It is the last week of school for the year, and I have only one more year of public school to worry about with my own children. I've spent a lot of years--a decade and a half, in fact--worrying about my own kids as well as any others that went to the local public school with mine. I spent a few years worrying and working for all the children that went to school anywhere in our town and another couple working and worrying for all children in our district.
But I'm done.
Last night at Costco I ran across a book by Glenn Beck that feeds the conspiracy theorists' rhetoric against the Common Core. I'm done fighting that fight.
In a purely selfish move, I'm going to say that I'm thrilled that my younger child, The Boy, is the final grade level that has nothing to do with the CC "roll out" in our district. He avoided it by being a year ahead in math and his English grade level stuff, while some elements have been integrated in but none of the required pieces are demanded until the year after his. And I'm not sorry about that at all.
I have volunteered in my kids' school for 15 years now. I have sat on committees of concerned parents every time I've been asked. I have worked with wonderful teachers--who aren't paid NEARLY what they deserve to do what is asked of them by society at large, much less the district they work for--and still they see the positive in the most recent changes that have taken the conservative right to grab their pitchfork and torches and demand change. I've seen administrators try to jump through the needs legal and district mandated hoops to help their teachers do what they do best--TEACH.
You see, the change happens every 4-8 years. Very similar to certain presidential administration changes. That is not a coincidence. Every national leader KNOWS the system is broken, but not a single one will put the money where his/her mouth is to make things right enough for the best to happen for our kids. But that is another topic completely. Educational theories come and go. Good teachers are coming less often, and the bad ones hang on for too long. But changes to the system/curriculum/methodology change on a regular basis. and good teachers take what works, fit it to their subject matter, try to breathe life into their topic with more energy and enthusiasm than a three ring circus ringmaster for the attention deficit, virtual world believing, entitlement driven students of today.
Today, I'm ranting about the anti-Common Core fanatics. I was sorry to see Glenn Beck is now their poster boy. I don't listen to his show but I admired him for not backing down on his religious beliefs in light of national attention and criticism--especially during the Prop 8 debacle in California some years ago. But now, the Tea Partiers must keep buying his books so he has found a new sublect to appease they and take their money.
For me, I'm just done. I'm done trying to explain what I have seen and heard and done in my local schools. I'm done trying to help others understand the reasoning for the changes. And I'm definitely done making head-banging-against-the-bricks attempts to persuade the conspiracy theorists to see the situation as I do. That opposition is too strong. And I'm just one person. And I'm tired of fighting.
Like Chief Joseph, Nez Pierce leader in the late 1800s, said "on this spot I'll fight no more forever". It is just too exhausting.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Monday, November 25, 2013
I Do Not Think That Word Means What You Think It Means
I got a letter in the last week from our health insurance company. Yes, we are some of those weirdos who have paid privately for health coverage. We didn't have a job with coverage, so we bought our own. It's called "responsibility". But that is another blog post.
I got a letter that informs me that our coverage will shift beginning on January 1st, but that because of the Affordable Care Act, we have a new choice available. We can keep our current policy as it is. Or we can add the ACA benefits to our policy.
Those benefits, you ask? Our individual deductible can remain the same ($7500 as it is now) or drop to $6000 in the new year, as well as a prescription deduction drop (from $1000) to $350. In all the essentials, those are the only changes.
And since this Act is "Affordable" our premium each month will go from a $327 to $701. Boy, I'm so grateful this act was AFFORABLE! I guess I should just be glad the policy was canceled and then uncanceled for another year.
And luckily for me, this is a moot point, as Genius Golfer's new job will offer health care insurance. Though not at the rock bottom price we have been paying.
This whole national uproar is INCONCEIVABLE. It's like getting in to a battle of wits with a Sicilian.
I got a letter that informs me that our coverage will shift beginning on January 1st, but that because of the Affordable Care Act, we have a new choice available. We can keep our current policy as it is. Or we can add the ACA benefits to our policy.
Those benefits, you ask? Our individual deductible can remain the same ($7500 as it is now) or drop to $6000 in the new year, as well as a prescription deduction drop (from $1000) to $350. In all the essentials, those are the only changes.
And since this Act is "Affordable" our premium each month will go from a $327 to $701. Boy, I'm so grateful this act was AFFORABLE! I guess I should just be glad the policy was canceled and then uncanceled for another year.
And luckily for me, this is a moot point, as Genius Golfer's new job will offer health care insurance. Though not at the rock bottom price we have been paying.
This whole national uproar is INCONCEIVABLE. It's like getting in to a battle of wits with a Sicilian.
 |
| "I do not thin' dat word meens wha chew thin' it means" |
Monday, October 7, 2013
Sounds Too Good To Be True? You Know The Rest...
I haven't much to say lately with regards to political stuff, but I read this one over the weekend and it just made sense. I wish people would do their own thinking--whether it is about our coming municipal primary election or the situation in Washington. See if this makes sense to you.
Terry
Adams wrote:
I
was in my neighborhood restaurant this morning and was seated behind a group of
jubilant individuals celebrating the coming implementation of the health care
bill. I could not finish my breakfast. This is what ensued: They were a diverse
group of several races and both sexes. I heard a young man exclaim, “Isn’t
Obama like Jesus Christ? I mean, after all, he is healing the sick.”
A young woman enthusiastically proclaimed, “Yeah, and he does it for free. I cannot believe anyone would think that a free market wouldn't work for health care.”
Another said, "The stupid Republicans want us all to starve to death so they can inherit all of the power. Obama should be made a Saint for what he did for those of us less fortunate.”
At this, I had more than enough. I arose from my seat, mustering all the restraint I could find, and approached their table. “Please excuse me; may I impose upon you for one moment?”
They smiled and welcomed me to the conversation. I stood at the end of their table, smiled as best I could and began an experiment.
“I would like to give one of you my house. It will cost you no money and I will pay all of the expenses and taxes for as long as you live there. Anyone interested?”
They looked at each other in astonishment. “Why would you do something like that?” asked a young man, “There isn’t anything for free in this world.”
They began to laugh at me, as they did not realize this man had just made my point.
“I am serious, I will give you my house for free, no money whatsoever. Anyone interested?”
In unison, a resounding “Yeah” fills the room.
“Since there are too many of you, I will have to make a choice as to who receives this money-free bargain.”
I noticed an elderly couple was paying attention to the spectacle unfolding before their eyes, the old man shaking his head in apparent disgust.
“I tell you what; I will give it to the one of you most willing to obey my rules.”
