So there’s a section of the debate that I wanted to address in a more in-depth fashion, because I think it was pretty important. It’s the part where the moderator asked about Supreme Court justices, and the discussion devolved into a conversation about Roe v Wade. (Which, while an important Supreme Court decision, was far from the only decision, although it is on the line.)
Specifically, let’s take a look at this selection of quotes from John McCain (I was going to excerpt the whole section, except that it’s very long. To see the quotes without editing, here’s the debate transcript.)
I would never and have never in all the years I’ve been there imposed a litmus test on any nominee to the court. That’s not appropriate to do…I would consider anyone in their qualifications. I do not believe that someone who has supported Roe v. Wade that would be part of those qualifications.
Let me talk to you about an important aspect of this issue. We have to change the culture of America. Those of us who are proudly pro-life understand that. And it’s got to be courage and compassion that we show to a young woman who’s facing this terribly difficult decision..I don’t know how you align yourself with the extreme aspect of the pro- abortion movement in America…Just again, the example of the eloquence of Senator Obama. He’s health for the mother. You know, that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything. That’s the extreme pro-abortion position, quote, “health.” But, look, Cindy and I are adoptive parents. We know what a treasure and joy it is to have an adopted child in our lives. We’ll do everything we can to improve adoption in this country. But that does not mean that we will cease to protect the rights of the unborn. Of course, we have to come together. Of course, we have to work together, and, of course, it’s vital that we do so and help these young women who are facing such a difficult decision, with a compassion, that we’ll help them with the adoptive services, with the courage to bring that child into this world and we’ll help take care of it.
So, there are a couple of issues going on here. The first paragraph I excerpted above is part of his discussion of “litmus tests” for the Supreme Court. He actually went a whole long thing about how you can’t use a “litmus test” to judge qualifications, yet states that support of Roe v Wade would make someone’s qualifications questionable. Doesn’t that kind of mean that you are, uhm, imposing your ideology onto your choices for the Supreme Court?
The second paragraph has a whole lot of things going on, and all of them need to be talked about. First, he says that he wants to give women “courage” to make a hard choice, yet he actually supports abrogating that “choice” altogether by making abortion impossible to obtain. How is that a choice? How it is courageous to be forced to keep a baby you don’t want? Including, yes, a baby that threatens your own life, which is when we get into the health of the mother issue.
You don’t see it in the transcript, but in the debate, McCain put the word “health” in quotes, scare quotes, with a huge sneer on his face, as though women’s health isn’t something which needs to be protected. He blathers on about the rights of the unborn, and apparently has no respect for the already born. He belittles the horrible situations in which being pregnant is, in fact, a health threat, and a woman must indeed have the courage to make a difficult choice. An incredibly difficult, awful choice. Women do not wake up and decide not to be pregnant when they get late term abortions.
How is it compassionate to belittle women’s health? How is supporting women’s choices not compassionate? How is encouraging women to think about all of their options lacking in compassion? You know what’s not compassionate? Forcing rape victims to have babies. Forcing young girls who have been raped by their fathers to carry the results of that rape to term. Telling women that, in a time of medical crisis, the life of the very much wanted and loved baby inside is worth more than theirs.
To say that caring about women’s health is “extreme” or that the pro-choice movement is “pro-abortion” is awful. Caring about women’s health, or anybody’s health, is a great, natural, human thing. It’s a good thing. We should be all about caring about women’s health. And, as someone who is very proudly pro-choice, let me tell you that I am most certainly not pro-abortion. I think that abortion is a very difficult, awful, and ultimately personal decision, and I would never tell a woman that she should or shouldn’t get an abortion. I’ve accompanied women on abortions, supported women during abortion recovery, and talked with women about their options, but I don’t promote abortion. And most people in the pro-choice movement feel the same way. Abortion is just one choice on the table.
Which made it all the more awful that when Mr. Obama said that both sides could probably agree that reducing unwanted pregnancies was a good thing, McCain interrupted and was incredibly snide and rude. Because, you know what? We should be reducing unwanted pregnancies. I think that this is something both sides of the movement should be able to come together on. I would love to live in a country where there were no abortions except in cases where the pregnancy threatened the life of the mother because all babies were wanted babies, and women were never raped, and women were never victims of incest. That’s probably not going to happen, but we could at least try. Hey, we’ve reduced the number of unwanted dogs and cats radically, why not do the same for people?
And I would like to note that abortions declined during the Clinton Administration, and rose in the Bush Administration. Why? Because Clinton focused on women’s health, sexual education, and benefits for low-income pregnant women. Bush took that all away and replaced it with shrill rhetoric about abortion.
And yes, by all means, let’s provide the support for women who want to carry their children to term. Let’s overhaul the foster system so that it actually works, allow gay and lesbian couples to adopt, provide pre-natal care for all women for free, support post-partum care and benefits for women who want to keep their babies. Let’s promote healthy babies, and adoption as an option, and healthy mothers. Let’s provide all those benefits you and your cronies regularly deny, Mr. McCain, and make women’s health a priority.
McCain, and his radical anti-choice running mate, are not pro-woman. As Obama rightly pointed out, McCain opposes equal pay for equal work. His running mate believes that abortion should be banned, even in cases of rape and incest. Mr. McCain thinks that women’s health is “radical.” His running mate thinks that being pregnant as a teen makes you “grow up real quick,” and that women should throw their potential and lives away to fulfill some sick, twisted religious belief.
The McCain campaign thinks that working for equal rights is working for the “liberal feminist agenda.” Feminists have an agenda all right, but it’s not liberal or conservative. The desire for equal treatment under the law, equal rights, and equal access transcends partisan lines. I would fight to the death for a woman’s right to vote Republican, carry an unwanted baby to term, and put it up for adoption, just like I’d fight for a woman who votes green and sues her employer for equal compensation.
You might not agree with me on the abortion issue, but I’d like to imagine that you can agree with me on these poits:
- Women deserve equal pay for equal work.
- Women’s health is not a “radical” issue, but in fact a very basic right.
- Reducing unwanted pregnancies is a good thing.
Posted 2 months, 2 weeks ago at 10:06 am. 2 comments
Dear America,
I think we need to talk about our relationship. I’m sorry to be saying it in a letter like this, but you’re so busy with the election and all that it’s hard to get in touch with you these days. I figure, this way, you have a chance to sit down when you really have some time. And you can be kind of intimidating in person, you know. I mean I’m sure you get that all the time, but I feel like I can be more honest in a letter than I would be to your face.
The thing is, I’m getting a little worried about you. I think that a lot of your friends are. I understand how it is when things are crazy stressful, but I really think it would be a good idea for you to sit down and evaluate what you want to do, as a country. I’m not sure that you’re going in the right direction, and, as your friend, I feel like I should point this out.
