sarah palin.
She fails to separate her religion from her leadership. And, as we learned last night, she has the terrifying talent of speaking in a way that commands attention while distracting listeners from the content of her words. She could read from a phonebook and command attention.
This country is supposed to be about the separation of church and state. Our beginnings are based in choice and freedom, the idea that we’re free to do as we will, to make our own way, worship as we like (and if we like). But this woman stands on a platform defined by religion, and her own religion at that, a platform that restricts personal freedom rather than protect it. It’s defined by the highly subjective and easily abused notion of ‘morality,’ where things are right and wrong and good and evil and anyone who raises questions is unpatriotic. This is the sort of rhetoric that girds fascists. Look at history. Look at recent history.
Americans are notorious amnesiacs.
A good friend of mine used to be an admissions officer at Princeton. She once said that she started getting applications with the acronym WWJD in the essay sections, one after another. Whole chunks of the application were supposed to be devoted to unpacking complex issues and she was getting a lot of white space – a sea of white space – broken by this single acronym. Thinking it was some kind of objection to the nature of the question, she gathered the applications up and took the stack to the dean to ask him what this acronym meant.
“What would Jesus do,” he said. “That’s their answer to the question.”
“But the whole point of the question is to display your ability to think critically,” she said.
The dean shrugged.
That story really struck me because it wasn’t about belief systems or spirituality or religion. It was about mindless obedience, so much so that when called to address a complicated issue, the response was an acronym, like a secret handshake. No thinking involved. Just a passive nod of the head.
Palin scares the crap out of me because her platform requires no real thinking either, and plenty of blind obedience. Gays are deviant. Books are dangerous. Abortion is murder. Evolution is wrong. War is right. And all it takes to win with a platform like that is charisma.
Filed under: pressing thoughts | 66 Comments
-
If you take me via feed, note that I tweak my posts like a spastic, so you'll just get the first imprint. -
recent comments
Kailith on lust. Kailith on fucktoyism. Bookmarks about Sexu… on pretty great things. isabellablue on romance. thatguy on orgasms and active verbs. and … isabella blue on romance. Pandora on housecleaning. Disconnected on housecleaning. badinfluencegirl on housecleaning. April on there’s nothing more sat… -
She should scare the crap out of us. She’s spirited, commanding, folksy. She’ll appeal just fine to the mobs who care little for truth when veracity is easier anyway — and her style of veracity is right up their alley.
Before yesterday I never would have thought the GOP had a legitimate shot at the White House; today I’m not so sure. You just can’t combat this sort of charisma with logic or thought.
I’ll admit, I rolled my eyes at all those people saying they would move to Canada if Gore lost.
I recently helped with this massive silent auction for Stephanie Nielson and her family. Stephanie was a blogger and she and her husband were horribly burned in a plane crash. I knew she was Mormon, but I would never NOT help someone just because of something like that. As I was going through all the blogs involved in the auction, they started popping up with “hurray, Palin is awesome!” posts.
The problem is that the people who support McCain/Palin aren’t evil. It’s so hard to wrap my head around…I know she would enact the Handmaiden’s Tale in a second if she could, yet her supporters are moms who would give $500 they don’t have to a stranger.
The difference that might take us to a dark place is that Obama supporters are ok with people like that, but also ok with people like us. Live and let live is our motto. Palin’s people are convinced that they need to save us from hell, and they’ll do it by force if necessary.
So, I’m researching jobs in Canada now.
I must disagree with your statement that “This country is supposed to be about the separation of church and state.”
As I am sure you are well aware this country exists because people were being persecuted due to their religious beliefs and moved here to be able to freely express them. People of any religion (or no religion) are welcomed in the United States of America, and they are welcome to express their faith freely.
Please don’t forget that the First Amendment to the Constitution clearly states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The framers put religion before all else for a reason. Sarah Palin, you and I all have the right to express our religion and the government can not impose upon that. Her moral compass happens to align itself to a structured major religious whereas yours or mine may not be in line with that same set of standards.
Glen, you’ve just argued in favor of a separation between church and state.
Sadly, the Republicans have enacted another variation of the lowest common denominator which appeals to so many single issue voters. I run across this all the time in my work environment- where the people who come out enthusiastically supporting one issue ignoring the other issues that are counter to their self interests I can do little else but shake my head. A large portion of the electorate have come away from Palin’s speech saying she “hit a home run”, based on the sound bites of the pundits, but after reading the text of her speech today and having a chance to digest what it said I’m more convinced than ever that our Republic is in its death spiral. What is so sad is that we have so much potential, but such a short attention span. I’m with ya debauchette, I’m scared shitless.
Actually no. If you read what I wrote it states that you have the right to express your beliefs and the government must respect that. Ergo you can be a candidate for office (or a judge, attorney, etc.) and profess your faith, even run on a faith based platform. One could be a preist, rabbi, imam or cult leader and still hold an office.
There is no separation of church and state in the Constitution nor does there need to be one. If the general populous doesn’t want to have a leader because of religion or race or preference in football teams we have the ability to vote them out of office. Conversely, if we want to vote for a candidate because they share our faith in the same God then we may.