Again, they looked at one another, an expression of bewilderment on their faces.
The perky young woman asked, “What are the rules?”
I smiled and said, “I don’t know. I have not yet defined them. However, it is a free home that I offer you.”
They giggled amongst themselves, the youngest of which said, “What an old coot. He must be crazy to give away his home. Go take your meds, old man.”
I smiled and leaned into the table a bit further. “I am serious, this is a legitimate offer.”
They gaped at me for a moment.
“I’ll take it you old fool. Where are the keys?” boasted the youngest among them.
“Then I presume you accept ALL of my terms then?” I asked.
The elderly couple seemed amused and entertained as they watched from the privacy of their table. “Oh yeah! Where do I sign up?”
I took a napkin and wrote, “I give this man my home, without the burden of financial obligation, so long as he accepts and abides by the terms that I shall set forth upon consummation of this transaction.”
I signed it and handed it to the young man who eagerly scratched out his signature.
“Where are the keys to my new house?” he asked in a mocking tone of voice.
All eyes were upon us as I stepped back from the table, pulling the keys from pocket and dangling them before the excited new homeowner.“Now that we have entered into this binding contract, witnessed by all of your friends, I have decided upon the conditions you are obligated to adhere to from this point forward. You may only live in the house for one hour a day. You will not use anything inside of the home. You will obey me without question or resistance. I expect complete loyalty and admiration for this gift I bestow upon you. You will accept my commands and wishes with enthusiasm, no matter the nature. Your morals and principles shall be as mine. You will vote as I do, think as I do and do it with blind faith. These are my terms. Here are your keys.”
I reached the keys forward and the young man
looked at me dumbfounded. “Are you out of your mind? Who would ever agree to
those ridiculous terms?” the young man appeared irritated. A young woman enthusiastically proclaimed, “Yeah, and he does it for free. I cannot believe anyone would think that a free market wouldn't work for health care.”
Another said, "The stupid Republicans want us all to starve to death so they can inherit all of the power. Obama should be made a Saint for what he did for those of us less fortunate.”
At this, I had more than enough. I arose from my seat, mustering all the restraint I could find, and approached their table. “Please excuse me; may I impose upon you for one moment?”
They smiled and welcomed me to the conversation. I stood at the end of their table, smiled as best I could and began an experiment.
“I would like to give one of you my house. It will cost you no money and I will pay all of the expenses and taxes for as long as you live there. Anyone interested?”
They looked at each other in astonishment. “Why would you do something like that?” asked a young man, “There isn’t anything for free in this world.”
They began to laugh at me, as they did not realize this man had just made my point.
“I am serious, I will give you my house for free, no money whatsoever. Anyone interested?”
In unison, a resounding “Yeah” fills the room.
“Since there are too many of you, I will have to make a choice as to who receives this money-free bargain.”
I noticed an elderly couple was paying attention to the spectacle unfolding before their eyes, the old man shaking his head in apparent disgust.
“I tell you what; I will give it to the one of you most willing to obey my rules.”
Again, they looked at one another, an expression of bewilderment on their faces.
The perky young woman asked, “What are the rules?”
I smiled and said, “I don’t know. I have not yet defined them. However, it is a free home that I offer you.”
They giggled amongst themselves, the youngest of which said, “What an old coot. He must be crazy to give away his home. Go take your meds, old man.”
I smiled and leaned into the table a bit further. “I am serious, this is a legitimate offer.”
They gaped at me for a moment.
“I’ll take it you old fool. Where are the keys?” boasted the youngest among them.
“Then I presume you accept ALL of my terms then?” I asked.
The elderly couple seemed amused and entertained as they watched from the privacy of their table. “Oh yeah! Where do I sign up?”
I took a napkin and wrote, “I give this man my home, without the burden of financial obligation, so long as he accepts and abides by the terms that I shall set forth upon consummation of this transaction.”
I signed it and handed it to the young man who eagerly scratched out his signature.
“Where are the keys to my new house?” he asked in a mocking tone of voice.
All eyes were upon us as I stepped back from the table, pulling the keys from pocket and dangling them before the excited new homeowner.“Now that we have entered into this binding contract, witnessed by all of your friends, I have decided upon the conditions you are obligated to adhere to from this point forward. You may only live in the house for one hour a day. You will not use anything inside of the home. You will obey me without question or resistance. I expect complete loyalty and admiration for this gift I bestow upon you. You will accept my commands and wishes with enthusiasm, no matter the nature. Your morals and principles shall be as mine. You will vote as I do, think as I do and do it with blind faith. These are my terms. Here are your keys.”
“You did when you signed this contract before reading it, understanding it and with the full knowledge that I would provide my conditions only after you committed to the agreement.”
The elderly man chuckled as his wife tried to restrain him. I was looking at a now silenced and bewildered group of people.
“You can shove that stupid deal up your a** old man. I want no part of it!” exclaimed the now infuriated young man.
'You have committed to the contract, as witnessed by all of your friends. You cannot get out of the deal unless I agree to it. I do not intend to let you free now that I have you ensnared. I am the power you agreed to. I am the one you blindly and without thought chose to enslave yourself to. In short, I am your Master.”
At this, the table of celebrating individuals became a unified group against the unfairness of the deal.
After a few moments of unrepeatable comments and slurs, I revealed my true intent.
“What I did to you is what this administration and congress did to you with the health care legislation. I easily suckered you in and then revealed the real cost of the bargain. Your folly was in the belief that you can have something you did not earn, and for that which you did not earn, you willingly allowed someone else to think for you. Your failure to research, study and inform yourself permitted reason to escape you. You have entered into a trap from which you cannot flee. Your only chance of freedom is if your new Master gives it to you. A freedom that is given can also be taken away. Therefore, it is not freedom at all.”
With that, I tore up the napkin and placed it before the astonished young man. “This is the nature of your new health care legislation.” I turned away to leave these few in thought and contemplation -- and was surprised by applause.
The elderly gentleman, who was clearly entertained, shook my hand enthusiastically and said, “Thank you, Sir. These kids don’t understand Liberty .”
He refused to allow me to pay my bill as he said, “You earned this one. It is an honor to pick up the tab.”
I shook his hand in thanks, leaving the restaurant somewhat humbled and sensing a glimmer of hope for my beloved country.
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Maybe This Time They'll Get It Right
If you read this blog much, you know I am not a highly political person, but there are some issues that really get under my skin. Usually they involve public education, but once in a while there are other tangent issues too.