I’ve been hearing some nasty rumors about you lately, and sometimes it’s hard to tell how much is true, but it does seem like you are straying far from the terms of the constitution. You’ve got political candidates condoning violent behaviour among their supporters, overseas “detention centers,” a seriously faltering economy, candidates who refuse to give the press access to their campaigns, morality-based legislation on a bunch of ballots, people struggling to keep their jobs and stay in their homes, two wars going on, several looming foreign policy issues, a growing health care crisis, and some serious environmental issues going on. I’m sorry to lay it out so bleakly like this, but I think it’s something you need to hear.
I know that you were founded on a premise of equality, America, and that as you have matured, you’ve evidenced a growing interest in diversity, but I don’t feel like that’s reflected in your actions. I know that sometimes it’s hard to make the right choice when you are surrounded by people with conflicting ideals, but the Constitution and the basic founding principles are pretty simple. And, quite frankly, I’m afraid that you’re promoting things like tyranny, which you claim to stand against.
I really think that we can work this out. I have a lot of faith in you, and we have a long history together. I’m not saying I want to throw all that out, at all. I just think that you need to get your priorities straight. If you can’t, maybe we should spend some time apart. You know. Date other people. I don’t want to jump to breaking up or anything here, I’m just warning you. And I don’t want to pressure you or anything, but a lot of your friends have told me that they feel the same way.
So get your act straight, America. We’re rooting for you, and we’re there for you if you need us, but there’s only so much we can do, you know?
Love,
s.e.
Posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago at 10:53 am. Add a comment
I saw two things recently which reminded me of an exchange from my childhood. The first was a toddler in an “Obama for Change” shirt, being pushed down the street by a yuppie mother. (Who, incidentally, ran me off the sidewalk and into oncoming traffic with her stroller.) The second was a photograph from a McCain rally of some parents and their young children, waving pro-McCain signs.
And I couldn’t help but wonder how much choice those children had in those situations. Toddlers don’t usually dress themselves, and even if they do, how many support Obama? Do seven year olds really ask to be taken to McCain rallies to wave signs like mommy and daddy?
When I was a kid, my father gave me every possible chance to turn into a conservative, though he himself is quite liberal. I don’t know if he did it because he felt that I deserved balance and a chance to make my own choices, or if he was secretly just wondering what would happen. He was assisted in this by a very conservative friend of our family, whom I will call the Birdwatcher. The Birdwatcher is a very bright man, who is very good at arguing politics, and he is very conservative.
Pretty much any time the Birdwatcher was over, the conversation devolved into politics. He has since moved out of the area, but every time he comes into town, politics inevitably comes up. The last time he visited, we argued for three hours straight about nationalized healthcare and taxation rates. Initially, like most children, I pretty much parroted my father’s political views. Eventually, I started engaging more, and the Birdwatcher started providing me with all sorts of fodder, including books, magazine articles, and so forth. It got to the point where I demanded a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, a paper which was not delivered up here then, and my father made arrangements with a friend in New York who would buy the paper and mail it to me every day.
But it was the Birdwatcher who was responsible for the following exchange with one of my schoolmates in middle school:
Schoolmate: Hey, do you want to come over after school?
Me: No, I’m expecting the new National Review.
Yes, the Birdwatcher did indeed buy me a subscription to the National Review, and I really did give up social engagements to come home and read each new issue. My father absolutely refused to read the National Review, although he usually ended up reading most of it anyway, just so that he could argue more effectively at the dinner table. I even brought in a National Review article for class discussion about a controversial ballot initiative (I ended up getting in hot water, and being rescued by my father, who pointed out that the National Review was a respected publication, whether or not the teacher agreed with it, and I was therefore entitled to bring in articles from it). After said show and tell, “bring in an item of news to share” was disbanded in favor of “craft like the Egyptians,” and I was permanently disinvited from several of my classmates’ homes by their parents.
I have to give the Birdwatcher credit. He really tried. He paid for my National Review subscription through college, when he called me a “pinko Communist queer,” a turning point which filled me with immense pride. I still have a number of books which give my houseguests room for pause, courtesy of the Birdwatcher. And I have to give my father credit. He never pushed me into liberal politics, and in fact never pushed me to get into politics at all, which made it kind of amusing when I went to college with the goal of studying political science.
My father figured, I think, that if he gave me access to information and conversation, I would come to my own conclusions about life, and I did. Our politics are not identical, although they are closely aligned, and we have had some fairly vigorous arguments about politics. I wonder how much information that toddler is going to get as he grows up? If those seven year olds will get The American Prospect or Mother Jones and read with the same avidity I dedicated to the National Review.
I suspect not, since independent thinking is not encouraged in this country by either the left or the right. It’s a pity, really. I think that if I had ended up a rabid Republican, my father would have liked me just as much.
Posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago at 10:58 am. 2 comments
I’m gearing up for the debate, which you can watch on Hulu, among other places. I’m fully stocked with a full Nalgene, a RitterSport Dark Chocolate with Marzipan, and a fresh pair of action pants. As I did last week, I’m liveblogging it, with the most recent entries at the top of this post. Please jump in in the comments section if you’d like to join in the fun. If you get tired of my blathering, 538, Jezebel, and Slog (among others) are all liveblogging as well.
7:32: Ok, so, first hit before poisoning myself with the punditry. I think that this debate went back and forth. McCain really did score some strong hits, and Obama missed some easy shots that he could have taken, which was a major bummer. That said, McCain’s puerile behavior really detracted from his performance in the debate. Obama seemed much more cool, collected, and on point, although he did get a big snippy a few times. McCain, on the other hand, was behaving like a petulant child being forced to eat broccoli. The end result: I think that Obama “won,” but that he could have done a better job. Obama’s close in particular was great, though, very nice.
7:32: Cindy looks like a fire engine.
7:31: Michelle, always classy. That dress/pearl set is just gorgeous.
7:31: Nice closer from the moderator.
7:29: Obama: attacking the Washington establishment, ok. Highlighting the economy, ok. Not so sure about the rehit on McSame; I think McCain has really tried to distance himself from Bush in this debate. Nice way to stress the “fundamental decency and generosity of the American people.” I’m starting to get into this. It’s beautiful, simple, and clear. (Although I don’t agree that being in the middle class is something to aspire to, but that’s another issue.) Loving the stress on working together as a nation, “spirit of service,” turning the speech onto US, rather than himself (as McCain did). This is a really nice closing speech.
7:27: McCain: “my friends,” “new direction,” “maverick,” blah blah blah blah fucking blah. Yeah, we do need to make healthcare and education available, McCain. Too bad your plans won’t do that. Careful steward my big fat behind. Yeah, crashing planes and winding up in jail is a great way to put your country first.
7:27: Woo hoo! Obama gets the last word.
7:26: Can we just agree that vouchers are stupid?
7:25: I just noticed…where is McCain’s flag pin?
7:24: More to the point, did McCain seriously just tell Obama to pay attention?
7:23: Why do people say “Warshington”?
7:21: Hehe, nice NCLB joke, Obama.