A government that does not separate church and state would be, for example, Iran. Iran is not secular. Our government is secular. That is, our government is not affiliated with any particular religion. Many would say that our current administration has allowed religion to heavily influence its decision-making. From where I’m standing, Palin is doing the same.
[edited for being excessively cunty]
I love how people can read the first amendment and complicate that to mean “separation of church and state”. It is human nature to make things more complicated. That is, after all, where morality comes from.
Can I add a word as a non-American? And, yes, there are liberal democratic states out there other than the US, you know …
To be more specific: one example of a country that does not separate church and state is the UK – and we don’t suffer the horrors of the Iranian theocrats. May I suggest, with respect, that Americans realise that there are other forms of democracy and of liberal states than that foreseen (or now interpreted as having been foreseen) by the Founding Fathers. The separation of church and state is indeed one of the bedrocks of American polity, but the suggestion that the alternative is an Iranian-style theocracy is both intellectually lazy and false.
The fact that the Church of England is the established church works perfectly well for most of us here, whether Christians, of other religious affiliation or of none. Abortion is not a major political issue (despite the recent infiltration into political life of US-funded groups who would make it so) and a candidate for Prime Minster who doesn’t believe in God – and says so – is still perfectly electable. Dare I add that we treat whores and whoring more kindly, too …
Are liberals really always better off demanding a total separation of church and state? I think the jury’s still out on this one.
Ian, I’m not sure why you think my mention of Iran was meant to be an alternative, unless you’re just trying to aggravate me into an email discussion. Which I think is probably the case.
It was intended to be a straightforward and contemporary example of a theocracy. I was calling out the difference between a state that does not separate church and state, and one that does. Nothing more.
I was certainly not trying to aggravate you. I think I probably manage to aggravate you enough without trying …
To the discussion in hand: my comment was provoked by yours that “A government that does not separate church and state would be, for example, Iran”. To pick Iran and not eg the UK is an easy way to win the argument – who would want to live in Iran? – but at the expense of really examining the issue.
Because your dichotomy of (a) separation of church and state and (b) a thoecracy is a false dichotomy. Is the UK the former or the latter? Answer: it’s neither.
And there’s a wider point, too. America is a democratic state with a liberal tradition. And it separates church and state. My point is simply that the former does not require the latter.
It wasn’t a political argument. It was a semantic discussion (an awkward semantic discussion at that). Now it’s a political argument.
If you actually want to examine the separation of church and state, then the UK would be a very complicated example, and you’re dealing with a pretty broad set of variables that don’t apply equally to both sides, the UK and the US, making it a difficult comparison (among them history, national identity, vestigial structure, religious identity). But sure, okay. Maybe the UK or Norway are better examples. Or Israel.
I have a bad feeling McCain will win.
After all, wasn’t it Churchill that said “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter”?
As to the semantics, I agree with you. And I think I’ve made my point on the political angle.
So, with apologies for any aggravation caused – but not intended – I will leave it there, if I may.
She absolutely terrifies me too. Unfortunately, it’s those same extreme “moral” views of hers that helped get GWB elected. If McCain/Palin wins, I shudder to think what will happen with the Supreme Court if any of the judges retire. That any one religion can have such a stranglehold on a major political party is contrary to what this country purports to be.
Unspeakableaxe’s quote from Churchill is true. Scary!
This is why the sites that I check most often are yours, Kasia’s, and dailykos.
So amazing that I feel that sentiment about Obama, not much more than a good speaker. Even more amazing that I hear “liberals” seemingly for everyone to “live and let live”, but at the same time have a problem with people with high religious priorities. Quite hypocritical. As I read some of these comments I don’t understand why so many liberals seem to simply not understand the Rebublican party. I agree, abortion is a tough one, I can’t see how the right to have an abortion can be taken away and yet I don’t see how the right of an unborn child to live can be taken. I don’t understand why liberals so much for “human rights” don’t seem to consider that unborn child a human, with rights. Again, hypocritical. And again, for me, a Republican, live and let live, means for the government to leave me alone as much as possible, let me keep my money and live my life without taxing me to death to pay for government overspending, often on causes I don’t agree with and shouldn’t have to pay for. I’m not sure enough liberals realize this. Sorry for rambling, after all this is not a political blog.
I am right there with you debauchette.
She is some sort of cross between Jesse Venture, Evita Peron and Archie Bunker.
I can not stand her. The unearned/unwarranted pious anger, the barely disguised racism, the chirpy ‘you betcha’ delivery. She is supposed to elicit this reaction in me and I suppose the equal and opposite reaction in the red states.
If this Palin ploy works in November, the political/cultural heart of this country has been gamed one to many times for my taste.
Regardless of the outcome I suspect that McCain will have the burden of knowing he and his political party introduced this strain of fascism into the American mainstream political waters.
Palin is a very, very smart choice by the McCain camp. A scary one at that. She will rile up the religious parties in on the Right and get them motivated in a way that McCain could not.
