If I hear one more accolade about McCain’s prisoner of war "bio" one more time, that will be it. And he's so "modest," they say. So much so that we must hear over and over about his POW experience of over 40 years ago as if it were yesterday. Does he think we owe him the presidency because he "sacrificed" for his country? His bad luck was to get shot down. Our bad luck is that he’s now running for president.
My definition of hero has always been someone who saves someone else's life. He only managed to save his own. Yeah, he served his country and he served his time in the Hanoi Hilton. But there were over 600 other guys in that prisoner of war camp, and McCain was no better and no worse than anyone else there, but lucky to live through it as most of the others did.
Now McCain has suddenly, after 26 years in Congress become a "reformer." How ridiculous is it to talk about cleaning up Washington when your own party has owned it for so many years? Does McCain imagine we can make ourselves believe he had nothing to do with the last 8 years? I guess he does. He is confident he can disassociate himself from Bush. At 72, his memory may be failing more than ours. And so he gives us all the old platitudes, some vague promises of cutting our taxes (was he talking to his wife on that particular subject?), and a degree of pandering to the far right that makes me wonder how we could possibly expect anything better than what Bush gave us. It could even be worse. A 72-year old man who's had four bouts of cancer—with an eager, ambitious Palin on the sidelines. Yikes!
What is most troubling about McCain right now, aside from no one recognizing any resemblance to a McCain some people once liked, is that he is so hungry for the office that I think he would do just about anything to get it. Palin is part of that. Having so many of the Rove people around him in addition to the many big-time lobbyists, is another. His campaign is playing dirty as only the religious right do, and I only hope that brains can trump this time around. McCain reiterates that he would rather win a war and lose an election, but his actions attest to the fact that he would rather win an election and lose a country.
Showing posts with label candidate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label candidate. Show all posts
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Dear Sarah
Dear Sarah,
You have a five-month old baby with Downs Syndrome, and I understand you were aware of the condition of the fetus before giving birth. I must commend you for undertaking the care of a child with special needs with four children already at home and a full-time job. I can only assume you have the means and resources to deal with your extraordinary situation. Not everyone does.
You made a decision for yourself, and I am sure you feel it’s the best decision for you. That does not mean this would be the best decision for anyone else. I have no business telling anyone what she should do in such a situation. But then neither do you. That’s the point.
It is a medical and personal determination that must be made. Whenever someone tells me that abortion is murder, I realize that person is not talking about a medical or personal choice but about religion. And religion should be a private matter in this country. That is the American way, we are told, though not lately by the evangelizers who seem to have waded quite deeply into politics. But if our Constitution is to have validity, such a very private and personal medical matter must remain in the realm of being decided by a woman. Certainly with advice from her physician and input from the baby’s father, if that’s germane. But not the government!
Sarah, I must admit that there are things about you I find perplexing. You are proud of being a strong woman, forceful—someone who speaks up for her rights. So why are you so willing to give up another woman’s right to decide for herself what can or cannot be done with her body? It seems a giant contradiction to me. The only answer I can come up with is a religious one. But if that’s the answer, then as a political figure, you should be pledged to allow others to follow their own conscience, as you have followed yours. To want others to believe as you believe does not offer the freedom of expression, the freedom of religion promised in our Constitution.
Yes, this is a complex issue, and every decision to have or to not have an abortion can be complicated. For instance a planned pregnancy can result in a woman becoming ill, and the physician recommending an abortion for the health of the mother. Or because of the compromised situation of the fetus. Or a woman may desperately want an abortion because of rape or incest! Or perhaps you may consider it not a worthy reason if a woman becomes pregnant because of the failure of birth control, or the failure of a vasectomy or other procedure. Whatever the reason, these are not my reasons, or your reasons, but we must respect that all women have the right to be fully informed of their options—and that must include the option of abortion.
Women must not be held hostage to politicians making the most important personal decisions for them. We are in the 21st century. Aren’t we?
Please give the matter some thought. I hope that ambition does not cloud your vision. I’d like to believe you when you said you went into politics to help people. Right now, I am having difficulty accepting that concept in light of your fiery defense of upholding a stand that has no respect or regard for women.
You have a five-month old baby with Downs Syndrome, and I understand you were aware of the condition of the fetus before giving birth. I must commend you for undertaking the care of a child with special needs with four children already at home and a full-time job. I can only assume you have the means and resources to deal with your extraordinary situation. Not everyone does.
You made a decision for yourself, and I am sure you feel it’s the best decision for you. That does not mean this would be the best decision for anyone else. I have no business telling anyone what she should do in such a situation. But then neither do you. That’s the point.
It is a medical and personal determination that must be made. Whenever someone tells me that abortion is murder, I realize that person is not talking about a medical or personal choice but about religion. And religion should be a private matter in this country. That is the American way, we are told, though not lately by the evangelizers who seem to have waded quite deeply into politics. But if our Constitution is to have validity, such a very private and personal medical matter must remain in the realm of being decided by a woman. Certainly with advice from her physician and input from the baby’s father, if that’s germane. But not the government!
Sarah, I must admit that there are things about you I find perplexing. You are proud of being a strong woman, forceful—someone who speaks up for her rights. So why are you so willing to give up another woman’s right to decide for herself what can or cannot be done with her body? It seems a giant contradiction to me. The only answer I can come up with is a religious one. But if that’s the answer, then as a political figure, you should be pledged to allow others to follow their own conscience, as you have followed yours. To want others to believe as you believe does not offer the freedom of expression, the freedom of religion promised in our Constitution.
Yes, this is a complex issue, and every decision to have or to not have an abortion can be complicated. For instance a planned pregnancy can result in a woman becoming ill, and the physician recommending an abortion for the health of the mother. Or because of the compromised situation of the fetus. Or a woman may desperately want an abortion because of rape or incest! Or perhaps you may consider it not a worthy reason if a woman becomes pregnant because of the failure of birth control, or the failure of a vasectomy or other procedure. Whatever the reason, these are not my reasons, or your reasons, but we must respect that all women have the right to be fully informed of their options—and that must include the option of abortion.
Women must not be held hostage to politicians making the most important personal decisions for them. We are in the 21st century. Aren’t we?
Please give the matter some thought. I hope that ambition does not cloud your vision. I’d like to believe you when you said you went into politics to help people. Right now, I am having difficulty accepting that concept in light of your fiery defense of upholding a stand that has no respect or regard for women.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)