7:20: Woah, McCain actually referenced Teach for America. And then suggested that people don’t need certifications to teach. “Teaching certificate? I don’t need no steenkin’ certificate!”
7:19: Yes, because capitalism worked so well for the economy, let’s just port the same model over to education.
7:18: Education is the civil rights issue of the 21st century?
7:17: Hell yeah we need more money and reform, Obama! You rock that education policy.
7:16: Hooray, education! And thank you for highlighting the fact that the American education system totally sucks right now.
7:15: Yeah, let’s mock “health” of the mother. You know what? When women have to abort children late in pregnancy for health reasons, it is devastating and horrible. So don’t you fucking belittle women who have experienced that, you pompous old white fuck.
7:14: Glad to hear McCain laughing at Obama when he talks about the need for common ground. That’s real mature.
7:13: I think Obama is presenting his position on women’s rights very well here.
7:12 For the record, I am proud to say that I am a part of the “extreme element” of “the pro-abortion movement” in America. My views are so extreme that I think women should be allowed to make their own choices about their own bodies.
7:12: You are seriously bringing up the born alive thing, John McCain? And please don’t use the term “partial birth abortion,” because it is NOT A MEDICAL TERM! It is meaningless!
7:11: “We have to change the culture of America…” by imposing our moral values on Americans. How unAmerican!
7:10: YEAH BABY! I am so glad to see Lily Ledbetter being introduced here, and SO SO glad to see Obama stressing that McCain doesn’t support equal pay for equal work.
7:09: Ok, I’m glad to hear Obama supporting the right to choose, but unfortunately he is not really answering the question. Interesting interpretation of the Constitution, as well, arguing that it should not be altered by state referendum. (Isn’t the whole structure of the Constitition supposed to support state’s rights?)
7:09: Glad to see Obama openly stating that Roe v Wade is hanging in the balance, for anyone who’s missed the boat on this issue.
7:08: Ah, so he’s not imposing a litmus test, but if you support Roe v Wade, you are “not qualified” to serve, so it amounts to the same thing.
7:08: Yes, Mr. McCain, Supreme Court justices are an important issue. And when you let your wacked out Conservative ideology interfere with your interpretation of the United States Constitution, that is an even more important issue.
7:07: I like how the moderator tried to put McCain back on track there. I wish I believed that McCain cared more about qualifications than morals.
7:06: REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS! OH YEAH BABY! YEAH YEAH YEAH!
7:06: Ok, seriously, can we, like, ban dogs in city limits or something?
7:05: Uhm…McCain is going off into outer space here.
7:04: Transplants are part of a gold-plated, Cadillac insurance policy? I’ll be sure to mention that to my friend who is waiting for a liver.
7:04: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, THERE ARE NO FUCKING MANDATES IN THE OBAMA PLAN!
7:03: Can we please stop talking about Joe the plumber? I think we are all over it now. Also, have I mentioned how much I hate my neighbor’s dogs lately?
7:03: Hey, thanks for reading my comment, Obama!
7:02: Ok, now we’re getting into the meat of things. And I LOVE to hear him referencing the tax on benefits.
7:01: I wish Obama would stress that the McCain plan would result in MORE uninsured by forcing businesses to drop health care plans.
7:00: Have you noticed how McCain blinks in rage whenever Obama is nailing him?
7:00: No mandates, no fines. If you actually READ Obama’s crappy health plan, you would know that.
6:59: That’s right, fatties, YOU are responsible for the problem’s with America’s health care system. It makes me want to throw on my jogging shorts right this minute to FIX AMERICA.
6:58: Just for reference, healthcare for a family of four (who would get $5k under McCain’s plan) costs around $12k/year. So unless you know how to magically add $7k to the income of a family, please let me know.
6:57: Nice, Obama is laying out his health plan in a pretty clear way. Oh course, it should be a nationalized single payer health plan with mandates, not a shitty between compromise that won’t really work, but it’s better than McCain’s plan.
6:56: Oh yes, please, let’s do talk about healthcare.
6:56: Yeah, Obama doesn’t want to trade with countries that permit abuse of workers and labor organizers. I think that’s pretty reasonable, myself.
6:55: Ok, now we’re just getting random with the attacks.
6:54: Nice way to call the car companies out on lagging on cleaner cars, Obama.
6:53: As Kate just said in the comments, I feel like McCain is a little out of control tonight, careening around with the crazy high b.p. Did you notice the whistling thing he’s doing? Like his bronchial tubes are constricted from stress?
6:53: Wow, almost a whole hour before McCain says Obama “doesn’t understand” in a totally patronizing way!
6:52: How did we get from energy independence to drugs? Did I miss something?
6:51: Drill now, drill forever?
6:49: Ooooh, yes, talk about mortgaging ourselves to China. Yeah baby.
6:48: Hey, numbers. Thanks, Obama.
6:48: Donde estas el numero, senior McCain?
6:46: Hey, way to ask for hard numbers when discussing oil consumption.
6:45: Cockamamie? Dude, no one under 80 uses that word.
6:44: How about talking about how Palin cut funding to special needs children in Alaska?
6:44: Ok, so Obama talks about Biden in terms of policy, skills, and experience, and McCain talks about Palin as…a role model for women and special needs children. Excuse me while I vomit.
6:43: Sigh, maverick crap again. I am still seething over the role model to women thing. Seethe. I just ate an entire row of Rittersport.
6:43: A FUCKING ROLE MODEL TO WOMEN??!?!?!??!?!?!?!?>! ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!
6:42: How do you defend Sarah Palin?
6:40: I am loving this defense of Biden. This is the kind of rhetoric that Obama is good at, when he is on point. Way to turn that fighting for the little guy rhetoric back onto McCain.
6:40: Interesting way to address the running mate issue. I think this should be an easy win for Obama if he plays it well.
6:39: Hey, Obama, don’t interrupt. Be nice. Be patient. Wait. Wait like a cat waiting for a gopher. You’ll git ‘im.
6:38: Ok, I am loving this. “Let me tell you who I associate with.” This is a great response to McCain’s slime.
6:37: Right, how can the Obama campaign control fraudulent individuals? Claiming that he is responsible for the Acorn scandal is just…crazy.
6:37: Way to bring in Reagan, the Republican hero, in the Ayers thing.
6:36: Yeah, and how old was McCain when Obama was eight?
6:36: Wow. Ayers? Acorn? Jesus Christ, McCain.
6:35: “Disagree without being disagreeable,” eh?
6:34: Is McCain really saying what I think he’s saying? Oh, yeah, he is. He is using the old “military as crutch” argument to pretend that what happens at their rallies is hunky dory. Also, I know those “Sarah Palin is a Cunt” shirts would come back to haunt us. Thanks, wannabe activists!
6:35: Obama made a mistake there with the “bad people” thing, since McCain actually has made a point of talking about the fact that Obama is a good guy at his rallies.