Our state legislature opened its 45 day session yesterday. Our district is represented by a brand new state legislator. He is not the one I voted for, but he won, so he is also my representative. His first order of business was to propose legislation that Utah drop the Conceal Carry Permit and just go the Constitutional Carry laws.
Really? That is the most pressing issue we have to deal with? Of course not, but everyone wants to get their "name out there" and he did. Maybe he is just pacifying the tea-party set that got him elected.
I don't have a problem with the Second amendment, but we didn't really have a problem with the CCP process already in place in this state. Why make a bigger issue over guns here than is necessary? Every other home reportedly has a gun--for hunting or sport or protection. And if they are legally obtained and the owners follow the rules for securing them, they can have them.
I just don't see the need to change the system here. It is a pretty simply process, from what I understand. And so long as the background check is done and a gun is legally purchased, let them keep what we have.
Instead maybe the time at the legislature can be used for more productive issues--like education funding, reducing class size, and compensating teachers--whether or not they are packing heat!
Our state legislature opened its 45 day session yesterday. Our district is represented by a brand new state legislator. He is not the one I voted for, but he won, so he is also my representative. His first order of business was to propose legislation that Utah drop the Conceal Carry Permit and just go the Constitutional Carry laws.
Really? That is the most pressing issue we have to deal with? Of course not, but everyone wants to get their "name out there" and he did. Maybe he is just pacifying the tea-party set that got him elected.
I don't have a problem with the Second amendment, but we didn't really have a problem with the CCP process already in place in this state. Why make a bigger issue over guns here than is necessary? Every other home reportedly has a gun--for hunting or sport or protection. And if they are legally obtained and the owners follow the rules for securing them, they can have them.
I just don't see the need to change the system here. It is a pretty simply process, from what I understand. And so long as the background check is done and a gun is legally purchased, let them keep what we have.
Instead maybe the time at the legislature can be used for more productive issues--like education funding, reducing class size, and compensating teachers--whether or not they are packing heat!
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Really?!
I have unplugged this weekend, as I mentioned yesterday. But this morning I perked up a bit when I heard the "Fiscal Cliff" legislation was voted on and passed. Of course, this wasn't the end-all-be-all compromise that was really needed to solve anything. It was just an effort to kick the problem a little further into the future.
And the really upsetting thing for me, at least, is that the entire delegation from my state voted against it--except the one guy that isn't going to be running for re-election. REALLY?! Are we really that partisan? Apparently that is the typical case for politicians around here. That is unfortunate.
Whatever happened to the statesmen or stateswomen who serve in Washington to do their civil duty and serve The People? Apparently they have gone the way of Muscle Cars and dinosaurs. Too bad. We, The People, could really use those folks right about now.
And the really upsetting thing for me, at least, is that the entire delegation from my state voted against it--except the one guy that isn't going to be running for re-election. REALLY?! Are we really that partisan? Apparently that is the typical case for politicians around here. That is unfortunate.
Whatever happened to the statesmen or stateswomen who serve in Washington to do their civil duty and serve The People? Apparently they have gone the way of Muscle Cars and dinosaurs. Too bad. We, The People, could really use those folks right about now.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Good Point!
I saw this today and thought I would share. Especially as the Election-Hangover is wearing off and reality is slapping us in the face:
Isn't really? We know who is REALLY in charge. And we already know who will win in the end. Didn't Elder Holland tell us that our biggest issue would be to make sure we are playing for "His" team? Our allegiance to God and our conversion to the Gospel of Jesus Christ should be true regardless of who won the election. And maybe considering all the election ruckus, it is even more important now.
Isn't really? We know who is REALLY in charge. And we already know who will win in the end. Didn't Elder Holland tell us that our biggest issue would be to make sure we are playing for "His" team? Our allegiance to God and our conversion to the Gospel of Jesus Christ should be true regardless of who won the election. And maybe considering all the election ruckus, it is even more important now.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
The Day After: Time to Get to Work
The US elections are over. And only one of the candidates I voted for won. Maybe I am a jinx for these elections. Regardless of my personal preferences, I think we need to examine the fact that America is a pretty great place.
I have received a few messages since yesterday's results that I completely agree with:
From Dear Friend Jan: "Ok , no matter how this all turns out. I just watched my husband (who is a Republican and I'm pretty sure voted for Romney) kneel and pray for President Obama. The hatred has got to stop. What kind of Christians are we when we are consumed with despair and hatred? We now need to have faith in our form of government which, I believe, is inspired. And we need to work to change our country for the better. Whining accomplishes nothing."
From a former neighborhood YW: "
I have received a few messages since yesterday's results that I completely agree with:
From Dear Friend Jan: "Ok , no matter how this all turns out. I just watched my husband (who is a Republican and I'm pretty sure voted for Romney) kneel and pray for President Obama. The hatred has got to stop. What kind of Christians are we when we are consumed with despair and hatred? We now need to have faith in our form of government which, I believe, is inspired. And we need to work to change our country for the better. Whining accomplishes nothing."
From a former neighborhood YW: "
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
A Worthy Hour From My Day
Genius Golfer and I just got back from voting. Our precinct was buzzing. It only took an hour to get through the line. Perhaps the most important hour of my day.
The best part? Perhaps tomorrow the ads on the TV and radio and internet will be gone. We can hope for that change, among others!
The best part? Perhaps tomorrow the ads on the TV and radio and internet will be gone. We can hope for that change, among others!
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Where Is Civility on the Ballot?
I read a great article this week about Politics and Civility. After the year we've had you wouldn't think those two concepts can coexist. But according to the article, they can and should. It is just a matter of personal choice.
The article was a composite of three different speeches made at BYU over the past year. The first gentleman quoted was Mark DeMoss, an evangelical and founder of the public relations agency, The DeMoss Group, who spoke oncampus in January of this year.
After joining to help the Romney campaign back in 2008, he saw the unrest and incivility on the political turf and began a civility project. He wrote to every sitting governor and every member of congress during the summer of 2010 (anticipating an ugly midterm election) to take a simple pledge regarding their upcoming elections:
1) I will be civil in my pubic discourse and behavior.
2) I will be respectful of others, whetheror not I agree with them.
3) I will stand against incivility where and when Isee it.
Of the 585 letters he sent to these elected officials, only three returned the pledge signed. That is pretty sad. Is it any wonder the regular, rank-and-file Americas have a hard time keeping a civil tongue when our elected officials can't even commit to behaving and speaking civilly?
He dissolved the civility project in early 2011. And Mr.DeMoss made a very good point in this article. He said, "The First Amendment may give me the right to demonize you with public speech, but it doesn't make it right." Yet so many people would seem to believe otherwise.
