There are two things that really are stuck in my craw tonight and it is bi-ideology.
Firstly it is one the left.
Last night in the Civil Forum On The Presidency at Saddleback Church, the presumptive Democrat nominee for president, Sen. Messiah Barack, gave a very flip answer in response to a serious question asked by Pastor Rick Warren in regards to human life:
Q. NOW, LET'S DEAL WITH ABORTION. 40 MILLION ABORTIONS SINCE ROE V. WADE. YOU KNOW, AS A PASTOR I HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS ALL OF THE TIME. ALL OF THE PAIN AND ALL OF THE CONFLICTS. I KNOW THIS IS A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE. 40 MILLION ABORTIONS. AT WHAT POINT DOES A BABY GET HUMAN RIGHTS IN YOUR VIEW?
A. WELL, I THINK THAT WHETHER YOU ARE LOOKING AT IT FROM A THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE OR A SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE, ANSWERING THAT QUESTION WITH SPECIFICITY, YOU KNOW, IS ABOVE MY PAY GRADE.
Now, this is classic Obama. Give a long winded, no point answer. But, where he went way over the line is by saying that it is above my pay grade.
It shows an absolute arrogance and lack of willingness to admit, as a Christian, that life begins at conception. Like many other liberal Christians and or politicians, once he makes that admission he can then neatly compartmentalize how that baby, that human being, can be dealt with. But, it was intellectual dishonesty wrapped in flippancy. This will come back to haunt the secular messiah. No, while the DDBMSOWM are buying into conspiracy theories http://haloscan.com/tb/betsynewmark/6354080346673017118 that make JFK assassination conspiracy nuts blush, they will not admit that this was a dishonest and flip answer to an issue that is of great importance to many Americans.
I wonder if he would appreciate a flip answer on whether or not it is OK to use the word "nigger". Would he like if some politician said that was above his or her pay scale? Or how about poverty. Well, that could be beyond many people's pay scale. You see where I am going with this? Serious issues demand serious answers.
Contrast the clear, concise answer that Sen. John "F--- You McCain gave to the same question:
AT THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION. I HAVE A 25-YEAR PRO LIFE RECORD IN THE CONGRESS, IN THE SENATE. AND AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, I WILL BE A PRO LIFE PRESIDENT AND THIS PRESIDENCY WILL HAVE PRO LIFE POLICIES. THAT'S MY COMMITMENT, THAT'S MY COMMITMENT TO YOU.
Clear and to the point. And, Sen. "F--- You" McCain can answer with authority for he has always voted for pro-life legislation even if he was not a leader on the said legislation.
No DDBMSOWM covering is going to work on this one.
Now, for my problem with the right.
On Friday, I posted a piece, The Case Against Tom Ridge http://rightviewfromtheleftcoast.blogspot.com/2008/08/case-against-tom-ridge.html for Sen. "F--- You" McCain's running mate. I focused on him because Mr. Ridge is a Republican.
But now, there are even bonified conservatives making a serious case for Independent Democrat Sen. Joe Lieberman to be Sen. "F--- You" McCain's running mate.
National Review's Rich Lowry makes a case http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZGI0OWZhMDJmNjUyMGE3MTQxZmNkY2FlODMwZjE5NGM.
So do a lot of members of The Weekly Standard.
Here is the fundamental problem with all this analysis.
If Sen. "F--- You" McCain were to ask Sen. Lieberman to be his running mate, he would lose quite a lot of Republicans. You know, the ones that actually do the grunt work of knocking on doors, phone banking, GOTV, all of that. There is no reason for Republicans, who want to elect Republicans to work to hard to elect both a Republican and a Democrat.
Also, Sen. Lieberman is no where near the maverick that Sen. "F--- You" McCain is. After all, the only reason he ran as an Independent Democrat is because he lost to a very anti-war Democrat in the Connecticut primary. When Sen. Lieberman became then Vice-President Al Gore's running mate, he could no longer support school vouchers like he did previously. No more any education reform that did not pass muster with the teacher unions. What would Sen. Liberman have to give up to be a running mate to a Republican? Most of what he believes in.
Sen. Liberman is a liberal, not a socialist but a liberal Democrat. That is why he could support the war effort in the Iraq theatre and does understand the War Against Islamofacist Terror.
But, on almost every other issue, he is to the left of the other DDBMSOWM crowd, Tom Ridge.
When conservatives try to make a plausible case for Sen. "F--- You" McCain choosing either someone like Sen. Joe Liberman or Tom Ridge, it sends a shiver up my spine. There is no real reason for Mr Ridge and there is less of a reason for Sen. Lieberman.
So there, I have been bothered by both the left and right. It is time for the right to stop justifying a bad left move, McCain's running mate. And it is time for the left to answer the abortion question with honesty just once, once I ask. Stop the lying, obstruction and flippancy.
13 comments:
The answer that Obama gave on when life begins was shocking. It made me wonder what other decisions are above his pay grade.
Do we really want to put a guy who can't give an answer to a question that fundamental in the White House.
That forum was the first time I really saw any reason to vote for McCain, instead of against Obama. I hope McCain doesn't screw up the VP pick...
just like richard 64 i think any decision obama will have to make will prove to be above his pay grade!!!!... now to maccain, he has tested me once again 64 with this possible pro-life candidate threat. let us HOPE he doesn't go through with it....
If you were a woman I'd give your position on the subject of abortion some consideration.
But since you'll never have to really face the consequences of being pregnant and deciding what to do, your opinion doesn't hold any water with me.