6:33: Wait…what?
6:33: Man, if I was eating a square of chocolate every time McCain interrupted, I’d be well into a second bar by now. McCain is acting like a child.
6:32: And a repudiation of the Lewis thing, with a note that the Obama campaign also issued a statement immediately afterwards. Should have happened four minutes ago, but still..improving.
6:31: Finally, Obama! And way to go on the interruption, AGAIN, McCain. Getting riled up, are we?
6:31: Ok…now we’re getting there.
6:30: Obama doesn’t seem to be doing too well here. He’s missing a few easy hits on the negative campaigning issue. He should be calling McCain out for those death threats, he should be savaging him on the palling around with terrorists bull. Go on the offensive. GO GO GO!
6:30: Maybe because your healthcare plan sucks.
6:29: Dude, you have to address the Lewis thing. If you don’t, you are going to be accused of evading. Say something. Anything. You’re right that we need to focus on the issues, but TALK ABOUT THE LEWIS THING. Right now. Go.
6:29: Oh, way to deliver the smackdown on the whining about town hall meetings. And way to point out that other orgs are funding negative ads.
6:28: Nice way to cite the poll on negative ads. And I can’t believe McCain interrupted him. Yeah, that’s real mature.
6:28: This is a key moment for Obama. He has a chance to really flip this against McCain.
6:27: Do you really want to claim that Obama spent more on negative ads than you? Oh, wait, the Republican party is buying your negative ads, not you.
6:26: Uhm, yeah Obama did repudiate Lewis’ remarks.
6:26: Ooooh…bringing up John Lewis. I hope that Obama turns that back on him neatly.
6:25: Oh, yeah baby. This is fucking great. McCain doesn’t even bother to answer the question, just whines about not getting town hall meetings.
6:25: Wow, frickin’ GREAT question calling them out on the nastiness of the campaign. Will he mention the death threats being made at McCain/Palin rallies?
6:24: Petulant much?
6:24: Wait, McCain “vigorously opposes” the war in Iraq? Or was that just a poorly worded sentence.
6:23: I’m a maverick! I’m a maverick! Look at me!
6:22: Nice response from Obama to that word vomit from McCain. And way to come up with a crisp, clear example of opposition against the Dems. I feel bad that he feels like he needs to respond to the maverick thing at all, but I can see why he does that. I’m also glad to hear him clearly disputing the claim that he wanted to raise taxes on people making $42k/year.
6:20: Great question (can you balance the budget in four years?) McCain says “sure I can,” and then “I’m not Bush.” And then goes on to say that spending freezes are the way to go. Sigh. Yes, Kate, he is babbling. Can the moderator cut in here?
6:19: The planeterium thing AGAIN? First of all, an “overhead projector” is not the same thing as a planeterium projector. Second of all, according to my top secret source, the planeterium never actually saw that money.
6:18: Ok, earmarking makes up a tiny chunk of the budget.
6:17: Ooooh, I’m loving his moderator. That was a firm steer back on topic. And, uh, for the record, Obama does support offshore drilling (which is one of his problems). And, a spending freeze is NOT the way to fix a failing economy, dipshit.
6:16: Woah, what does home ownership have to do with balancing the budget, McCain?
6:16: “Ethic of responsibility,” nice one, Obama.
6:15: Obama claims his plan is “pay as you go,” which seems to run contrary to the claim made by the moderator. I would love to see someone reliable crunch the numbers here. (Does number crunching remind anyone else of the scene in The Phantom Tollbooth where Milo eats numbers and describes their flavor?) Anyway, back to Obama. Loving the stress on healthcare, education, and energy policy.
6:14: How can Obama make sure that the rescue plan is structured properly as President if it’s…already gone through?
6:14: Woah, calling out the economic plans of both candidates! Nice!
6:13: $455 billion in deficit? Woah nelly. That is a lot of moola.
6:12: Is that an Adlai Stevenson quote?
6:12: McCain is acting like a snotty little brat at the dinner table, man.
6:11: Oh, Obama, honey, don’t repeat yourself.
6:11: SERIOUSLY? CLASS WARFARE?!?!?!?!! WTF?
6:10: Oh God, Joe the plumber, again! And the redistribution of wealth! COMMUNIST!
6:10: Incidentally, here’s the Obama tax cut calculator.
6:10: Nice hit on the McCain tax breaks, Obama. Glad to hear the 95% number finally being voiced in a debate, crisply, with nice, clear language.
6:09: SINISTER!
6:08: Uhm, let’s distinguish between small businesses and the corps you want to suck up to, McCain.
6:08: Oh, McCain is going for the everyman story, only on steroids. I wonder if “Joe” exists.
6:07: Uhm…where is McCain going with this?
6:06: Jobs, tax cuts for the middle class (defined as $250k and less), helping homeowners (stresses that McCain is giving money away to banks, and that we need writedowns), and the need for long term change.
6:05: Hey, specifics from Obama!
6:05: Ok, now McCain’s talking about buying mortgages. Why isn’t he mentioning write downs?
6:04: McCain is kind of making me want to go to sleep. He sounds like he’s talking through a banana. And, you know, not really saying anything.
6:03: Just say “no” to broken hips.
6:02: I love the moderator already. “We’ve already heard the talking points…let’s try to give the public something they haven’t heard.”
6:02: Loving McCain’s tie! Very subdued, classy.
6:01: Here’s Slog’s liveblog (as opposed to just their website, linked above).
6:01: The pundit is making this sound like a cagefighting tournament. “Everything is on the line!”
6:00: Wow, the rock riffs for the introduction are AWESOME.
5:58: Vicki, the only way I can get through a debate is with Rittersport. Do they not have it out there? Need me to send you a box for fortification purposes?
5:58: Hulu feed is live.
5:37: The focus of this debate is domestic policy, which I suspect means that we are going to hear a lot of talk on the economy. I am also hoping to hear more on healthcare, and I would love to hear about reproductive rights, although I don’t have high hopes. Word also has it that McCain will be busting out the Ayers crap, which I think/hope is going to backfire on him in a major way. I hope Americans are smart enough to realize when guilt by association is being used as a political tool.
Posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago at 5:33 pm. 5 comments
One of the topics that came up in the debate last week was healthcare, with both candidates being asked whether they thought healthcare was a right or a responsibility. McCain kind of blathered on abstractedly for a while, finally settling on “responsibility,” while Obama blathered for a shorter while, and then said “right,” fairly firmly, causing me to cheer.
In the last week, there’s been a lot of discussion (in some circles, anyway) about this question. Personally, I think healthcare is a right, and I thought I might take the time to articulate why I think that. The dictionary has a lot of definitions for “right,” including “that which is due to anyone by just claim, legal guarantees, moral principles, etc.,” which is where I think healthcare falls.