The second author quoted in this article is Karen W. Hale, a former Utah state senator and vice chair of the Utah Democratic Party, and member of the LDS church. She also was a candidate for Lieutenant Governor a few years ago. Her insights were pointed as well.
She said "For many public servants, partisanship seems to have taken precedence over the motives that drew them to political involvement in the first place--to promote the public, or common, good and to improve the lives of Americans.
"Looking at the controversial, adversarial nature of politics today, we might ask who in the world would want to get involved? the partisanship, the bickering, the ridicule, and the name-calling are all legitimate reasons to think twice about jumping into the political arena. These unsavory by-products also dim our hopes of making a positive difference in our government, communities and society."
Then she quotes former US Senator John Glenn from an interview he did with Time magazine as he was leaving office about 14 years ago. He says: "I worry about the future when we have so many young people who feel apathetic and critical and cynical about anything having to do with politics. They don't want to touch it. And yet, politics is literally the personnel system for democracy. We've got the finest democracy in the world, but it;s also one of the most complicated. Not everyone needs to run for public office, but every tie someone drops our of the system it means hey in effect give their franchise to somebody else....If you say politics is so dirty you don't want anything to do with it, what you're really saying is that you don't want to get dirty from democracy."
That is exactly how I have felt about politics. Especially in the local area. Man, otherwise rational people can get more than their panties in a knot over a candidate or issue and become completely blind to any discussion or alternative thought. Then that kind of fringe belief systems drives them into mad, and even crazy, paranoid behaviors. It definitely keeps me at arm's length from it all.
Ms. Hale also mentioned a couple of things as they relate to living the Gospel and participating in the political system around us. The points she makes are not new. We've heard them from our church leaders for years too. "It is unlikely that any one party will encompass and represent all of your beliefs. You will need to select the party with which you most identify."
And then, quoting Elder Marlin K. Jensen from an 1998 Salt Lake Tribune interview, she adds " principles compatible with the gospel maybe found in the platforms of all major political parties."
Finally, she says "I believe that partisanship--in the sense that we claim a political party and work within the structure of a largely partisan system to participate in the process of government and engage in robust, civil dialogue--is compatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
"However, partisanship--in the sense that we demean, belittle, and separate ourselves fro those who hold differing political views ad that we place party success ahead of the common good--is not compatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
"Becoming more civil may require that, fro time tot time, we change the radio station or television station, broaden our daily news diet, and listen to people who may disagree with our points of view. As we work to understand other perspectives, we may just get a taste of where the other side is coming from and occasionally find common ground upon which to build."
I loved her piece. What a breath of reason to hear the ideas that we can agree to disagree, but that doesn't have to lead us to be disagreeable.
The final portion was from Senator Joseph Lieberman, US senator from Connecticut and the first Jewish person to be nominated for national office with his unsuccessful bid as Al Gore's vice presidential nominee. He spoke primarily on religion in politics and the base of value that the early Founding Fathers gave our country because of their faith.
He said "...America has been a nation that has been defined not by our borders, but by our values. One of those founding values was a belief in a higher power--a belief in God....In that way, the United State of America was and is a faith-based initiative....and the First amendment prohibits the establishment of an official religion, ensuring every American the right to worship--or not worship--as he or she chooses. The full promise of this founding vision, I believe, is one of freedom of religion, not freedom from religion."
The whole article is pretty great. If you are interested in seeing the rest of this, check the link HERE. With all this easing my current political headache, I still can't wait for Tuesday to come and go. No one person can change the country--for good or bad. But we need to look for those who we feel most likely will represent our own views and then work hard in our own community to help make that vision real.
The article was a composite of three different speeches made at BYU over the past year. The first gentleman quoted was Mark DeMoss, an evangelical and founder of the public relations agency, The DeMoss Group, who spoke oncampus in January of this year.
After joining to help the Romney campaign back in 2008, he saw the unrest and incivility on the political turf and began a civility project. He wrote to every sitting governor and every member of congress during the summer of 2010 (anticipating an ugly midterm election) to take a simple pledge regarding their upcoming elections:
1) I will be civil in my pubic discourse and behavior.
2) I will be respectful of others, whetheror not I agree with them.
3) I will stand against incivility where and when Isee it.
Of the 585 letters he sent to these elected officials, only three returned the pledge signed. That is pretty sad. Is it any wonder the regular, rank-and-file Americas have a hard time keeping a civil tongue when our elected officials can't even commit to behaving and speaking civilly?
He dissolved the civility project in early 2011. And Mr.DeMoss made a very good point in this article. He said, "The First Amendment may give me the right to demonize you with public speech, but it doesn't make it right." Yet so many people would seem to believe otherwise.
The second author quoted in this article is Karen W. Hale, a former Utah state senator and vice chair of the Utah Democratic Party, and member of the LDS church. She also was a candidate for Lieutenant Governor a few years ago. Her insights were pointed as well.
She said "For many public servants, partisanship seems to have taken precedence over the motives that drew them to political involvement in the first place--to promote the public, or common, good and to improve the lives of Americans.
"Looking at the controversial, adversarial nature of politics today, we might ask who in the world would want to get involved? the partisanship, the bickering, the ridicule, and the name-calling are all legitimate reasons to think twice about jumping into the political arena. These unsavory by-products also dim our hopes of making a positive difference in our government, communities and society."
Then she quotes former US Senator John Glenn from an interview he did with Time magazine as he was leaving office about 14 years ago. He says: "I worry about the future when we have so many young people who feel apathetic and critical and cynical about anything having to do with politics. They don't want to touch it. And yet, politics is literally the personnel system for democracy. We've got the finest democracy in the world, but it;s also one of the most complicated. Not everyone needs to run for public office, but every tie someone drops our of the system it means hey in effect give their franchise to somebody else....If you say politics is so dirty you don't want anything to do with it, what you're really saying is that you don't want to get dirty from democracy."
That is exactly how I have felt about politics. Especially in the local area. Man, otherwise rational people can get more than their panties in a knot over a candidate or issue and become completely blind to any discussion or alternative thought. Then that kind of fringe belief systems drives them into mad, and even crazy, paranoid behaviors. It definitely keeps me at arm's length from it all.
Ms. Hale also mentioned a couple of things as they relate to living the Gospel and participating in the political system around us. The points she makes are not new. We've heard them from our church leaders for years too. "It is unlikely that any one party will encompass and represent all of your beliefs. You will need to select the party with which you most identify."
