Story
Like most of the women involved with this site and thousands across this great county I have been appalled by the sexism exposed in our media over the last year. I was sickened that our (Democratic) Presidential nominee was not the one to stand up to this elite group and and speak out for women--but then that would have angered his friends--the media! It took a Republican "Maverick" to do that. I have not always agreed with McCain but I am happy that he recognizes that women cannot be overlooked and if they are, don't expect them to go peacefully along regardless of how they are treated. I am mad as hell at my beloved Democratic party.
As a life long Democrat, I am heartsick by the lack of respect for women and our vote--in our own party. Oh, they're using the right buzzwords like abortion and healthcare but is that all we are? Are we wholly defined by abortion? Are we only good for behind the scenes? I do not believe in going along blindly like sheep and Mr. Obama, I'm saddened to say, is not the Messiah. He, to me, is a pawn in a very exclusive chess match. He doesn't have that center--that grounding that an honorable person has--someone like Hillary. He has lived a life connected with associates that are less than savory and whole portions of his life have not been completely exposed and examined--and the joke of it is, he doesn't really have that much history.
The ACORN issue is more than just embarrasing; it is a threat to the fabric of our democracy. How many elections can be plagued by fraud and lies before the vote itself is damaged? It doesn't matter to me if it's Republicans stealing an election or Democrats--it is a travesty and we must all demand tranparency--before it's too late.
I'm convinced it will take one strong, independent and capable woman to clean up the mess we have!
Leave a token
Start a Discussion
-
11/01/08 17:44pm PDT AmyS
Yes westexas you do seem rude. And I did not say.."moderate like me." You added that yourself. You can be pissed off all you want and so can I for that matter, but the actual procedure of partial birth abortion is gross and is not supported by many moderate Dem.s If I remember correctly Clinton did not support it--Obama did until he took some heat for it and then I think he tried to wafer--I don't even know his latest on it. The case you describe is dragic and unique and does not reflect simple terms of choice--which is where the controversy on this is--at least for me. As far as ACORN I think the feds will have to decide how many laws have been broken--it is my understanding it has went far past self reporting a single problem. I hear people drawing the distinction between registration and voting but for me the intent is clear. As a child I watched "enlightened liberals" spit at our young soldiers who came back from war in the early 70's and thought what a stupid thing to do to our own soldiers--I was only a child and had more sense than this. I have never been one to buy completely into these severe liberal or servere conservative platforms. Just because you don't like what I say doesn't mean there aren't a lot of centrists who have similar views to mine. Often very left folks just can't see it. -
11/01/08 16:21pm PDT westtexas8
Frankly, I have yet to see proof that Acorn stole an election. I somehow feel that self reporting a problem , such as employees falsifying data was just that ,self reporting. I do know that Bush stole the election in 2000. Hey I know South Texas politics when I see them! Now , as to partial birth abortions. Exactly what do you mean by that? Our family had a very bad experience- our first sweet little girl did not have a brain stem. Perhaps you know that is the worst possible form of spinal bifida. This was in Illininois, BTW. Because this was discovered in the 2nd trimester this was considered a possible partial birth abortion. It took a great deal to get the clearance to have labor induced. Per all those ladies who are against "partial birth abortions" our young mother, already in incredible emotional pain, her husband and all of the rest of us were devestated but none so much as she, would have needed to carry our sweet babay girl to term. Dead inside her. I am curious, which one of these new feminsists should be in charge of how much pain my daughter in law should suffer to "choose life"? Just wondering. This just really, really, pisses me off. If this seems rude, my apologies. asfor the Obama camp running off any moderate democrat- like me- oh honey child, as if. What a joke. -
11/01/08 15:21pm PDT AmyS
Oh my goodness! You ladies have a lot to say and I love that!
I hear from some that Obama et al would be just fine to rid the Dem party of all moderate democrats. This will be a tragedy because I know many that will have to turn Rep, Ind or start their own party. For example, I am a strong supporter of choice but am vehemently opposed to partial birth. It is inhumane and should not be widely practiced unless the mother's life is in danger. Where is our moderation?
Well ladies, I do think there is a new type of feminist. One that is more moderate than what was once thought. I talk to many of them every day. We may not want to accept it but it is true and many of these women are Republican and Independent. Who are we to say they are not feminist because they do not believe in the destruction of life. This a reasonable proposition if you stop to think about it--although one that I do not preach. In fact, I do not preach this to my own children.
However, I can accept the fact that they feel this way. I can accept the fact that they are women just as I and we share many things in common--even if we cannot agree on many other things. I think it is absurd to say these women are not in our club because they don't believe everything just as we do. And what about this great new change Obama talks so much about--a new kind of politics--what is new about insinuating that these women are less...less important, less intelligent, less needy, less savy than we. What about all this working together non partisan and BS like that.