Everyone is entitled to good healthcare, because everyone is entitled to lead a healthy life. By good healthcare, I mean access to qualified physicians, safe prescription drugs, and appropriately-maintained medical facilities. If a woman has breast cancer, she should be able to receive the best treatment available. If a man has AIDS, he should have access to the care he needs. I’m talking about basic, thorough treatment for conditions which threaten life and well-being. I am not talking about voluntary procedures and drugs (breast augmentation, for example, or Viagra, which I do not think should be covered by a nationalized healthcare system).
My believe that healthcare is a right is part of a larger framework, that people deserve to be healthy and happy. If we say that healthcare is not a right, we say that people don’t have a right to be healthy, and I think you can see how that’s a little absurd. And if we’re going to argue that “children deserve healthcare,” where does that leave adults? (Now, one could argue that children need assistance because they can’t make life choices, which differentiates them from adults, but I personally think that children and adults should be treated equally, which means that if I have to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket for medications I need, so should children/their parents.)
Is healthcare a civil rights issue? Well, sometimes. When a black woman can’t get medical treatment because of her color, economic status, or social ranking, yeah, that’s a civil rights issue. When a fat man is denied respectful medical treatment because of his weight, that’s a civil rights issue. Issues can intersect in the big bad world, and nothing exists in a vacuum.
But the right to healthcare doesn’t just benefit people on a personal level. Like other rights, it also benefits society as a whole, making a country stronger and more productive. Nations with nationalized healthcare have healther citizens, much more productive workplaces, and lower healthcare expenditures. When you focus on preventative care and encourage people to seek treatment early, before a situation becomes a problem, it lowers costs, which is good for everyone, and increases the amount of time people can spend working and being productive, which is also good for everyone. Let me say that again: comprehensive national healthcare is cheaper than private systems like ours.
Rights come in a lot of flavors. Liberty, for example, is an oft-touted right here in the States, as is freedom of speech/association. Likewise, a lot of people cite “the right to pursue happiness” as an American value. How can you pursue happiness when you are crippled by a disease you can’t afford to treat? When all of your income is sunk into expensive drugs? When you’re stuck in a job you hate to ensure that your sick partner has health insurance? Healthcare is a fundamental necessity, just like housing, education, and other “external” things, but that doesn’t make it any less of a right.
Until we recognize this, I really don’t see how we can fix the American healthcare system. Because, if you don’t think that healthcare is a right, than nothing’s broken.
Posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago at 10:52 am. 3 comments
…like the power of the people. When the people vote, that is. The voter registration deadline in California is a week from today, homechickens, so if you aren’t registered, get on it. (And seriously, if you aren’t registered, for shame! I’ve already voted! Voter registration forms are practically spilling out of every orifice at the post office/library/city hall, and you have no excuses.) If you aren’t from California, but you are a United States citizen, and you are eligible to vote, and you are not registered, find your deadline and info here.
So, this weekend, I was having lunch at my Chinese mother’s, and my father and I were talking about our ballots, and he said “Hey [Chinese mother], you should really find your ballot, I’ll bet it came in a big grey envelope.” And she said “I don’t want to vote, they are all idiots.” And then she kind of spiked the spatula at the pan while my father and I simultaneously said “that’s why you need to vote!”
And I think we convinced her to vote, which is good, but it makes me worry, because a lot of people think like her. And then stupid LA Times columnists say “hey, go ahead and don’t vote,” and people say “well, the Times said it was ok, so I’m not voting.”
But you know what? Not voting is not ok. Voting is critical, contrary to what stupid columnists want you to think. Get out the vote campaigns are not about “advancing the Democratic agenda,” they are about getting people involved and active in their communities. Yes, get out the vote campaigns are primarily run by liberal organizations with an eye to getting out the vote in traditionally liberal demographics, but I am just as happy to help a Republican register to vote as I am to help a Green Party member register, because I want people to exercise their rights! And most people who work for voter advocacy organizations are going to say the same thing. Idiotic propositions pass because people don’t vote, because they sit at home going “they’re all stupid,” and I personally feel that those people have no right to complain when things don’t go their way. (Although stupid Times columnists disagree. That’s ok. Disagreement is the hallmark of a free society.)
So here’s the thing. Let’s say you are undecided. When I get over guffawing at the very notion, because, seriously, you should have been able to make up your mind about a candidate at this point, I have this to say: If you don’t like any of the candidates for President, leave that part of the ballot blank. Or write in someone you do like. But don’t disenfranchise yourself just because you don’t like one part of the ballot.
The ballot is huge. There is a ton of shit on there. You can go in and vote for one proposition, if you want, and that’s all you care about, but do it. And, as long as you’re going to go in to vote for something, vote NO on 4 and 8, just for me. And maybe think about voting on some of the others, too. But hey, it’s up to you. The parts of your ballot that you choose to vote are totally your business, and no one else’s. There’s tons of information out there to help you learn more about the propositions on your local ballot. If you don’t want to do a lot of research, find an organization/newspaper you like/trust and follow their recommendations, because they’re probably going to be pretty much in alignment with how you voted if you did the research on your own.
Voting matters, and yes, as cliche and stupid as it sounds, every vote really does count. When you vote an entire ballot except the part for the President, that sends a message. When you don’t vote at all, it doesn’t say anything, other than that you are lazy and that you have no vested interest in society.
My Chinese mother is right. They are all stupid. But that doesn’t mean that you should skip the polls, or ignore your absentee ballot when it comes. I have voted in every single election in California since I turned 18, even the stupid ones with, like, two propositions on the ballot and one guy running uncontested for City Council. I rack up “I Voted” stickers like notches on the bedpost. And so should you.
Posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago at 10:50 am. Add a comment
So I was listening to the radio yesterday afternoon while assembling a lasagna, and they did a segment on how people’s tax rates will change under the Obama and McCain tax plans. They picked three random people to profile: one person making around $45,000/year, one person making $100,000, and one person making $500,000. Initially, I thought the segment would be pretty neat.
As it turned out, the person with the lowest income would experience a significant reduction under Obama, and no change under McCain, while the middle-income person would pretty much see no major change either way. The person making $500,000, however, would be paying around $3,700 more in taxes under the Obama plan, according to the calculations made on the program.
On that basis, he said he wouldn’t support the Obama plan. He went on and on about how he would have to make “significant changes” in his business, and how the plan hurts “small businesses,” and then guilted the low-income person into saying she didn’t support the Obama campaign either, if it meant that small businesses would be in trouble.
Here’s my question: you’re telling me this guy is such a bad businessman that he can’t make small adjustments to make up the difference? You’re telling me that less than one percent of his income is so critical that his business will be “significantly scaled back”?! I could conserve less than one percent of my income pretty easily, and I think that most people could. Hell, turn the heat down five degrees and you could probably manage it.
