Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Not Until November. I Promise.

I will not promote any ideas or make comments on any candidates today. I have vowed not to do so until November. I am sure you have heard enough of that (at least from me) the last two weeks.

However . . . .

PLEASE make no judgments about whom to vote for until you have looked regularly at; it is my new favorite place. My frustration with politics is always about how to get accurate information--the candidates may or may not be useful for such. Their websites are helpful but they put too positive a spin on their own positions. NPR is good, but they seem to be skirting the actual issues in favor of the non-issues as well. And though they are getting "both" sides: the versions of each particular are so widely different that it is impossible to know what to believe. This site carefully looks at various claims made by e-mail circulations, campaign ads, speeches and commentators and either debunks or confirms them based on a variety of non-partisan sources--all carefully documented at the end of each piece. It is updated almost daily.

I found the site because I was looking for a way to verify this story from last week's New Yorker. If true, I find it a most disturbing piece of the Sarah Palin puzzle. I still do not know yet where the source material is for the extensive quotes attributed to Palin in TNY, but if she actually said all of this (it is not typically satirical portion of the magazine) then the GOP has taken a moderate, reform-minded, state-first governor (although there is some dispute about that as well) and turned her into, well, a pit-bull with lipstick. (Can somebody please explain why this imagery is something that so many women seem to find appealing?) It makes her remarks at the convention look at the best hypocritical and at worst like somebody who will say or do anything to anybody in order to get ahead.

Okay. I promise. I'm done. Just please take an extra 10 minutes today to look at the links.


Janssen said...

I personally HATE that "pit bull with lipstick" line. Why does everyone love it so? It's just stupid and faintly derogatory.

Yankee Girl said...

I took a class on genocide in college and one of the interesting things true across just about every genocide is that while the men perpetrating the genocide are scary the women are even scarier. One of our hypotheses was that women may feel the need to prove to men that they are tough enough, strong enough, man enough to get the real work done.

We could translate this hypothesis really nicely into the world of business and politics as well.

And then we could start talking about why it is that a competitive man in business is admired but a competitive woman is called a bitch or why a guy who sleeps around is called a stud and a woman who does so is a slut.

Kimberly Bluestocking said...

I think women think the "tough" men are the ones who often get ahead (though it may just be that they're the most vocal about their success), and many women want to prove that they can compete with that, that they're "just as strong."

On the other hand, I think they still recognize that our society values femininity, and many try to have a foot in each camp. They see the "pit bull with lipstick" as the ultimate in both feminine and masculine virtues.

Personally, I don't think the "tougher than you and your mama" attitude is a credit to either gender.

The Grahams said...

Does wikipedia count as a fact check website because that's where I turn for all info I'm seeking. J.K. On an even lighter note, this reminds me of some Mormon rumor mill website that Chris would always search after hearing a juicy story at church. We would find the funniest things. (and I thought the pit-bull analogy was stupid)

Slyck and Slim said...

People tend to see the things they are looking for. It's good to read up and be informed, but after all our researching and heads cranked in all different directions, prayer and personal introspection should guide our actions for what we feel is the right thing to do. Nobody's perfect -- not even Mr. Obama. :)

Science Teacher Mommy said...

Slim, sorry for the implication that Mr. Obama was "perfect." That is one reason I like that factcheck website: it doesn't really pull punches either way.

Your point about prayer and introspection is very important and has been a part of my thinking, but we have to be careful with that too. I'll explain. I was listening to a religion podcast from NPR the other day which was talking about Sarah Palin's religion--fair game seeing as how much the religious right has warmed up to McCain's presidency since bringing her on board. They had several recorded clips of her speaking publicly, as a politician, in an evangelical church in her hometown. She was urging the congregation to pray for a spirit of prophecy and revelation to know God's will. Although I found the pentacostal language of her speech a little foreign to me, the idea wasn't so much: LDS people are also encouraged to pray for gifts of the spirit so that we might better understand God's will. The part I found mildly disturbing was that at one point she said to the congregation, "I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built. So pray for that." I think there is a big leap there--is she saying that she knows for certain that it is God's will that the pipeline be built? I'm sure there are Alaskans (maybe native Eskimos?) who are just as certain that the god(s) they pray to don't want that land destroyed. They also had her on record saying as much about the war--that it was God's will. Again, I'm sure you'd find just as many people on the other side of that argument.

I'm not against Sarah Palin or any politician claiming publicly that they pray or practice their religion. There is nothing wrong in any way shape or form with that. I am, however, disturbed by any person who is not the prophet claiming to know God's will, particularly when it involves something as big as running a town or a state or especially a country.


Kimberly Bluestocking said...

When someone asked Lincoln if God was on his side, he responded that he just hoped he was on God's side. I agree we need to be careful about assuming that just because we think something is good and right, God must share that opinion. He often sees details and long-term implications that we miss. :)

That said, I think when people are truly doing their best to make right choices, God respects that effort even if He doesn't support their particular cause. While this election is vitally important in our lives now, in the next life what will really matter is whether we each studied things out and made what we honestly felt was the best choice for our country.

I'll certainly be praying about my choice in November, and I hope I'll have the sensitivity and humility to heed whatever answers I receive.


I don't like either Presidential candidate. One has a history of surrounding himself with corrupt and America-hating friends and spiritual advisors. While the other has a long history of scandaland less than than stellar judgments.

I do however like Sarah Palin. A lot. I think it's a colossal political mistake to focus all Democrat energy into tearing her down when she's not even the one running for the main gig.

I'll be doing what I do every time an election rolls around and I can barely stomach the candidates. I'm going to close my eyes, hold my nose, and vote for the one closest to my own ideals.

n8ma said... is doing what cable news pretends to do.