And then, quoting Elder Marlin K. Jensen from an 1998 Salt Lake Tribune interview, she adds " principles compatible with the gospel maybe found in the platforms of all major political parties."
Finally, she says "I believe that partisanship--in the sense that we claim a political party and work within the structure of a largely partisan system to participate in the process of government and engage in robust, civil dialogue--is compatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
"However, partisanship--in the sense that we demean, belittle, and separate ourselves fro those who hold differing political views ad that we place party success ahead of the common good--is not compatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
"Becoming more civil may require that, fro time tot time, we change the radio station or television station, broaden our daily news diet, and listen to people who may disagree with our points of view. As we work to understand other perspectives, we may just get a taste of where the other side is coming from and occasionally find common ground upon which to build."
I loved her piece. What a breath of reason to hear the ideas that we can agree to disagree, but that doesn't have to lead us to be disagreeable.
The final portion was from Senator Joseph Lieberman, US senator from Connecticut and the first Jewish person to be nominated for national office with his unsuccessful bid as Al Gore's vice presidential nominee. He spoke primarily on religion in politics and the base of value that the early Founding Fathers gave our country because of their faith.
He said "...America has been a nation that has been defined not by our borders, but by our values. One of those founding values was a belief in a higher power--a belief in God....In that way, the United State of America was and is a faith-based initiative....and the First amendment prohibits the establishment of an official religion, ensuring every American the right to worship--or not worship--as he or she chooses. The full promise of this founding vision, I believe, is one of freedom of religion, not freedom from religion."
The whole article is pretty great. If you are interested in seeing the rest of this, check the link HERE. With all this easing my current political headache, I still can't wait for Tuesday to come and go. No one person can change the country--for good or bad. But we need to look for those who we feel most likely will represent our own views and then work hard in our own community to help make that vision real.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Bad Dream or Telling Premonition?
This week I had a tremendously frightening dream/nightmare in which I was in a law office or library setting with half a dozen or so other educated women discussing the local politics swirling around us. These women were wearing dresses, pantyhose, and heels. They looked professional, albeit circa 1990. Their hair was done and they wore conservative jewelry and makeup.
I could recall a lot more detail from this dream, for whatever reason. Maybe becasue I woke fro it in such a sudden way.
The conversation of the dream was unsettling at best, but these women were sharing their ideas about the candidates running for office--not just the presidential race, but even down to our local school board race. Normally, this is a good thing, but thees women were spreading half truths and outright lies about people I either know (the school board candidate) and support. I tried, in the dream, to reason with them and tried sharing my understanding of the position each of these candidates held on public education, sex ed, and educational funding. All the things that make me crazy--one way or another--that have been in the news regularly during election cycles.
The next thing I know I went completely postal--like, I snapped and was simultaneously beating them with my fists and shooting them with guns and hacking at them with really big knives. As horrifying as that is, the really odd part is that slowly, as I was taking each of them out, each woman's face morphed into the face of a woman in my stake who is serving on one of the local School Community Councils yet disagrees with nearly everything the public schools are doing. She believes the Common Core standards are part of a federal government conspiracy theory to brainwash our children into believing President Obama's every whim. She supports every candidate I detest and I disagree with her on point after point politically. Yet, I have to deal with her on an ecclesiastical level.
Anyway, as soon as the blood and gore began I startled myself awake. A little appalled by what I just dreamed. And yet, on a more irrational level, I was strangely satisfied. That makes me a little bit scared of myself.
It also makes me wish this whole election process was long over! Now, that would be a dream.
I could recall a lot more detail from this dream, for whatever reason. Maybe becasue I woke fro it in such a sudden way.
The conversation of the dream was unsettling at best, but these women were sharing their ideas about the candidates running for office--not just the presidential race, but even down to our local school board race. Normally, this is a good thing, but thees women were spreading half truths and outright lies about people I either know (the school board candidate) and support. I tried, in the dream, to reason with them and tried sharing my understanding of the position each of these candidates held on public education, sex ed, and educational funding. All the things that make me crazy--one way or another--that have been in the news regularly during election cycles.
The next thing I know I went completely postal--like, I snapped and was simultaneously beating them with my fists and shooting them with guns and hacking at them with really big knives. As horrifying as that is, the really odd part is that slowly, as I was taking each of them out, each woman's face morphed into the face of a woman in my stake who is serving on one of the local School Community Councils yet disagrees with nearly everything the public schools are doing. She believes the Common Core standards are part of a federal government conspiracy theory to brainwash our children into believing President Obama's every whim. She supports every candidate I detest and I disagree with her on point after point politically. Yet, I have to deal with her on an ecclesiastical level.
Anyway, as soon as the blood and gore began I startled myself awake. A little appalled by what I just dreamed. And yet, on a more irrational level, I was strangely satisfied. That makes me a little bit scared of myself.
It also makes me wish this whole election process was long over! Now, that would be a dream.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Differences of Opinion
There is a little primary election about to take place in our state next Tuesday for the Republicans. Two candidates are running for our state legislative seat. Another two are running for US senate. Both races are getting ugly.
And I am a registered independent.
Because the primaries here are closed, I am unable to vote next week unless I change my party affiliation, just for the primary. Well, no republican around here is worth that feeling that I have sold myself off to the predominate party. So I am interested in what happens--let's be honest here. Republicans seem to rule the local world. What they decide affect me. But there are principles here that I wholeheartedly disagree with in these races.
One that came up yesterday was that a member of our stake, using our ward member emails, is emailing me very negative messages about the candidate that I will choose to support when the time comes that I can vote (in November). I support him because of his stand for public education issues that I believe in.
Her emails, as passionate as they can be, are not the truth as I have researched it. She is so convinced that the State Common Core standards are some kind of Obama-administration-led conspiracy theory to take over and run our local schools. The most curious part of this camp is that the majority of folks who so passionate declare these falsehoods are in the charter school or home schooling vein. They don't even have their kids in mainstream public education, and therefore, the common core does not apply. So of they get their way, parents who are not the majority of the public school students will be making choices for the students for whom they have not stewardship.
The other very disturbing thing, to me at least, is that these people seemingly have very strong testimonies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which, as I understand and believe, relies heavily on an individual's right to choose for himself. But they want to deny me that choice for my own family. Just like the Sex Ed bill that tried to remove the "opt out" choice for parents in favor of teaching only abstinence. luckily for my mental health, the governor was wise enough to veto that one on the premise that parents should get to choose for their own kids.