I think the women of the 60's did some tremendous work but now it is time for us to CHANGE! Isn't that what everyone is grasping for in this election cycle? Isn't this why MSNBC has thrills running down their leg when they hear Obama speak? Isn't this why the Kennedy's et al threw the Clinton's under the bus? Isn't this why so many desperate people are clinging to anything they can get hold on--even if it is just words!
We Dems practice a huge double standard and it is ingrained in everthing we do. Sure it is ok for ACORN to receive public funds and openly and loudly campaign for Barack Obama. But it is not ok for the Rep/s to steal an election. Well, which is it...is it ok or not?
-
10/31/08 12:08pm PDT westtexas8
Blondie,I am ware of the process as I was thrilled when O'connor was appointed. Read my post. I made the statement that Palin and Mccain would appoint panelists to the supreme court. if you think that a nominee cannot be selected by political beliefs I beg to differ. You might also take a look at the sitting panel if you doubt that. I know how to get a case it the supreme court. I actuall read periodicals and books. Take a look at the sitting chief justice, a Bush appointee. Of course, if we elect a democratic majority, an actual majority as you know the sitting members do not have the numbers to block a veto or a filibuster, then perhaps you could be right. But that is a big if. as to your point about the book banning, Perhaps a person who is in government ,holding a postion of authority who either did not know ,( there is that education again, )or refused to acknowledge the laws of the land , rings hollow for you. Not so for me. In fact, that is a bell I have heard rung for many, many years. I am bit tired of it. Palin doesn't want government interferring? Oh, well, is that not why we have just indebted our children and grandchildren to a government take over of the financial institutuions? Government did not interfer? Well, that was a good decision. I favor a centrist federal government. You can favor states rights. I will be happy to state the position I hold but it will have to be this afternoo n as I have an apt. We can disagree, I just think you pick and choose the "facts" as you want to see them . Do you honestly think that congress is not going to give POTUS the nominees he /she wants? It is common practive, and I think you know this. As for Palin, with MCCain being so elderly and her stated ambitions for 2012, I look at her as if she could be POTUS, and shudder. -
10/31/08 11:41am PDT blondie
wetstexas- Presidents don't appoint SCOTUS, they nominate, a majority in congress is needed. Palin has no ability to appoint. Read how to get a case to the SC. If Roe were to be overturned, you betcha- it goes to the states-just like the death penalty. I don't support the death penalty but each state decides. McPalin are constitonists- they don't want government interfering. BO not so much. As for the Wasilla library, she made a hypothetical statement about the books. I am sure she would love to see the books banned but she understands that she cannot do that and never persued the matter. So bringing that one up is empty. Palin made career decisions and she has made mistakes. McCain has also made mistakes. I am alot more comfortable w/ people who have made mistakes, admit it and don't keep making the same mistakes. I am not comfortable with an egotistical megolomanical man who thinks he has the answers to everything. He has never worked on major legislation. He has a scant voting record in his very short tenure in the senate. He has not released his thesis from law school or his undergraduate record. He is a hallow candidate that I will not support. But I agree that we can disagree, I just wish you would use fact in your supporting arguments- i.e. President "appointing SCOTUS", banning books, etc. If you can articulate BO's plan to me I am willing to listen. The problem is there isn't one beyond the rhetoric.




Stumble It!
I am actually not a left or a liberal , I do not think. If I misunderstood the idea of moderate democrats being run out of the democratic party then perhaps I read you wrong. I thought you menat many oderate democrats beign run out of the party by the Obama camp , was I wrong? I am actually a moderate democrat before I cpould ever be a republican. There is no way that any one in the Obama camp could even run me off from any party. it is the job of the party members to insist that the party stay true to it's valuse. That is what I was referring to., so did I misundedrstand you? I also agree with you about soldiers being spit on in the 70's .Being from a working class neighborhood many of my older friends were r in country in VietNam. My daughter is named for one of them. As I stated, this was not a time of shining light for us. Oh hey, this was not directed at you personally. I have a real issues with anyone deciding medical issues for anyone and the partial birth issues is a cheap shot , in my opinion, in respect to this election. The bill Obama voted against was sent to weaken the RoeV Wade. it is very tough to get a partial birth abortion in Illiniois. At least is was for my family. The awful thing is, my daughter in law would never have an abortion. This is my point. Either we trust the majority of women in this country to make very careful and always painful decisions in regards to their families and their bodies or we do not. There may be some women who abuse this, but for most I beleive these are difficult choices that only the families invilced can make. these are not easy choices. I don't care what you say- I just wanted you to know why I sounded cross. There was actually a RTL group who did not want my daughter in law to give birth early, this is an issue no one thinks through. Everyone is impacted by this and it does reflect simple terms of choice. Just ask my daughter in law. See, if is an opinion, and that is my point. acorn, well if federal election laws have been borken then the law needs to address it.