Now they have a real chance of winning. Before her choice I wasn’t too worried that they would continue to hold the White House, but now with her beating the religion drum next to McCain I think that chance is real again.
Oh Boy. Another four, or eight, years of the same administration … not something I think this country can survive to be honest.
People joke about McCain’s age and all, but could you imagine if they win and he does indeed pass away or at least get sick enough to have to step down? Wow she’d be in charge of this country and as Debauchette so correctly pointed out she’s very, very good at speaking and getting things riled up. Boy imagine a well-spoken George Bush with a real agenda? Ack.
Sweetness: “Even more amazing that I hear “liberals” seemingly for everyone to “live and let live”, but at the same time have a problem with people with high religious priorities.”
The difference here is that usually that side of the argument has no interesting in living and let live. They usually very much wish to impose their views on the rest of us around them, no matter if we believe in those views or not.
Creationism in the class room. Abortion. Gay Marriage rights, or lack thereof. Etc. Big difference in allowing people to believe in what they want and forcing your beliefs on them.
@ Sweetness:
“Even more amazing that I hear “liberals” seemingly for everyone to “live and let live”, but at the same time have a problem with people with high religious priorities. Quite hypocritical.”
This fundamentally stupid argument is a tact right wingers often love to take, though it only betrays a plain lack of critical thinking ability. The problem with your example, Sweetness, is that people with “high religious priorities” don’t tend to fall in the “live and let live” camp. In other words, my intolerance of your intolerance doesn’t make me intolerant. But, nice try. Bill O’Reilly’s got your back, though.
“As I read some of these comments I don’t understand why so many liberals seem to simply not understand the Rebublican party.”
We understand the Republican party well. That is why we dislike it immensely. Fear mongering, craven, hypocrital, moral policing, self-righteous skin jobs who don’t seem to have the IQ to get that war is NOT “doing God’s work”, and that violence is far more pornographic and obscene than fucking.
I am a HUGE fan of your blog but have never posted a comment. As soon as I read the title I knew your post would be controversial. As they say, never talk religion or politics at the office because everyone’s passionate, everyones right, and everyone’s wrong. Having said that, I thought your responses to Ian and Glen were extremely condescending and lacked what I really respected about you, which was logic and honesty. Posting a link to Wiki for the definition of the separation of church and state because you’re not willing to walk us through it today is elitist and treats your readers as ignorant. Don’t all of our experiences and beliefs influence our opinions and actions. Regardless if we want our politicians to leave religion out of their day jobs, aren’t they all going to use their core set of beliefs to form opinions on the right and wrong way to do their jobs. I very much disliked this post, especially your comments, but I will always be a HUGE fan of your writing.
Christophe, I agree. I was unreasonably cunty to Glen. Ian’s a different story.
Gentleman Whore, thanks for responding to Sweetness more succinctly than I could have.
Also, Christophe, since most people already understand the concept of separation of church and state in this country, it seems like Debauchette shouldn’t have to walk anyone through it; she’s not your constitutional law professor. A wikipedia link to the subject (I don’t see it above, maybe edited out) would be so commenter Glen could learn what the first amendment is about, since he clearly doesn’t know.
I’d recommend anyone interested in debating the separation of church and state and the meaning of the first amendment take a look here:
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_reli.html
It runs down the mention of religion in the Constitution and it’s appearance in the Bill of Rights, as well as legal precedents set. For the most part the separation interpretation, stems from the “establishment” clause in the first amendment. When an elected official professes too deeply their favorite flavor of the great sky god – that can be seen as crossing the line into establishment.
“In the end, the 1st Amendment not only prevents the establishment of a national religion, but it also prohibits government aid to any religion, even on an non-preferential basis, as well as protecting the right of the individual to choose to worship, or not, as he or she sees fit.”
Depending on one’s perspective, the current administration can be seen as having violated one, if not two of these tenets. So when Phil Gramm, or similar people say they demand legislation because of their religious beliefs, or individuals are elected who then pursue an agenda based on their religious beliefs – these can be construed as aid, often on a preferential basis.
If America votes for McCain then it deserves exactly what it gets. The “live and let live” mentality of the ‘liberals’ is so downright absurd. The lack of anger in response to the hypocrisy and hatred might as well be complacency.
I loathe how discourse in this country has been driven down to “conservative” versus “liberal” and any other paradigm is just too difficult to talk about. That American politics has flipped around and everyone has to talk about their love of God is absurd. Most Americans have likely never read a full page from the Bible.
I get so furious watching what this country is becoming. I get so damn furious that almost no one is summoning up their anger is response to this shit. If Americans will only listen to simple arguments and sound bites, then that’s where Obama needs to focus. Fuck him if he doesn’t stoop to the level that Republicans have set. He needs to go further than them and rub their noses in it. Because if he doesn’t, they won’t stop engaging in those tactics.
I for one will see lower taxes because of McCain. I’ll make more money and have more opportunity, while the other 98% of Americans will see the opposite. If they make that vote, they deserve it.
The evangelical christians, whose moral compass is aligned with their religious beliefs at the expense of logic, fail to recognize that they are cut from the same whole cloth as the middle eastern religious fanatics that are their mortal enemies.