The other disturbing part of this is the idea that one candidate is more "righteous" than another. That is not what that little "r" after their name means.
I just want it to be over. Waiting for the presidential election until November is unsettling enough, but this kind of neighborhood brawl waiting to happen just makes my stomach sick. And makes me less enthusiastic about the Strawberry Days parade...where these holier than thou candidates will certainly be this weekend.
And I am a registered independent.
Because the primaries here are closed, I am unable to vote next week unless I change my party affiliation, just for the primary. Well, no republican around here is worth that feeling that I have sold myself off to the predominate party. So I am interested in what happens--let's be honest here. Republicans seem to rule the local world. What they decide affect me. But there are principles here that I wholeheartedly disagree with in these races.
One that came up yesterday was that a member of our stake, using our ward member emails, is emailing me very negative messages about the candidate that I will choose to support when the time comes that I can vote (in November). I support him because of his stand for public education issues that I believe in.
Her emails, as passionate as they can be, are not the truth as I have researched it. She is so convinced that the State Common Core standards are some kind of Obama-administration-led conspiracy theory to take over and run our local schools. The most curious part of this camp is that the majority of folks who so passionate declare these falsehoods are in the charter school or home schooling vein. They don't even have their kids in mainstream public education, and therefore, the common core does not apply. So of they get their way, parents who are not the majority of the public school students will be making choices for the students for whom they have not stewardship.
The other very disturbing thing, to me at least, is that these people seemingly have very strong testimonies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which, as I understand and believe, relies heavily on an individual's right to choose for himself. But they want to deny me that choice for my own family. Just like the Sex Ed bill that tried to remove the "opt out" choice for parents in favor of teaching only abstinence. luckily for my mental health, the governor was wise enough to veto that one on the premise that parents should get to choose for their own kids.
The other disturbing part of this is the idea that one candidate is more "righteous" than another. That is not what that little "r" after their name means.
I just want it to be over. Waiting for the presidential election until November is unsettling enough, but this kind of neighborhood brawl waiting to happen just makes my stomach sick. And makes me less enthusiastic about the Strawberry Days parade...where these holier than thou candidates will certainly be this weekend.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Facebook Funny
I recently read this on Facebook, and knowing the regular readers of this blog (read: my parents) don't Facebook, I had to share:
"I told her, 'You don't have to be President to do that! Come to my
house: mow my lawn, pull weeds, & sweep my yard, for $50. And you
can give a homeless guy the $50 to use for food & shelter.' She
thought it over, she looked me in the eye and asked, 'Why doesn't the
homeless guy come over & do the work, for the $50?'
"I said, Welcome to the Republican Party.'
"Her parents still aren't speaking to me." - originated by Scott Nelson
"I recently asked my neighbors' little girl what she wanted to be when
she grew up. She wanted to be President some day. Both parents, are
Democrats, & standing there, so I asked, 'If you were President what
would be the first thing you would do? She said, 'I'd give food &
housing to the homeless.' Her parents beamed with pride.
"I said, Welcome to the Republican Party.'
"Her parents still aren't speaking to me." - originated by Scott Nelson
Friday, April 6, 2012
Feedback? You Bet!
Check this link: here
I heard about this "report" yesterday from a friend on Facebook. After seeing and hearing just the minute or less that the FoxNews link my friend had posted had up, I wrote an email, using the feedback spot on the NBC site. Here's what I wrote:
"I cannot believe that MSNBC would allow such a piece to be broadcast. Mr. O'Donnell has obviously never looked into any background or history of the Mormon church--else if he had, he would have realized that the only piece of truth he had in his "opinion" piece was the name of the church's founder, Joseph Smith. The rest was complete garbage. I'm shocked and appalled that an otherwise reputable news organization would allow such hated-filled filth to be distributed at their hands.
"If MSNBC has any journalistic honor a retraction will be offered along with a public apology for the lies this man has unleashed, and some censure be issued to Mr. O'Donnell personally for his slanderous and erroneous report.
"Mitt Romney's run for the Republican nomination has not been endorsed by his church's leadership. He is seeking his political party's endorsement. He is just another guy running for office. His faith is a side note.
"Regardless of the presenter's issues with a potential presidential candidate's faith or standing in the polls, and just because it was presented as an "opinion", should NOT make outright falsehoods agreeable by any news organization worth it's salt.
"Shame on your MSNBC. And shame on Mr. O'Donnell."
Sadly, the political arena is now free to lie to make their point. The mainstream media has an obvious bias. The character of any particular candidate is no longer important. And the whole process is drug-out too excruciatingly long. Oh, and money does seem to make the world go 'round.
The whole thing is making me sick. November's election cannot come soon enough for me. Attack ads and hate-speech doesn't help me see the advantage to voting for anyone. Yet, I know I must vote--else my decision is usurped by the seemingly growing majority of liars and slanderers.
Too bad we can't just have a debate--select each party's candidate. Hold an issues-based debate between the two, and vote already. That, I'm sorry to say, is only ever going to be a dream.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Course Corrention Brings Relief
I first need to correct my own mistake. The Republican caucus meeting was open to observers, but I just couldn't access the precinct info from the state GOP's website. Friends have since told me they had non-participant observers who attended their precinct meeting. So I apologize for that error. The caucus was very well attended last week, and lucky for everyone, more moderate folks prevailed!
The other political thing that happened at the end of last week, was that the governor vetoed the legislation known as HB 363--a revamping of Sex Ed in public school. His reasoning for the veto was the limiting of parental choice. I hope the resounding public opinion that was (finally) voiced that liked what we already have in place also made some influence in his decision.
Now if I can just hang on until the state's new Common Core shift happens in our school district this fall, I think I can survive the political process. In the meantime, I will keep a large bottle of Excedrin at the ready.
The other political thing that happened at the end of last week, was that the governor vetoed the legislation known as HB 363--a revamping of Sex Ed in public school. His reasoning for the veto was the limiting of parental choice. I hope the resounding public opinion that was (finally) voiced that liked what we already have in place also made some influence in his decision.
Now if I can just hang on until the state's new Common Core shift happens in our school district this fall, I think I can survive the political process. In the meantime, I will keep a large bottle of Excedrin at the ready.
Friday, March 16, 2012
Secret Combinations?
In the Book of Mormon, the prophets of old repeated warnings to the
people to avoid "secret combinations"-- which means avoid those schemes
and their people who work together in secret to undermine the good of
the people, usually in a spiritual sense. I'm starting to wonder if the
political parties are well on their way to filling this definition.
