight telecom immunity? THEN, after the vote when his supporters were in a state of shock that their messiah could do such a thing, he told them that they "just weren't listening"...he never was a "liberal" or a progressive. Did that anger them? No! They shrugged it off as if it didn't happen.

The trouble is, most Obama supporters will not read or listen to these facts...they are happier to stay in their state of total oblivion and repeat the mantra "He's better than McSame" or "Supreme Court!". How can they trust that he will not appoint one of his new Conservative BFF's for the Supreme Court? When has he ever proven to be honest or trustworthy?

Your letter was well written, much better than my ranting. I applaud you for your calm reason, kiddo. As always...a great post!

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

Hey, Mary Ellen -

THank you so much for your response. I have not yet heard back from my sister. And, I failed to say after she sent the initial email, she had fwd an email abt how to get an Obama button. You know I deleted that immediately! Ahem. Now, my mom said that my sister seems less enamoured of Obama of late, but is still supporting him since he is the Dem. nominee. That's not good enough for me. I don't support people who become the nominee through nefarious means. But that's just me.

I was thinking this morning that maybe it's a GOOD thing that the DNC completely changed the schedule for the COnvention to be in August. It is giving the SDs time to see how woefully unprepared Obama is, and time for them to see he cannot beat McCain. He just cannot. Only Hillary can.

And yes, SO Much more that could have been said, that's for sure. You're right - I didn't even get into the whole Rezko/Ayers/Wright, et. al. And his constant flip-flopping lies. What a piece of work he is...

JOHN - thank you so much for your thoughtful response on foreign policy. I also took a look at your book at Barnes and Noble - it looks VERY interesting, indeed!

I agree that we need to stop being so patronizing and thinking that our way is the ONLY way when it comes to the soverignity of other countries. There is an inherent arrogance in our policies that we know best: everyone needs to acknowledge that, and get in line. No wonder we are viewed with some contempt by other countries - our hubris and too-often bullying posturing.

Thanks so much for stopping by...

Linda, I hear you. I really do. You make a very compelling point about voiting for McCain instead of writing in Hillary, or a 3rd party candidate (though honestly, there is NO 3rd party candidate I want to support - it's Hillary or nobody).

As I said to Mary Ellen, maybe this whole Convention move to August may backfire on the DNC dictators!! One can only hope, pray, and WORK toward that!

Sorry for the brief(er) responses. Unfortunately, one of my cats has gotten sick as a result of bringing home the kittens from the SPCA. So, I am off to the vet in a few minutes. But I VERY much appreciate your comments!

Sean said...

Wow um, less time on h44 and more time in the real world is my prescription.