The only real difference between these two factions, who both believe that they are absolutely correct and righteous, is geography and paternity. If not for these two circumstances they could easily exchange places. (WWJD and WWMD are easily substituted for one another.)
As an aside, most lay people continue to believe the framers of the constitutions were christians. Adams was but Washington and a large number of the other framers were Diests and were not guided by religious conviction in their political thought.
Here, here.
We’re heading into a federal election in Canada too…but we’re so focused on what’s happening in the US that most of us won’t even bother to vote. In a recent poll in Canada, BOTH parties would vote for Obama over McCain.
Being Canadian isn’t bad. There is the weather. But if I wanted to, I could have an abortion for free at my local hospital, referred by my family physician. The visit to my family physician is free too. If I wanted to have the baby, I could take a year paid maternity leave. Having the baby is free too.
I just had a discussion with a colleague and neither of us could figure out the religious afiliation of any of our past Prime Ministers…I guess it just doensn’t matter to us.
We don’t live in some kind of idyllic fairy land, but I’m sure if you’re looking for some place to escape Sarah Palin, there are definitely worse places…
Yeah, Scott… I said the same thing about America deserving Bush…both times. I mean…how scary is it that he was elected TWICE??? If that can happen then we’re doomed this time, for sure.
Sweetness..I don’t think liberals have problems with people who have high religious priorities until those priorities include deciding what the liberals need to have for theirs. And then making them laws.
Abortion is a perfect example. Higly Religious Conservatives take a theological perspective, call it Truth, then decide that everyone has to have the same beliefs. Abortion isn’t just a human rights issue to me, it’s about freedom of religion.
Hm…I wonder how excited everyone would be and how many votes a candidate would get in this country if they started peppering their speeches with “Praise Allah” throughout.
The biggest concern I have? They will continue to rape the environment. Her record on protecting our last standing, most pristine state is simply fucked.
Gosh, those Canadian health care workers are so committed that they work for free. I wonder how they pay their bills. Sorry, Sarah but I had to have a little fun. You definitely pay for those services. You just don’t pay at the point the service is rendered.
The fascinating part of this discussion is that everyone has a different view of what separation of church and state really means. IMHO there has never been a complete separation of church and state. For evidence, just look at the federal holidays. Current politicians on both sides are definitely blurring the lines more than ever before. Legislating morality and imposing your will on anyone who doesn’t share your beliefs is obviously the problem. If you don’t like Palins beliefs, no problem, don’t vote for M/P. However, don’t be so naive as to think that the other candidates aren’t going to attempt to legislate based on their religious or moral beliefs either.
Debauchette, not to pry or anything but Im dieing for a good fuck story. Are you ever going to write about what happened with you, Gabriel, and the woman you had your eye on? Apologies for being so forward, but you really turned me on when you used the word “cunty”….
sarah made most of my point for me. i don’t know where the prime minister OR the leaders of the THREE opposition parties go to church… and i don’t care.
it just doesn’t rate as a point of discussion. i suspect it doesn’t in the UK either but i don’t know as i don’t hang out there.
i just wish ‘because it’s right’ wasn’t an argument anyone thought was valid.
[we canadians pay taxes so that we have health care and other services. we're pretty socialist up here but the majority of us like it that way]
I’ve been following your site for quite some time now, and usually don’t comment on blogs- I like to lay low. But after this post, I have to finally come out and let you know how much I admire everything that you portray yourself to be on this site. You are a brilliant soul and talented writer and I am always left with the desire to know more and more. I’ve read almost every post because I am so enthralled by your stories and the way you detail each simple and complicated moment. You are my guilty pleasure, I love when you update and this post is just an extension of your brilliance. I just wanted to finally say hello, and let you know I’m an avid follower. You’ve opened my mind.
From Sweetness:
“I don’t understand why liberals so much for “human rights” don’t seem to consider that unborn child a human, with rights. Again, hypocritical.”
I don’t understand why conservatives think it’s okay to send young men and women to war and still reason that liberals are hypocrites.
I am a liberal and for the record I don’t think abortion is something that should be done except in extreme circumstances, but there are so many other things that staunch conservatives stand for that leave a very bad taste in my mouth.
As far as Sarah Palin goes, she scares the ever loving crap out of me. This country has already demonstrated that we still need separation of church and state. It may work for the U.K., but it won’t work here, not now, especially with rights being threatened in the name of religious “morality”. We are too polarized to come together and just agree to get along.
As a non-American, it’s been fascinating (and scary) watching this election. Things which I don’t understand how half the US voters don’t seem to understand include:
* the difference between the religious right and atheists/agnostics is not that they are both passionate about something, but that the atheists are not interested in forcing you to follow their beliefs. They don’t care if you believe in religion, just don’t force them to believe in it too.
* the GOP supporters who deride Obama for his lack of experience and that this will destroy the US … um … so how has Bush with all this ‘experience’ made the US a better place?