For the low income person, 1% of her income in additional taxes would make a big difference, because she’s making so much less. But for someone making half a million dollars, I think it’s a very different story. The whole segment was really frustrating for me, especially when they interviewed representatives of both campaigns, and they both failed to really address the question. The McCain representative, for example, blathered on about health insurance, and how the low-income person was probably uninsured and the McCain insurance plan would totally make up for the difference in taxes (which isn’t true, as $5,000 for health insurance is a drop in the bucket, people). The Obama spokesperson went on about how the tax plan would be implemented with a balanced budget, but didn’t address the specific questions asked by the people profiled in the segment.
Uhm, no. But that’s beside the point. The point is that this kind of attitude is crazy. If Obama’s plan was raising taxes for someone making half a million dollars by a full percent, or maybe even two percent, I can see how that would make a significant difference, especially for a small business, where money is often tight. But I fail to see how someone making $500,000 a year can’t carve out $3,700 more for taxes, especially with a good accountant. The guy already claimed a suspiciously high rate of taxation, which makes me think that he has a very bad accountant, or he was lying.
I think that Obama’s tax plan is sound. It makes sense to me to reduce the tax burden (or eliminate it entirely) for people who are not making much money. And yeah, it does make sense to me to tax the rich, especially since most of them take advantage of crazy tax loopholes. I think it’s reasonable to set a cap on tax burden, but I have absolutely no problem with rich people paying high taxes. That includes me, in the event that I am ever rich (which I am defining as an income in excess of $250,000). Warren Buffet once said that his secretary paid more in taxes than he did. That’s the kind of situation Obama’s plan aims to fix.
95% of people will not experience a tax increase under Obama. The same is not true of McCain. That’s what it boils down to. And, trust me, that 5% is not being abused or victimized. They can handle small tax increases, since they make the vast majority of the money in this country.
If Obama is elected, I am tempted to set aside 1% of my income next year and donate it to a worthy cause, just to point out that it’s not at all difficult to use money responsibly. How can you critize the government for “fiscal irresponsibility” when you can’t even figure out how to manage your own income?
Posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago at 10:37 am. 8 comments
I’m watching the debate from home this time (sans team), so I will be liveblogging my response. Which means you RSS fiends are going to have to hit the website to see what happens, and keep refreshing this entry to see updates! The most fresh will be on top, and feel free to join the fray in the comments.
Thanks for playing along, all. Liveblogging was a lot of fun. Comments are, of course, still open. I’m off to read the words of the punditry and see what they have to say. By the way, over at fivethirtyeight, Obama is currently clocking 345 electoral votes!
7:42: Personally, I think that Obama was the clear winner here. But, as always with debates, people are going to say that “their” candidates won. But I do think that Obama hit a couple of points really well, and it sounds like pundits agree with me. I hope those 80 undecided voters go out and get proselytizing!
7:38: Both of them also seemed to really struggle with actually answering the questions. I realize that this is kind of par for the course for these kinds of things, but I do with they would at least try. Brokaw at least tried to be hard on them time-wise, but he didn’t do as well with the whole forcing them to answer the question issue.
7:36: So, that’s the debate. I think that, unfortunately, a lot of it involved Obama being defensive, because McCain just piled on the lies, and Obama was forced to respond to those instead of addressing questions. I think that really hurt his performance, and he definitely faltered and got stressed at some points, and it showed. However, he really nailed a couple of questions with his trademark clarity and fluency, and that was great to see. I thought that McCain looked really unprofessional, what with all the pacing around and fidgeting.
7:35: So, before I get distracted, can I just say that it is totally foul that several threats have been made against Obama at Palin and McCain rallies? Because I think that’s completely disgusting, and that McCain should be condemning shouts of “kill him” at his campaign rallies. That is just not acceptable.
7:35: Wow, the pundit just trashed the debate format. Nice.
7:34: Get ready for next Wednesday!
7:34: People, we cannot elect this man to the Presidency. Please.
7:33: Sigh. Campaign rhetoric, not an actual answer.
7:32: By “our generation,” do you mean hella old people, or, like, average-aged Americans?
7:32: Oh, great, McCain gets the last word.
7:31: Ok, we get it, you are from a disadvantaged background. American dream. Yay. I guess you aren’t going to answer the question.
7:30: Obama says…unexpected challenges are what he doesn’t know about. Great. So instead of segueing to what you do know, keep up on the don’t know. It’s a great question! Don’t steamroller it!
7:29: Great ending question!
7:29: Yes, direct talks are the only solution. I don’t know why McCain thinks that sticking his head in the sand and waiting to get bitten in the ass is the solution to global security problems.
7:28: Sanctions, sanctions, sanctions.
7:28: Yes, “all the tools at our disposal,” proactive government, not reactive.
7:28: Ok, the question is not “should Iran have nuclear weapons,” it’s “if Iran attacks Israel, what do we do?” So please answer it.
7:27: Kate’s right: Tom Brokaw really picked some great questions.
7:26: I just want to get through a debate without the words “stinking corpse” and “preconditions.”
7:25: Wow…wow. Way to just totally defang the UN, and stress the fact that the United States doesn’t give a fig for UN approval/discussion.
7:24: Oh, Israel. I thought we would get through a debate without Israel. Woah, McCain touched that guy! Yikes.
7:24: …which doesn’t get answered with a yes or no.
7:23: Oooh, a yes or no question.
7:23: Yeah, hammer that “muddle through” line. Stress the need for strategy, Obama.
7:22: I want to see Obama talk more about making allies, and restoring the position of America in the world. I thought that was a strong point in the last Presidential debate.
7:21: The lady behind Obama has shifty eyes goin’ on.
7:20: Hey, why you gotta go bagging on the KGB? Let’s talk about SMERSH!
7:19: Yeah, we’re gonna have a hot war, at this rate. Especially under a McCain administration. With Putin rearing up into that airspace.
7:18: Afghan army? NATO? The surge is not working. STOP using the surge to justify your crazed foreign policy!
7:17: Yes, when you take over a position of responsibility, McCain, you usually have a command. That is kind of how it works.
7:17: Hey, Obama got the general in charge’s name right, unlike, ahem. PALIN!
7:16: Acceptable dictator? How do we deal with Afghanistan? Great question. Obama says: make Iraq take charge. (What about the Anbar Awakening?)
7:15: Uhm, saying that you are committed to taking Bin Ladin out is not “telegraphing a punch.” Also, crashing six planes: not responsible.
7:15: My RitterSport consumption goes up radically when McCain is speaking.
7:15: McCain sounds like a petulant child denied a pony.
7:14: Music to debate by: Oukast, “Bombs Over Baghdad”
7:14: Bomb bomb bomb Iran! YEAH!!!!
7:13: Kate: I totally missed that! I will have to go back and listen for the “Katy.” Maybe he was talking directly to you!
7:13: Nice quickie followup negotiation, guys.
7:12: I think that McCain, uhm, “doesn’t understand” how foreign policy works.
7:12: That’s not how you say “Taliban.”
