No, I haven’t quit blogging, nor have I actually turned this blog entirely into a kids’ book review site … although that is appealing. I’ve just been doing some more reading lately, and with going back to work, I’m wanting to spend my time with my wife and daughter …
Still, here are some thoughts about recent events. From the Democratic Convention:
- Why was Obama there every night? As I recall, the custom is for the nominee to show up only at the last night, to accept formally the nomination and give that big address. This time around, though, I was hearing about Sen. Obama there all the time. No, I don’t think that this is any kind of a big deal, but I found it strange. Sometimes, I think that traditions are worth following.
- I don’t care about the “Obamapolis” set that’s upset so many people who didn’t like Sen. Obama anyway. It was a gaudy set, but I don’t think that Sen. Obama actually believes that he’s a demigod.
- John Kerry’s speech can almost be summarized as “I’m sulking because I didn’t get elected.” He did have a good run when he was talking about Candidate McCain opposing the agenda of Senator McCain, and his self-deprecating joke “Talk about being for it before he was against it.” That sounded humble and humorous … unlike the rest of his you-should-have-elected-me speech. By the way, Sen. Kerry can’t use the term “swift-boating” without sounding petty. Even if he’s right about the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, it sounds petty.
- Al Gore was worse than John Kerry. He opened by talking about the election eight years ago … that would be the one that he didn’t win, by the way. Again, he sounded petty. When he moved on to talking about the future and the environment, he sounded better.
- There are other speeches about which I can’t comment, because I didn’t see or hear them. That includes, I’m afraid, the Clintons, Sen. Biden, and Sen. Obama.
- Sen. Biden, by the way, is a good choice for VP. He was the second-best choice that the Democrats had for Presidential nominee (after Gov. Richardson), and has a good record of accomplishments. He also has some great personal elements — his reputation for going home every night instead of living in Washington, for example.
Regarding Gov. Sarah Palin:
- I like her. She’s done a lot of good things about corruption, wasteful spending, and efficiency in Alaska.
- The story known about her trying to fire a particular employee will completely undo that whole reputation if it’s shown to be true … Which is part of why I doubt there’s anything to it. Surely she’s smart enough not to invite national scrutiny of something like that. On the other hand, if it’s true, then rule her out now both for insincerity and bad judgment — both doing it and being dumb enough to get caught. Having said that, I’m not making a call on that yet. I don’t have enough facts, which are what matter in these cases.
- If I believed that Sen. McCain had chosen Gov. Palin because she shared his agenda, I might decide to back Sen. McCain. A solid conservative, she’s a wonderful running mate for a conservative Presidential candidate. I look at Sen. McCain and think that he made his choice for political calculations. He needed someone to make points with him with conservatives, because he’s not well-liked by fiscal or social conservatives. (Not everyone can tick off both groups!) She is. He also wanted to suck wind out of the “historic” sails of the Sen. Obama campaign, and a female VP would help with that. Sen. McCain let so many trial balloons float about choosing a pro-choice candidate, possibly Sen. Lieberman, his cookout with Mitt Romney, Bobby Jindal, etc., that I think he let the advisers tell him what he had to do. He looked over his options and made a political choice. I should therefore not be surprised that I like his VP candidate more than I like him.
- I’m hearing lots of people talking about how she will appeal to Hillary Clinton voters … Are pundits that stupid? Are they that sexist? Unless you’re just voting on gender, how can that be? Calling Palin the anti-Clinton wouldn’t be that far from accurate. Anyone who was backing the very liberal Hillary Clinton on issues should be avoiding the very conservative Sarah Palin. I wish that I believed that this wasn’t part of the McCain calculation.
- McCain is still at the top of the ticket. I’m not voting for him.
- I’m trying to think of how Daily Kos could get more classless, by the way.
One more note … I’ve commented before about people trying to announce political reasons for various natural disasters. A Focus on the Family commentator was encouraging people to pray for rain in order to wash out Sen. Obama’s address at the Democratic Convention, which was pretty repulsive, although Stuart Shepard fell back on the classic “it was a joke” defense.
I’m eagerly looking forward to the attempts to determine the meaning of Hurricane Gustav, and its timing. I, of course, don’t presume to know. Hurricanes happen … but I do know that God has a sense of humor.
Having said that … there’s nothing really funny about a hurricane. Please, keep the people of the Gulf Coast in your thoughts and prayers. I’ve heard stories about people who refused to evacuate … while, yes, they are fools, I pray for their safety.