* how US citizens talk about how the US is a beacon of democracy, freedom, equal rights … yet you look at how corrupt/power hungry your current government is, your trampling of people’s rights (both non-US citizens and your own), how corporations have such influence in your politics. And yes, every country has their issues, but I honestly believe the US has fallen far from being the shining example it once was.
I say this not to denigrate the US – I lived in the US for several years and am very fond of the place. I write more in a tone of despair
Since this isn’t a political blog and I expected the usual comments back to me, I won’t go on here about my own point of view. I am not at all, however, intolerant, not even of those people who like to sweep all of us Republicans under the same rug. I won’t bother to comment more, as it will fall on deaf ears, and I’m sure that’s what many think of me. But I actually do consider all sides, as many, many of us do even if you don’t know it, or simply don’t care.
@ Sweetness:
“I am not at all, however, intolerant, not even of those people who like to sweep all of us Republicans under the same rug.”
Of course not, because you’re a compassionate conservative! Only you happened to describe those same people as hypocrites. Which makes you either a hypocrite yourself, or obtuse. Being a conservative, the odds are high you’re both.
“I won’t bother to comment more, as it will fall on deaf ears, and I’m sure that’s what many think of me. But I actually do consider all sides, as many, many of us do even if you don’t know it, or simply don’t care.”
Another common tact by the right, when they’ve run out of argument (which usually happens fast) is to say, “It’s pointless talking to you people, you simply aren’t going to listen.” Deaf ears? Or ears attached to brains that don’t happen to agree with the jingoistic, pro-war, evangelical rhetoric your party espouses at every opportunity?
I don’t know what a right winger means when they say they “consider all sides”, as I’ve never heard one of you claim otherwise, unless you mean obfuscating the truth, spreading lies and misinformation, and condemning anyone who isn’t in your bible camp. Please, tell me, what do the “many, many” of you say when you “consider” the gay marriage side? Or the side on abortion? Or the side on taxing the poor and middle class? Or the side that wants this war that should’ve never happened, to stop?
Sell this brand of bullshit somewhere else, Sweetness, please. There has to be a small town of snake-handling, can’t tell shit from shinola, tongue-speaking Christies somewhere, who can’t wait to lap it all up.
By the way, if history and trend is anything to go by, Palin’s ultra neo-conservative bible-waving image is more than likely a cover up for something fairly heinous. The people who preach the loudest do so for their inner demons are legion.
Although she would be just one heart beat away from the presidency, lets not forget that she is the vice presidential choice, not the presidential one. I’m sure Biden has not been vetted nearly as much, for exactly the same reason. And on the note of Separation of Church and State, nobody is going to re-christianize America, I wouldn’t be to worried about that. The fact that our wars have taken on a religious flavor though, is more the fault of our enemy than our own. While the war in Iraq arguably has no merits, and maybe Afghanistan is futile, protection of oil interests are a huge, secular, national priority. We are nowhere near a lost country, but this election does offer new hope, and change.
I know Evangelical platitudes like “WWJD?” are disturbing, but so too are uncritical, platitudinous responses of any sort…this is the issue, I think…
When I was teaching at an unnamed northeastern university, my undergraduate students would be presented with an essay question (e.g. “is the the patriot act wrong?”)…
more often than not, i’d get, “yes, because, it is anti-democratic” or “no, because it is necessary to protect against terrorists” without any further qualification. They were indoctrinated in an ideological tradition, where those platitudinous responses were good enough and where substantiation was unnecessary because all of their peers (be it media, family, friends, etc.) heretofore agreed.
when i took my disappointment and dismay up with my supervisor, I was instructed to ignore it and to pass them (even if they had refused my corrections and commentary). Higher education is a commodity. Plato would frown, sure, but he’s not keeping the books. Many universities are not combatting parochialism and ignorance, but perpetuating it for the sake of the $.
Gentleman Whore, you see, I’m not even going to allow myself to believe that liberals that agree with you politically are as hateful and ingorant as you so obviously are. You seem to be the one preaching the loudest, maybe you could get off your soapbox and take a look at yourself.
You know zero about me, my ideas or my life, my religious or sexual beliefs and your venom filled words are despicable.
Your ears are deaf and dumb as well. I know you think your point of view is right and your self-rightousness and inability to see past it is the problem with a fanatic of any name, liberal or conservative. I am always open and interested in hearing people’s thoughts and a different point of view but not how you present yours, with a blanket of hate and criticisim.
Again debauchette, although I have no problem going on about my own thoughts on a particular topic, this is your blog and I want to respect that.
Sweetness – I have no doubts that you’re a tolerant person. You’ve been very tolerant here.
I have a few opinions on what’s been said here, but I don’t want to draw anything out unless it’s productive (and I’d probably just haul off on a tangent about the use of divisive social issues as a political strategy, like this one, which is parsed well here).
Theresa said something important, that any sort of platitudinous response is dangerous, on either side, and I agree with that.
Sweetness, I’ve no doubt my words are far more despicable to you than many conservative policies.
I read you often, Gillette. I admire your style.
I have always thought the the “take down R v.W now” slogan was just that-a slogan. It is hard as hell to amend our lovely constitution. Moreover, abortion is very useful for people who are against it-ask their daughters who have tip-toed off and had one-as those who support it.