7:11: Announcing willingness to launch attacks is not a threat of the use of force. There is absolutely nothing wrong with making all potential options clear when discussing foreign policy. It enforces the idea that we need to make Pakistan an ally so that we don’t HAVE to attack.
7:11: Oh, please don’t shit on Roosevelt.
7:10: Good job, let’s make Pakistan an ally so that they will go after the militants! Let’s commit to taking Bin Ladin out! YEAH! *fistpump*
7:09: Very strong presentation of Pakistan as a threat, stressing the fact that American soldiers are dying because of Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
7:08: Ooooh, yeah, let’s talk about Pakistan!
7:08: Kremlin reports that the little “instaresponse” running on the screen on CNN goes up to “full positive” on Obama, and basically nothing on McCain. Apparently viewers aren’t impressed with McCain either.
7:07: I admit it, I’m guilty of using “my friends” in rhetoric, Kate. I shall stop immediately!
7:06: Nice fleeting Holocaust reference, John. But I don’t think you’re a “cool hand at the tiller.”
7:06: McCain vainly tries to defend involvement in Iraq. Drop it, friend.
7:05: Ooooh, let’s hear about the McCain doctrine!
7:05: “…that diminishes us” in reference to standing by while genocide is going on. Go, Obama. Preventing genocide is indeed in our national interest. Making allies is critical. Mentioning Darfur is critical.
7:04: Way to not mention Darfur in the use of force question, Tom.
7:04: Way to stress the failure of Bush foreign policy.
7:03: Seriously, McCain is roaming around like a cat when tuna’s on the table. Chill out, man.
7:02: Obama is nailing this. He’s back on the ball, concise, articulate, crisp, refuting points neatly. This is like a return to chess from rugby.
7:01: “I don’t understand how we ended up invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.” YEAH!
7:01: Well at least someone is willing to stand behind your judgment, Mr. McCain, because I definitely don’t. Don’t be patronizing, you bastard.
7:00: Yeah, I hear you get a lot of military experience in prison.
7:00: “Greatest force for good in the history of the world?” I think Jesus is feeling a little left out here.
6:59: Obama is trying, but he’s just getting snowed in here.
6:57: I’m giving Obama another +1 on the healthcare as a right statement.
6:57: McCain is just deluging Obama with lies which he is forced to counter instead of answering the questions. This really sucks.
6:56: Yes, Mr. Obama, healthcare is a RIGHT! Thank you.
6:56: Stop with the mandates already.
6:55: Great question: privilege, right, or responsibility? McCain says responsibility (it’s your fault you don’t have insurance!)
6:55: That’s assuming I didn’t get thrown out for prior conditions.
6:54: He keeps going on about this 5k like it’s a big deal. Is he not aware of how expensive insurance is? 5k would be like…three months of insurance for me.
6:54: Not ok to go across state lines for an abortion!
6:53: Nope, no mandates in the Obama plan. That’s one of the major problems with it, in fact.
6:53: Impose efficiency?
6:52: “One of the major challenges,” hasn’t McCain used that line before?
6:52: Ok, I am all for attacking McCain’s healthcare plan, because it sucks, but you are NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION. Is healthcare a commodity? y/n?!
6:51: Yay preventative care. Vicki, what do you think about the streamlined medical records concept? Also, hooray for not excluding for preexisting conditions. Also, please answer the question.
6:51: McCain is circling like a shark, man!
6:50: Is healthcare a commodity? I say no, it’s a right. Obama says…nothing in particular, apparently. Oh, wait, here we go. Sort of.
6:49: How come Obama didn’t get to answer the last question?
6:49: “That one,” yeah, that nigro over there. Jesus. Answer the damn question instead of being a nitwit.
6:48: Interesting question. Phrasing is awkward, but interesting. One project, or many? Sounds like McCain is all about the one project mission.
6:47: McCain looks positively satanic. And fidgety. Is he even listening?
6:46: Who’s reaching across the aisle now? Yeah, that’s right, Obama says “we agree on something,” even after vile attacks.
6:46: Solar, geothermal, wind. Yeah.
6:45: Agh naked neighbor. Eyes burning.
6:44: How can you disagree with the Bush administration when you vote with them 95% of the time? And why does McCain keep referencing Leibermann? Nuclear power? Nuclear power is the fix?
6:43: Way to represent with a young black woman! And the environment! YEAH!
6:42: A COMMISSION? A COMMISSION is your response to the Medicare problem?
6:41: Ronald Reagen? Seriously? Why do people treat that trickle-down idiot like a God?
6:40: While Obama did deviate from the question, he brought it back really nicely. Good work on the fly, Mr. O! First +1 of the debate.
6:39: This is awesome. Obama is clearly, crisply, beautifully debunking the tax thing, point by point.
6:38: Glad to see Obama trying to answer the question, and then address the tax issue, because I think that’s very important.
6:37: Obama’s getting rattled.
6:37: Ok, tax credits? Do you know how much health insurance costs?
6:35: For someone who’s all about “reaching across the aisle,” you sure are a fan of the partisan attacks, Mr. McCain. For fucks sake, Obama is not going to raise taxes. STOP SAYING THAT.
6:35: OBAMA WILL NOT RAISE TAXES!
6:35: I’m all about the burden-sharing.
6:34: When you say “18 billion dollars” people think “a lot of money.” You need to stress that this is a sliver of the total budget, or people are going to get the impression that earmarks are a huge deal. Which they aren’t.
6:33: Yay service organizations! Yay nonmilitary ways to serve the United States!
6:32: Man, you are really hammering on the energy, Obama. What does this have to do with sacrifices, exactly?
6:31: McCain, you are telling people without health insurance that they have to wait, by proposing a totally fucked plan which will create a net drop in insured Americans. Don’t you dare try to pass yourself off as pro-health care.
6:29: Spending freeze? WTF?!?!?! Does McCain not understand how the economy works?!
6:28: Does McCain not understand that shrinking government means shrinking the economy? I mean that’s just a bottom-line thing.
6:28: Internet questions?! Why did I not know that there were Internet questions?
6:27: Good target on the McCain tax cut, pointing out that tax policy needs to be adjusted.
6:26: Soooo…energy is the top priority? 10 years to oil independence? Oh, the JFK card! Sexy. Health as priority two is nice to hear. Education as third? I guess it’s hard to rank these three issues, to be fair.
6:26: Ok, Obama is kind of making bullet points, that’s nice. Nice gas price reference, too.
6:25: Oh, so you are just not going to answer the question. Got it.
6:25: Wow, way to admit that people like me won’t be benefiting from Social Security because you SPENT ALL OUR MONEY.
6:24: Answer the question, McCain.
6:22: NOOOOOOO OFFSHORE DRILLING GAHHHHH
6:22: Obama looks bemused about the pork barrel discussion.
6:22: Oooh, he almost said the “m” word. Although I am glad to see McCain recognizing watchdog orgs.
6:20: I don’t think that Obama is really establishing grounds for being “trustworthy,” although I get where he is coming from.