September 1, 2008 at 11:48 pm
That’s a mouth full! It’s almost hard for me to pick what to comment on, but I will just make a couple of points:
Yes, there really are pundits that stupid. Some Clinton supporters are now voting for McCain because of his female VP. Sometimes I read comments on CNN articles. Since many of them are liberal, it can be quite educational. Stories about Palin have included samples like: Hillary Supporter: “Good for her! It’s about time women were better represented in politics.” And there are PUMAs angry at these brainless “traitors.”
I really don’t get it. What if I told these feminists that I am going to vote Obama simply because he and his VP are men? They wouldn’t like it. Yet, they think it’s perfectly fine for them to base a vote on gender. And there are plenty of black people voting for Obama just because he’s black. How would they like it if I voted for McCain just because he’s white?
The FOTF commentator. My husband and I are devout Christians with a strong sense of humor. It’s one of the things about him that attracted me early in our friendship. We have a great time together, but I have noticed that some conservatives totally can’t handle that. I try hard to suppress that part of myself when discussing things with them.
I don’t do it to be mean. Truly, I don’t. It’s certainly not from being shallow. We don’t like religious humor. We don’t ever make fun of anything related to God, religious songs, etc. I have the utmost respect for my Lord. And I don’t do it when the topic is of a serious nature, etc. But if it’s just about rain on the Democratic Convention? The person may not even have been thinking of the destruction from Katrina. Maybe just that hurricanes dump a ton of water. We get Citizen, a magazine on politics from FOTF, and there is a healthy amount of sarcasm in there. I couldn’t judge that commentator unless I heard him, but I’m thinking it wasn’t meant to be taken the way you took it. I could see myself saying something like that and not meaning anything by it. :-)
September 2, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Farrah, I’m with you on religious humor. When I say that I think God has a sense of humor, I typically cite the duck-billed platypus as proof. Not that He goes for jokes about Himself.
In fairness, you’re right, I should cut FOTF some slack for the joke. I’ve told some that didn’t work, too. I get concerned when they spend too much time acting like another arm of the Republican Party. Whatever credibility Pat Robertson ever had was spent when he let himself get too political, and I hate to see Dr. Dobson go the same way … It’s one thing to speak to issues, it’s quite another to go after one party or the other.
It’s how I look at it; I can see your point, and concede that it’s at least as valid as mine. I don’t like it when people forget that God is neither a Democrat nor a Republican.
I wouldn’t say it’s as bad as Michael Moore talking about God being on his side, for sending Gustav to delay the Republican convention.
September 4, 2008 at 12:59 pm
That platypus comment is cute. Most often, though, God makes me smile out of pure wonder at His brilliance. :-)
I see that we differ in our partisan views. I got mine from what I have observed. In fact, my mom always said the Democratic Party was best, because it helps poor people. The problem is that the Democratic Party has changed. At one time, both supported traditional Christian values but differed in their philosophies. Now, the Democratic Party has become the voice for every radical, extreme left minority group.
Back when I first became interested in voting intelligently, one of the first things I did was to look at the two big platforms. I found out that one supported abortion and homosexuality, and the other didn’t. That may sound narrow-minded, but coming from a Christian home with parents who didn’t even vote, I had little to go on. (Now, there are many other reasons I vote Republican.) I also learned over the last several years that most of the time (not always) Democrats and Republicans vote with their party even if they don’t necessarily agree with it. To me this makes sense. There is strength in numbers.
There is another reason this makes sense. Very little of our population will or can actually take the time to get to know candidates. Who could blame them? My last voting experience was very frustrating finding the info. I needed to completely fill out my ballot, and I am much more driven to make an informed vote than most people I know. If I had that much trouble, no wonder most of my acquaintances don’t even bother.
So people depend on the candidates being fairly true to the party they are running in. I don’t understand how anyone could not be partisan. For me, it’s the only logical way to be. I feel that I am voting issues by voting partisan. They are one and the same. If you have two people standing before you and know nothing about them other than one is a Muslim and the other is a Christian, who are you going to pick to worship with? That’s how I see Democrats and Republicans. So to me it makes sense for FOTF to target the Democrats. From my view, the Democrats are sticking together on goals that are very destructive to this country and the values I hold dear as a Christian. (This doesn’t mean I don’t criticize the Republican Party and other groups that I support.)
When a candidate chooses to identify himself with a party, he is placing himself under their banner of issues. He is marking himself red or blue. He’s saying that he agrees with most of their platform, just like a Mormon agrees with many of the doctrines unique to that religion or a Baptist, etc.
I know you aren’t trying to convince me of anything or pick a fight. I’m just trying to understand. Do you already have a post where you explain the logic behind not being partisan? I wouldn’t want you to spend much time replying, especially if you already have a good post on it. Sorry for my ignorance. I haven’t been following your blog all that long. You seem to be a reasonable person, and I’d really like to understand where you’re coming from.