If ppl are being responsible and working damn near around the clock, they will be too damn tired to even have sex. That is the real solution- constant work. For all! We just need to keep the raunchy teens busy;that will set them on the right path. After all, dragging a kid off to an Ivy is a drag and will no get one the attentions of Mr. Rich Britches IV. Inhale the cock but please don’t fuck it!
Mrs Palin has a whole set of scandals surrounding her name-possible adultery, the abusive former brother-in-law firing crap, pregnant daughter with no husband as of today. I will lift my eyebrows in surprise if she doesn’t bow out gracefully to help raise the impending grandkid. Or whatever she needs to say.
Let us not forget the class factor-her man is a common worker. I am sure he is pleasant but we want educated and rich on our national stage.
The eloquent GH has made a number of pointed jabs at our Repub party. The honored defenders have rallied back.
For me, it comes down to if people are happy being broke and hungry. It seems they were, for I studied the Reagan and Bush I years in school-looked grim. I am childless, so I will be fine. Hell, give me a tax cut-I have a small business. But I do need enough people with discretionary income to buy my goods. So, I cannot just spend my days happily laughing as the economy tanks.
The econ was shitty after 2nd term of Reagan, that did not stop ppl for voting in Bush I. Somehow, ppl can put all kinds of things before their economic well being.
We are fortunate to live where no one religion controls the day. Luckily, the civil religion we vaguely follow does it part-stays out of the way. Nothing matters more here than the ability to make money and anything that impedes the flow of commerce is a no-no.
Europe went though all this shit already that is why they threw God back into the churches where He belongs.
I have no problem with people being religious or not- i only ask that they to not use that to create oppressive laws that will make me have to budget and sweat over finances over candlelight. We need to be free and autonomous-so we can work, pay taxes and consume.
(BTW, Don’t you know that the wise old God rewards people with wealth? Nothing says heavenly love more than a flush money market account and all kinds of rising stocks in the BRIC countries.)
I always though McCain had a good shot at the seat. Now that gas prices have declined by about 50-70 cents at the pump, the war pullout dates are stated and now, the Fed will bail out housing, it is enough to restore a sense of hope to those that are ready to vote Repub.
We will see. Either we will make a change one way or sway back toward ‘tradition’ but I say this:
How much does it cost and how the hell do we pay for it?
Sweetness, I admire your courage in addressing the readers who obviously disagree with you but I question your judgement in directly addressing Gentlemen Whore who is obviously intolerant of your opinion. All I can say is people like Gentlemen Whore who preach tolerance and then deliberately expose themselves as hypocrites by being intolerant are not worth your time. I -uncomfortably- feel the need to explain my beliefs so the individuals that automatically associate Republicans with ultra-conservative religious zealouts can understand the entire political party is not fucked.
The war in Iraq
Sorry hit enter too soon. The war in Iraq should have never happened. Even though Congress was in favor of the war by a large (bi-partisan) majority the need to invade has been exposed as fraudulent. However, the exit strategy needs to be carefully planned to minimize the suffering of the citizens of Iraq. On other fronts, I don’t believe the government should legislate anything related to abortion, gay marriage, or windfall profits tax. The government simply has no right to infringe on my personal choices. The uneducated and intolerant automatically go the religion card with Republicans. Most Republicans in my sphere believe government should have no part in attempting to legislate personal choice decisions. We believe in small government who serve citizens by looking over infrastructure and little else. I want a small government with little impact on my day to day life. Like Palin or not, you won’t get that with any other candidate.
how can you think that, christophe, when palin says we’re doing “god’s work in iraq”? if you want to minimize the great suffering we have unleashed upon the iraqis, the best exit strategy is a hasty one – i.e., not the plan mccain proposes. if you want a small government with little impact in your day-to-day life, i find it hard to believe the mccain-palin ticket is the answer to your needs. i get that you’re a traditional conservative/possibly libertarian. but how on earth is what liberals want right now not traditionally conservative? we want to get out of iraq – that cuts spending; we want gays to have the same rights as every one else or at the very least not have their personal choices legislated; same with abortion; we want the economy rejuvenated, and to restore the middle class who, at this moment, are losing their homes and their health insurance. a traditional conservative today would vote for obama for anything other than purely fiscal reasons.
and, not to beat a dead horse, but my intolerance of intolerance doesn’t make me intolerant – you and sweetness can pull out the hypocrite card all you like, but all she did was start out by calling liberals hypocrites, then express offense at my responses and insist i don’t know her beliefs. i can appreciate the fact that not every republican like yourself wants to oppress gays, spy on other americans and have the poor bail out the rich when it comes to tax day, but like it or not, that is the party you’ve chosen to truck with, and the last 8 years has seen that party legislate or attempt to legislate many things you can claim you don’t believe in or agree with, but seem ready to put up with for reasons clearly more important to you. the gop has only continued to prove its ineptness in leadership on domestic and global fronts, and i’m sorry if the venom in my anger offends you, but i find the obscenities and atrocities of the last 8 years far more offensive, as i do the presidential ticket that’s going to give us the same and more for another 4.