6:19: Good call on the surplus reference, Obama. Or “Hussein O.,” as I hear the rightwingers are calling you these days.
6:18: Woah, the Passion of Teresa.
6:17: Way to not answer the question, McCain. Why don’t you stop sniping and actually try debating?
6:16: Could we take the focus away from homeowners for two seconds, for those of us who don’t own/will probably never own homes?
6:15: Yay Obama corrections on McCain’s line of crap.
6:14: Go Obama! You talk about that credit freeze! Thank you for kind of answering the question.
6:13: Ok, so McCain repeated his first answer, but did not actually answer the question. And I think McCain would be well advised to stray away from the Fannie and Freddie stuff, since he was a pretty big recipient of donations from them too.
6:12: Is McCain seriously claiming that he “warned us” two years ago? Isn’t that Obama’s line?
6:11: Isn’t this a repeat of the first question?
6:09: Apparently we all like Warren Buffet.
6:08: “Not you, Tom.” WTF?!
6:08: Good for McCain, actually proposing a plan to stabilize home values/keep people in their homes, even if it’s going to be done with my money.
6:07: Ah, “spending spree.” That guy in the white shirt looks terrified.
6:06: Woah, McCain’s getting up close and personal. But…what does energy independence have to do with individual Americans?
6:05: Ok, great, regulation for the package. How about actual people? Alright, middle class tax cuts. Keep homeowners, I like that. Oooh, WPA-style stuff. Interesting. Yay healthcare/energy.
6:04: Obama is really engaging with the audience, nice. Attack on the Bush admin is great, let’s hear a plan.
6:03: Great first question: how do we help individual Americans?
6:03: McCain went with the psychedelic tie AGAIN? Is it lucky?
6:02: Oooh, I hope we get to hear some reproductive rights. Oh, domestic and foreign policy. Darn.
6:01: And pundits! They are so cute. People listen to these people?
6:00: 80 uncommitted voters? Damn, I wish I was part of the Gallup pool. Oh, wait, I’m not uncommitted.
6:00: Man, this is like watching real TV, with lame commercials killing time before the actual event.
5:58: Hulu feed just went live.
5:56: SLOG is liveblogging too!
5:55: I’ve got a RitterSport dark chocolate and hazelnut bar, a full Nalgene, and an empty bladder. Bring it on!
Posted 3 months ago at 5:50 pm. 16 comments
There’s a letter which has been making the rounds, encouraging people to donate to Planned Parenthood in honor of Sarah Palin, thereby ensuring that a thank you letter gets sent to her. It’s meant to be a consciousness-raising form of protest, and I actually thought it was pretty clever. (Needless to say, numerous people are stepping forward to take claim for the original idea.)
Which is why I was surprised to read Jezebel’s critique of the scheme. Personally, I think that the critique was poorly thought out, and lame, but I wanted to take the time to respond to it anyway, because that’s just how I roll. Basically, the argument there is that by donating to Planned Parenthood, people will be robbing Obama of donations.
And that’s wrong, on multiple levels.
First of all, I suspect that most people are capable of donating to both, should they choose to do so. It might mean splitting a donation, sending $30 to each instead of $60 to one or something, but every little bit counts, and Obama relies heavily on small donors.
Furthermore, donations don’t just take the form of money. Someone could choose to donate $60 to Planned Parenthood, and to canvass or work the phones for Obama. Man on the street campaigning is really important, especially right now, and in a way it can be almost more valuable than just sending money, especially in swing states/communities.
However, it’s more problematic than that. The assumption is that everyone who would donate to Planned Parenthood would also donate to the Obama campaign, and that is not true. I, for example, would donate to Planned Parenthood, but not to Obama. Planned Parenthood is an organization I support. I like that they provide reproductive health care services to women who need them, and the fact is that they always need more money. I don’t support the Obama campaign, because, as stated elsewhere, I don’t like Obama. As a commenter noted, being anti-Palin doesn’t make you pro-Obama.
People are calling the Planned Parenthood protest “a stupid idea” in the comments, and I think they are totally missing the point. The point is to alert people to the fact that their reproductive rights are under serious threat in a McCain/Palin administration, and to encourage people to donate to a great cause. And, of course, I love the idea of seeing the McCain campaign deluged with thank you cards from Planned Parenthood: they apparently experienced a big uptick in donations as a result of this circulating email, which is awesome.
If you don’t have a lot of money to spend on donations, you can put your money where it counts and donate to the Planned Parenthood Political Action Committee, which can spend that money on political advertisements to promote candidates which support Planned Parenthood. It’s like a nice double-whammy. I think we need to be thinking ahead about protecting reproductive rights in this country, because even if Obama wins, I think there’s going to be a lot of pressure to limit reproductive freedoms. It’s time to be proactive, not reactive, people.
It’s clever little ideas like this which mobilize people, encourage them to donate and get active when they might not otherwise do so. Jezebel, why would you want to pee on that?
Posted 3 months ago at 10:30 am. Add a comment
That’s how many people tuned in for the Biden/Palin debate. Making it the most watched vice-presidential debate event since 1960, which is just mindblowing. And one of the most watched election debates, period. 34% more viewers tuned in for this than for the Obama/McCain debate, although that was a pretty darn historic event, if you think about it.
What’s amazing is the multiplicity of response. It seems like Biden “won” in the response polls, but Palin’s approval ratings also ticked up. People think she’s “more prepared” after the debate, for example. From that perspective, the debate could be considered a win for her, because she met admittedly very limited expectations. By not making a total fool of herself, she apparently impressed people.
I’m heard Republicans say that she was “great,” apparently willing to ignore the fact that she didn’t answer any of the questions. Democrats are deriding her performance for the most part, and praising Biden. Independents (like me, I’m registered non-partisan!) seem to be leaning in a Biden direction. Seems to me that if you had polled people ahead of time about the debate, the outcome would be pretty similar to the responses afterward: people make up their minds before they watch these things.
And, of course, there’s lots of dissection of every sentence in the debate, but what I find interesting is that this is probably Palin’s last public appearance. I suspect that the McCain campaign is going to whisk her away somewhere for the duration of the election cycle, because she’s too much of a liability for them. Unless, of course, they decide to use Bristol’s nuptials as an October Surprise.
Which, I mean, can I just pause for a moment and say how very tacky that would be. If I were Bristol Palin, I would not be allowing my mother to use my wedding as a political tactic. It would just be too slimy and weird and altogether unpleasant. She already looks painfully isolated at public events with her mother, relegated to the sidelines with the baby and an unhappy expression. I wonder how much of a say she got in the decision to join the McCain campaign?
They hid Cheney, who turned into one of the most dangerous veeps in history. And I’ll bet they’re hiding Palin, someone who could prove equally scary in that office, if she ever held it. So let’s make sure she doesn’t, ok?
Posted 3 months ago at 10:42 am. Add a comment