This week were our local caucus meetings--both the democratic and republican. And after watching the first one in person, and the second one via friends who were texting me their updates, I'm starting to wonder.
I've been a registered Independent from my first voter registration filing. I was initially taught that as a voter I should look at the individual and his/her stand on issues--regardless of party affiliation. I learned that there were good people in both parties and it was best to vote my conscience and align my vote with those whom most closely feel like I do on any particular subject. I have bought into that ideal from the beginning.
In any other state, I would certainly have stronger conservative leanings, but where I live now is SO very conservative it nears reactionary at times. So my Independent affiliation, at times must seem radically liberal to others. But I feel most comfortable there and have no plans to change my thinking on this. (This certainly must disappoint my dad, but there you have it. Sorry, Dad.)
I completely understand that as I am affiliated elsewhere, I didn't expect to be able to participate in the democratic caucuses. But at least they welcomed me as an observer. I tried, on the state GOP's website, to verify the location of my precinct's meeting and it wouldn't even let me see the information without registering as a republican. Now, even with the recent redistricting, I already knew my precinct and where we were supposed to meet. But I knew immediately I wasn't even welcome as an observer in the GOP's meetings.
The other interesting thing I noticed--from both sides of the political spectrum--were the hatred and vitriol that was spewed at the opposition. That kind of partisanship is what is bogging down our progress in the Senate and the House back in Washington. The same things seems to happen--partisanship wise--here in our state. The difference here is that the extreme conservatives have hijacked the legislature and run away without truly representing the middle-of-the-road constituents. That part is most frustrating to me. If we can't cooperate and respect each other, how will we ever get anything done?
The last thing I noticed more curiously with the extreme republicans was the higher likelihood they seem to have to be conspiracy theorists. This week we held our junior high parent's meeting about the new Common Core standards in math and language arts beginning in the fall. And leading up to this meeting, and throughout the meeting itself, certain parents--who've made their political bent and tendencies clearly evident--repeated made comments that this shift is being pushed, paid for, and required by the federal government. Our principals, teachers, districts leaders, and even the State Office of Education have tried to make the facts clear. This change--along with 46 or 47 other states--is happening from the states themselves. And the states are allowing the local districts and event he schools themselves select the textbooks, coordinate the teaching within the schools' departments, and have all asked for parental input in that selection. But still, these folks who are convinced it is a scheme from President Obama to brainwash our kids amaze me. Do they really think he is that smart?! Or that he cares that much?!
This whole week of wading into political realms had made me exhausted--I'm tired of defending my kids' schools and their teachers and principals to them. I'm tired of the rhetoric of hate. I'm tired of the arguing and fighting and attacking. (Even within their own parties--those fighting to see who is MOST conservative!)
I need a nap.
This week were our local caucus meetings--both the democratic and republican. And after watching the first one in person, and the second one via friends who were texting me their updates, I'm starting to wonder.
I've been a registered Independent from my first voter registration filing. I was initially taught that as a voter I should look at the individual and his/her stand on issues--regardless of party affiliation. I learned that there were good people in both parties and it was best to vote my conscience and align my vote with those whom most closely feel like I do on any particular subject. I have bought into that ideal from the beginning.
In any other state, I would certainly have stronger conservative leanings, but where I live now is SO very conservative it nears reactionary at times. So my Independent affiliation, at times must seem radically liberal to others. But I feel most comfortable there and have no plans to change my thinking on this. (This certainly must disappoint my dad, but there you have it. Sorry, Dad.)
I completely understand that as I am affiliated elsewhere, I didn't expect to be able to participate in the democratic caucuses. But at least they welcomed me as an observer. I tried, on the state GOP's website, to verify the location of my precinct's meeting and it wouldn't even let me see the information without registering as a republican. Now, even with the recent redistricting, I already knew my precinct and where we were supposed to meet. But I knew immediately I wasn't even welcome as an observer in the GOP's meetings.
The other interesting thing I noticed--from both sides of the political spectrum--were the hatred and vitriol that was spewed at the opposition. That kind of partisanship is what is bogging down our progress in the Senate and the House back in Washington. The same things seems to happen--partisanship wise--here in our state. The difference here is that the extreme conservatives have hijacked the legislature and run away without truly representing the middle-of-the-road constituents. That part is most frustrating to me. If we can't cooperate and respect each other, how will we ever get anything done?
The last thing I noticed more curiously with the extreme republicans was the higher likelihood they seem to have to be conspiracy theorists. This week we held our junior high parent's meeting about the new Common Core standards in math and language arts beginning in the fall. And leading up to this meeting, and throughout the meeting itself, certain parents--who've made their political bent and tendencies clearly evident--repeated made comments that this shift is being pushed, paid for, and required by the federal government. Our principals, teachers, districts leaders, and even the State Office of Education have tried to make the facts clear. This change--along with 46 or 47 other states--is happening from the states themselves. And the states are allowing the local districts and event he schools themselves select the textbooks, coordinate the teaching within the schools' departments, and have all asked for parental input in that selection. But still, these folks who are convinced it is a scheme from President Obama to brainwash our kids amaze me. Do they really think he is that smart?! Or that he cares that much?!
This whole week of wading into political realms had made me exhausted--I'm tired of defending my kids' schools and their teachers and principals to them. I'm tired of the rhetoric of hate. I'm tired of the arguing and fighting and attacking. (Even within their own parties--those fighting to see who is MOST conservative!)
I need a nap.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Really?!
Our state legislature wrapped up their annual session last night. And I have had a couple of heartburn inducing bills that I have tried to keep on my radar while they worked. Now the legislature's part if over and the Governor is holding the bag at this point with bills waiting to be signed into law.
I just want to share my complete disappointment about one bill. Overwhelmingly, legislators in both houses passed a bill shifting our public education's handling of Sex Ed in health or biology to an "abstinence only" curriculum. This bill is now sitting on the governor's desk waiting for a signature or a veto.
The thing is, while abstinence is the option I personally would prefer for our kids for their sexual behavior, this bill disallows any parental choice to "opt in" or the choice to give permission for our kids to learn from an educated and caring teacher (as it is now). A student requires a permission slip to sit in a class period to hear any of this information--which is currently even more limited than I would prefer--at this point. This new bill removes that opt in or permission slip choice. The proposed change would not let teachers answer ANY question from a student that went outside the abstinence-only language.
Where will kids go for information then? You know they won't just stop looking for what they feel they need to know. The Internet? Their friends? Yeah, sure. I worry about that. A lot.