whew! Such a storm of words with hardly a mention of sex at all and yet I found myself so engrossed…wierd. I thought I only liked the titilating sex talk but I have to admit that I was uh, sorta turned on by the political infighting. It was reassuring to see so many people frightened by Palin; she scares the shit out of me too. As an ex- Catholic from an Irish Catholic upbringing I feel justified and confidant of my dim view of organized religion and Im relieved to see that so many share my point of view. On the other hand a lot of people do not and that scares me also because in this culture of ours people like Palin do have a role to play ; their moralistic script has already generously been written by the likes of Saul of Tarsus and they feel thus exempt, I imagine, from thinking critically about the evolution of religious beliefs and the psychosocial ramifications of primal human fears regarding death. Who has time to think critically about dying someday, examining the fear, especially when there is a sale on at Wall Mart… and I’ve been baptised so im safe, And the in- laws are coming by so the house needs cleaning? No wonder we elected Bush twice. Half the country is busy wallowing in willful ignorance ,frantically
consuming things and the other half is clinically depressed and do not even know it. I wish that prayer was effective. I’d spend the next two months doing Novenas, saying the Rosary and lighting candles to convince the god du jour that Obama must win. I’d pray for secularism. And world peace, of course. Any way,yea Palin scares me and I look forward to the revelation of hidden problems masked by righteous moralizing. The press has to move fast here. Lets pray for the NY Times. Imagine a sex scandal!!?? We could all blog for months… let us pray….
There was an interesting article in The Seattle Times this weekend. It outlined – through official memos and documents – Sarah Palin’s first few months as Mayor of Wasilla. Among the “rhetorical” questions she posed to her department heads, she asked the city librarian how she felt about banning books.
Debauchette, dear, I think this is the longest I’ve stayed away from your blog since I found it.
I wanted to let the counter-productive mutual accusations die down. But I was haunted by the thought that I’d recently read something that I thought illustrated the left-right or fundamentalist-secular dynamics so clearly.
I finally found it again, here:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/30/105745/003
Hope you’re well,
Lucky
Debauchette, didn’t you once mention that a majority of your customers are Republican? I’d be curious to hear your observations about some of the personalities involved. Maybe one day if you’re so inclined and if you have the time and energy we’ll get to hear about that aspect of your profession.
I can’t fathom how an entire collective of people can run primarily on a “family values” ticket and then lead some of the shittiest, least moral family lives out there. Putting aside entirely the issue of adultery or hiring sex workers, but more a focus on all of the closeted homosexuality, and the unrepentant attitudes when their flawed policies like “abstinence-only education” leap up and bite them in the proverbial ass. How can an entire group of people go for so long and look to change (or at least recognize) their own raging hypocrisy? “No EXPLICIT [which I think means comprehensive] sex ed in school! Don’t you dare hand out condoms to my children! Or yours! Oh yeah, and the snowbilly high school hockey player knocked up my teenage daughter, but that’s ok. At least they don’t have a clear grasp on how the male and female reproductive organs function. My work here is done.”
I live in a city known for its granola tree huggers, and I can tell you that I observe less divorce, and generally better, more functioning, communicative, value-rich families, than when I visit relatives in a red county in a red state.
wendy, the facts support your observations: divorce rates are higher in red states; so are adultery rates, and abortion rates, and teen pregnancy rates where abstinence is taught as sex education.
bill maher asked an interesting question last night on “real time”: what would the republicans do or say if one of obama’s teenage daughters came home pregnant? and what would they say if that baby’s daddy, if he were also black, had a myspace page that looked anything like levi johnston’s?
exactly.
I don’t believe that all of the bickering back and forth between sides of the issues are worthwhile. The polls have shown for months that 50% want Obama and 50 % want McCain. That means on election day 50% will be happy and 50% will not be. Both parties have let the american people down by not investing in our future properly and only being concerned with getting elected. I would suggest to everyone that we get rid of all of them and start over. Until that happens we will continue to have the same election every four years.
Sweetness and Christophe, you say you want smaller government. How about starting with Homeland Security. That’s a big waste of money. While we’re at it, why don’t we reduce the military so that we provide defense of our country. Lots of savings here. I happen to like the concept of social security so we’ll leave that one alone. Medicare and Medicaid could be adjusted if we were ever to have an honest discussion of health care costs that spends 80% of all health care dollars in the last 90 days of life. Sure would be nice if we could stop paying the HUGE interest charges on the national debt, but we’re running a pretty big deficit thanks in part to the trillion dollar total cost of this war. Our tax system if pretty well fucked given the regressive nature of the system. Personally I’d like to see a consumption tax as a way to level the playing field. What are your ideas for smaller government?
what a fantastic post! i’m new to your blog – my best friend just pointed it out to me and now we’re hedonistically watching the travel channel sitting on the same couch in the same living room on different laptops reading the replies to this exceptionally well-written little diddy you’ve got here.
i think i’m in love with gentleman whore – all his points are my own and i’m just thrilled that i dont have to get all huffy with anyone because he’s done it better than i could have anyway.