And ironically since I'm also not a woman, the subject of abortion isn't one that I'm qualified to speak to, either.
What do you say that we both just shut the fuck up about it, then, eh?
Now since you seem to have some interest in religious matters, perhaps you can answer a question that's always troubled me, namely - how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Yeah, I know, that was a cheap shot. We all know that the answer is six (6).
But consider this:
According to the Gospels, Jesus was turned over to the occupying military authorities in Jerusalem and to their partners in the local religious establishment for a cash bounty paid out to one of his followers. Jesus was convicted in a kangaroo court proceeding where the judge admitted that there was no real evidence against him, he was tortured by his guards, and strung up to die in a media-driven spectacle, complete with crowds cheering for his death.
Here's the question, Senator McCain: How is it that with all these crimes committed against the one you call your savior, you can endorse the use of the same governmental tactics by our government that were employed against Jesus?
For Right Wing Snarkle. I do not mind you taking a different opinion than my own. But, I will NOT tolerate profanity on this comment site. I will block you from further comments if you can not abide by that request. Thank you.
Framing the issue of abortion as all about the woman (as snarky and other proponents do) is wrong-headed. Of course we don't have any empirical evidence of when life does or doesn't "begin" - but we don't need any to make a decision on abortion. Without knowing we should err on the side of life beginning at the instant of conception and let that guide us. To do anything else would be like driving toward a cross-walk, closing your eyes, and saying "it's okay, because I don't know if there are any people in the middle of the road anyway."
Obama would allow this little girl to die for surviving an abortion, all so he could quibble over "fetal viability."
Well, as for not knowing the difference between using dashes (like in Sen. "F--- You" McCain) versus the actual letters (in this case k, u, c, though not necessarily in that order) - Ooops.
Regarding Gay Bigot's strawman/bad analogy, and his parroting of the latest, but not the last, wingnut obsfucation regarding Obama's votes, etc., the less said, the better.
Pregnancy is ultimately a health matter which, like all health matters, is best managed by the person(s) involved, with the help and support of a competent and objective health professional.
Of course, the repubs have learned to exploit the issue and manipulate the gullible to their electoral advantage.
Now, if some of you really want to get into criminalizing abortion, then you should definitely go after women who abort their pregnancies.
Charge them with premeditated murder, or at least with being an accessory. Throw the book at 'em, and if the particular state has capital punishment, well, tough noogies for them huh?
I mean, if you're really serious about this, what're you waiting for?
Go all in, or don't go at all, I say.
You're right snarky, it is a health matter. A healthy matter that involves at least two people, three if the father is part of the equation, as he should be.
Let me ask you the same question the candidates were asked: At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?
Ugh, more of the Gay Bigot's anti-abortion schtick.
Come back when you're pregnant, and we'll talk.
Otherwise, your views on this subject are of no interest to me.
Or, to put it another way, keep your index finger off of my prostate gland.
Snarkle, Snarkle, Snarkle!!! Your "You can only comment if you are pregnant". Is intellectually dishonest. By that way of thinking, one can not be commander-in-chief unless they have served in the armed forces. And only if they served only the way that you like. And whenever one uses the arguement that one can not have a thought and or opinion unless one has been directly affected shows a very narrow way of handling issues. Your right, no male will become pregnant. But that does not mean a male can not have a thought and or opinion. Remember, by and large it does take two to tango. To make it nothing more than a "medical" procedure takes and humanity and or morality out of the equation. Thus, doctors will at some point be able to do whatever they want under the guise of "medical" reasons. But, my guess is that morality has no place in Snarkleland.
Nope, you misread my comment.
Gay Bigot is free to say whatever he wants, about any subject he wants.
What I said was that with regard to pregnancy and related matters, I have no interest in listening to whatever he has to say because, as someone who's biologically incapable of becoming pregnant, he (and all other men) really doesn't know what he's taking about.
And never will.
I'm not interested in listening to somebody who doesn't know what they're talking about, but any such person is certainly free to make a fool of himself.
I'm just not going to listen.
And of course anybody who's opposed to abortion, for whatever reason, should definitely not get one.
By the same reasoning, if somebody is opposed to the idea of prostate exams for men over the age of 40, then they are certainly free to not have such an exam.
But that doesn't mean that they can make them illegal.
Conversely, if they think that hourly prostate exams are the way to go, then they're free to pursue that interest to their hearts content.
They just need to keep their fingers off of my prostate.
I think that's pretty clear, don't you?
But I'm surprised that neither of you, who each apparently hold strong anti-abortion opinions, have yet taken up my suggestion to call for the out-and-out criminalization of abortion, and actively charge women who have abortions either as murderers, or as accomplices.
If you think it's a crime and moral outrage, why not go after the ultimate perpetrators?
I didn't expect him to answer the question. In that regard he parrots Obama.
As one writer said: His [Obama's] answer to the human being question could have been "when the baby takes a breath", "when he can say 'Mama'", "at conception", any of those would have been better than the thirty second non-answer he offered us.
Answering questions like "when does human life begin" is something liberals are allergic to. Also, I've never called - nor do I now call - for the criminalization of abortion. There's no easy answer to the problem. But to equate it to a simple medical exam, or dumb it down to a "you do your thing, I'll do mine" slogan is intellectually dishonest.
Well, it looks like "intellectually dishonest" is the wingnut word of the week.
But I have to ask Gay Bigot - don't you think every sperm is sacred?
Post a Comment