I believe strongly that, as a parent, it is my duty and privilege to teach my kids the values and morals I believe as right. I feel bound to teach them how to stay safe, physically and emotionally, when it comes to human sexuality along with everything else I do to try to keep them safe. Having a teacher back up my efforts to instruct my kids with just the facts, is a great way to tie the medical information to the morality I want to instill in them on this topic. Now the government thinks they know better what to do for my kids. That is wrong. In every way.
Here is a LINK in a local newspaper from one of the opposing representative, who presents a thoughtful and caring opinion. I agree with her. How I wish other elected officials thought more about the "we the people" they represent than their own re-electability or the extremists who puff them up throughout the session as lobbyists.
My faith in the system significantly dims between this kind of extremist agenda-driven legislation and the vicious, attacking, slanderous primary election propaganda going on in our country. And that is disturbing to me. America was designed for better than this.
I just want to share my complete disappointment about one bill. Overwhelmingly, legislators in both houses passed a bill shifting our public education's handling of Sex Ed in health or biology to an "abstinence only" curriculum. This bill is now sitting on the governor's desk waiting for a signature or a veto.
The thing is, while abstinence is the option I personally would prefer for our kids for their sexual behavior, this bill disallows any parental choice to "opt in" or the choice to give permission for our kids to learn from an educated and caring teacher (as it is now). A student requires a permission slip to sit in a class period to hear any of this information--which is currently even more limited than I would prefer--at this point. This new bill removes that opt in or permission slip choice. The proposed change would not let teachers answer ANY question from a student that went outside the abstinence-only language.
Where will kids go for information then? You know they won't just stop looking for what they feel they need to know. The Internet? Their friends? Yeah, sure. I worry about that. A lot.
I believe strongly that, as a parent, it is my duty and privilege to teach my kids the values and morals I believe as right. I feel bound to teach them how to stay safe, physically and emotionally, when it comes to human sexuality along with everything else I do to try to keep them safe. Having a teacher back up my efforts to instruct my kids with just the facts, is a great way to tie the medical information to the morality I want to instill in them on this topic. Now the government thinks they know better what to do for my kids. That is wrong. In every way.
Here is a LINK in a local newspaper from one of the opposing representative, who presents a thoughtful and caring opinion. I agree with her. How I wish other elected officials thought more about the "we the people" they represent than their own re-electability or the extremists who puff them up throughout the session as lobbyists.
My faith in the system significantly dims between this kind of extremist agenda-driven legislation and the vicious, attacking, slanderous primary election propaganda going on in our country. And that is disturbing to me. America was designed for better than this.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Food for Thought
I thought this was funny, and telling. For all my dislike of the campaign season, I guess there is a reason for this (blasted) season. Choose wisely.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Enough Already!
I realize that the GOP has only had three state's primaries thus far, but I have had it. Can't we just be done already? I'm tired of hearing negative attacks about each of the candidates. I'm tired of not hearing what the candidates think they can bring to the presidency, solutions they propose and idea of how things could help the country get back to normal.
Didn't these guys ever do debate in high school? These kind of negative personal attacks really doesn't fit the debate format I remember from speech and debate coaches. In fact, we'd be disqualified if we pulled the same kind of thing these guys are doing.
The Lincoln-Douglas debates weren't like these today. But then, Lincoln's ultimate fate isn't quite what these guys are after either. I just wish they could debate the issues, rather than the other guys' faults.
Didn't these guys ever do debate in high school? These kind of negative personal attacks really doesn't fit the debate format I remember from speech and debate coaches. In fact, we'd be disqualified if we pulled the same kind of thing these guys are doing.
The Lincoln-Douglas debates weren't like these today. But then, Lincoln's ultimate fate isn't quite what these guys are after either. I just wish they could debate the issues, rather than the other guys' faults.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Politics As Usual?
Today I have been listening to the news coverage from Iowa, because that is what is on the morning radio. For the past several months I have avoided watching the GOP presidential debates. And I can honestly tell you I am more than a little bummed that we have to hear about this kind of stinky mess for another ten months before the country actually gets to vote for president.
While I don't want to slam anyone specifically here--as that is something that turns my nose in years like this--I will say how disappointed I am in so many of the GOP candidates. And here is why:
How can you ten or twelve folks tear each other to shreds in debates, attack ads, and news interviews and in less than six months jockey for positions to share a ticket with the party's nominee like nothing has happened? How can you--for example this morning--Mr. former Speaker of the House call the former Massachusetts governor a liar and immediately turn around and tell the interviewer that you would support him if he becomes your party's candidate?! Really?! Is that how you do things? You'd probably want your name on the ticket with his if he is selected to run. Right?
If someone called me a liar, I'd be pretty put out and not likely to choose to hang out with someone like that. Maybe if you're a career politician words like "liar" mean something else to you. It doesn't seem logical to me that based on the outcomes of the new few months' worth of primaries and caucuses a nominee will emerge and all that schmack talk will be forgotten.
And why would I (were I ever to the party's nominee) select a running mate that has thrown those kind of attacked at me throughout the duration of the campaign? I don't get it. I suppose this is another point to prove I will never be an elected official. Ever. Anywhere. Not a chance. Thankyouverymuch.
I'm off to see that I have a stash of Tylenol to last until November. Good luck, America. We're going to need it.
While I don't want to slam anyone specifically here--as that is something that turns my nose in years like this--I will say how disappointed I am in so many of the GOP candidates. And here is why:
How can you ten or twelve folks tear each other to shreds in debates, attack ads, and news interviews and in less than six months jockey for positions to share a ticket with the party's nominee like nothing has happened? How can you--for example this morning--Mr. former Speaker of the House call the former Massachusetts governor a liar and immediately turn around and tell the interviewer that you would support him if he becomes your party's candidate?! Really?! Is that how you do things? You'd probably want your name on the ticket with his if he is selected to run. Right?
If someone called me a liar, I'd be pretty put out and not likely to choose to hang out with someone like that. Maybe if you're a career politician words like "liar" mean something else to you. It doesn't seem logical to me that based on the outcomes of the new few months' worth of primaries and caucuses a nominee will emerge and all that schmack talk will be forgotten.
And why would I (were I ever to the party's nominee) select a running mate that has thrown those kind of attacked at me throughout the duration of the campaign? I don't get it. I suppose this is another point to prove I will never be an elected official. Ever. Anywhere. Not a chance. Thankyouverymuch.
I'm off to see that I have a stash of Tylenol to last until November. Good luck, America. We're going to need it.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