sarah palin is terrifying. though i dont believe in souls i generally say that republicans have none. she’s a prime example. her twisted, convoluted moral values clearly do not even work in her own household, how could they work for the entire country? there just are not enough bad things in the world to say about her intolerant, fundamentalist points of view, and i’m just scared shitless that mccain/palin will win this thing. and then i really will have to move away even though canada is freezing and i dont like snow. lucky for me my boyfriend can easily obtain canadian citizenship, eh?
i despise the view taken by the conservative right-wing that liberals are being intolerant of their views when all we want is for people not to push their absurd and unfounded belief systems on us. it’s in the same vein as christians constantly proclaiming that atheism takes as much “faith” as christianity when no one claims that it takes “faith” not to believe in fucking leprechauns.
sadly religion is the cause, directly or indirectly, of most of the problems i can think of, and until people are smart enough not to need that kind of crutch, we’ll continue to get fanatics like george w. bush and sarah palin leading the huge fundamentalist population in the united states to “a brighter tomorrow”
petrifying! and here we thought the age of reason was coming.
Good God Almighty … I retired from politics after the “recount”. Now, I just know what I know and, for me, right now, there is no reason to go much further. I’m entirely too sensitive for it. Though it does amaze me all the attention it grabs. Sheesh! People LOVE it!
I love how the article that strays away from the general nature of the blog gets more comments than the average post. It’s usually a good idea to stay away from one-sided politics on forums/blogs/discussions. Have you ever witnessed someone that suddenly became enlightened and forgot all their old opinions in favor of the person’s with whom they were arguing against?
I just had to delete a paragraph on the topic after realizing that it was posing an argument based on what’s been said.
Hey d. Thought I’d pass along a link to another blog. (hope he doesn’t mind…) Smart guy, smart audience. Attached is a post (and replies!) you may find interesting. There are actually several other posts regarding the Palin phenomena that are also worth reading. Thought provoking perspectives. If people can handle some of your more descriptive language here, I’m sure they can handle the term “redneck,” as used and not shoot the messenger(s).
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/redneck-pride/
Why is it that Barack Obama, who has professed to be led by his faith just as often and who is largely credited from his charisma, avoids your fear?
Given many of the choices made by the religious right, one has to wonder if they’re really asking themselves, “What wouldn’t Jesus do?”
A couple of things: 1. It’s not surprising at all that M/P had a surge after the announcement of P. She riles people up, she delivers a good speech (content aside), she’s photogenic. Give it a few weeks and I’m sure things will return to closer to the way they were before her nom. It’s all about ebb and flow. Just because M/P have edged slightly higher than O/B in the last two weeks doesn’t really mean a whole lot. Whenever someone gets a lot of attention, people pay attention and polls change. Regardless, it’s going to be yet another close presidential race.
2. P definitely deserves a lot of the attention she’s getting, and she’s getting people talking, which is very good. However, what everyone needs to be reminded of, is that people shouldn’t be voting for her (or Biden), but for the *presidential* candidate. VPs are notorious for getting little jobs and just hopping around doing PR-ish things, so I’m not really that worried over her actual influence in office, if M was elected. Noone should be voting based on the VP candidate…
3. I’m still not happy about O, but given the choices, he’s definitely the better choice. Given that I can (by profession), considering being an expat (again) has been a recurring pondering of mine lately.
I’ll field Wendy’s question, if you like.
The majority of my clients, like Debauchette’s, were Republicans. It would be impossible to paint them all with the same brush and pinpoint one personality type. What it boiled down to was that my clients were rich. Very, very rich. They voted for the party that would decrease, or at least not increase, their tax burden. If they had any qualms about aligning themselves with a party that patently endorses the curtailing of social freedoms, it wasn’t apparent. When I challenged them (which was rare – I knew it was best to steer clear of the subject), their rejoinders were pretty weak, such as “Well, I just don’t believe that Roe v. Wade will be overturned” or “Abortion is a hot-button liberal smokescreen”.
I think it just boiled down to a wholesale internalization of the status quo. They knew the rules didn’t apply to them. Because the rules hardly ever apply to the rich, do they?
Sarah Palin scares me as much as McCain does. Probably a little more. If they take control of the White House, my family is planning to defect to Canada (or Europe… it’s been discussed) as soon as can possibly be managed. I refuse to be a part of a country where people like those two can get elected into its highest offices. We should have left when Bush took office.
And I don’t care who slams me for being “unpatriotic”. My allegiance is my own and to my family and those I love – not to a piece of land.
Anyway, I agree entirely with your post.
I found this blog post interesting given the fact that not too long ago you blogged about the Edwards affair and how you think that one’s personal private life has no connection to one’s public life. Or do you think this only in terms of one’s personal private sex life? And when it comes to other personal private subjects- religion- it does not apply?
You can not separate personal and private from one’s personality. However- and I think this is what you were trying to stress- is that a person should hold their personal believes for themselves and themselves only- not for others. And not as governmental policy.
“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross”.
-Sinclair Lewis