Blogs Are Stupid

Doesn't anyone believe in Dear Diary anymore? What happened to the joy of putting actual pen to paper? And why does every ordinary Jane and John think they can write well enough to burden the world with their scribblings? It’s a mystery that badly needs solving. My first entry contains my thoughts about blogging and will set your expectations. The rest will probably be stream of consciousness garbage, much like you’ll find on any other blog. Perhaps we will both come away enlightened.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

The Never Post About the Not Vote

I haven't decided for whom to cast my vote in November, and even if I did, I wouldn't tell you.

It's nothing personal. I wouldn't tell anyone except my husband, since he can't divorce me if we disagree. Can he? Is there such thing as divorce on the grounds of political imprudence? Or would that just fall under the "irreconcilable differences" umbrella?

I was raised a conservative. Now, I don't mean politically. I mean socially. Religiously. Sexually. Personally.

I was raised to know that one does not go about trumpeting one's personal doctrine to anyone who will listen. You don't hang your dirty laundry out for all to see. You don't proselytize to casual acquaintances. You don't speak of things that happen behind closed doors, good, bad, or indifferent.

We were taught that although we might have been lower class in terms of our economic status, we did not have to act common and coarse.

We were raised to always behave as though we were as good as everyone else though our clothing was second hand and our meals came from plain white packages with bold black lettering.

And to my mother, that meant that one did not make a spectacle of one's self.

So anyway, I won't tell you who I am voting for. But I will tell you who I am not voting for.

I am not voting for Mike Huckabee.

There are a lot of reasons, and if you've been reading Blogs are Stupid for any length of time, I bet you can extrapolate one or two.

But what it really boils down to is this:

I don't think Mike Huckabee really wants to serve the people.

Mike Huckabee wants to serve SOME of the people and the rest can go fuck themselves because as far as he's concerned, they are condemned to the fires of hell and hardly worth concerning himself with.

That kind of exclusionary bullshit makes me see red. Or blue.

Whatever.

Of which people do I speak?

Gays. Lesbians. And of course, non-believers. But mostly gays and lesbians. Non-believers can always be brought to heel eventually.

And not only does he want to exclude them dogmatically, he wants to exclude them Constitutionally.

Yes folks, Mike Huckabee wants to change the United States Constitution, which is the foundation of our government and has remained unchanged for over 200 years, to settle once and for all that pesky little issue of defining marriage as a union between MAN and WOMAN and no other.

You see, Mike Huckabee believes in the doctrine of slippery slopism. Once you let one do it, you gotta let 'em all do it. If you let a man marry a man, next thing you know, we got women marrying women, women marrying horses, men marrying sheep....where does it end?

"Well, I don’t think that’s a radical view to say we’re going to affirm marriage. I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal. Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic".

God save us from slippery slopists.

Of course, he also wants to change the Constitution to suit his other religious views, so I can't lay all his stupidity and ignorance at the doorstep of homophobia.

It's really about extremism, intolerance, and the inability and/or refusal to empathize with other people. I do not believe such a person can be a strong or effective leader.

Because what he is saying when he expresses a desire for a "faith based" Constitution is the desire to serve a "faith based" constituency. And everyone else be damned, literally.

My Mom and I discussed this recently on my visit home. She guessed right away that I would not vote for Huckabee because he is a "bible thumper". This is not her opinion of him, but she understands that that this is how I perceive him. She knows me better than I like to admit.

She queried if I would really like to see someone in the White House who had no religious beliefs whatever.

I really would have no problem with that, because I don't consider spirituality and morality to be mutually exclusive concepts. I also would have no problem with a person of faith in the White House.

It's simply not a defining issue for me AS LONG AS faith does not eclipse the larger issue of serving the best interests of the people.

What is a defining issue, is Humanism.

Any system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values, and dignity predominate.

Is that unrealistic and naive? Probably. But more importantly, it's also desperately at odds with the ruthlessness and that a leader must also sometimes, regrettably, posesss.

Oddly, though I also probably will not be voting for Hilary Clinton, I think that balance is most often succesfully achieved by women.

They can be the tenderest of lovers, the fiercest of protectors, the most compassionate, nurturing and kind. But they can also be ferocious, inexhaustable, determined and resourceful when they or those in their care are threatened. They do not rely on brute force to achieve their goals and vanquish their enemies, but cunning and ingenuity.

While a man will hack and slash and plunder...a woman will plot, and plan and scheme.

The great military triumphs, the physical wresting of lands and riches and dignity from their peoples; for those we can thank a powerful, masterful man.

But behind every great political coup in history, there has been a woman mastermind, even if we never knew about her. I gaurantee it.

Because everyone knows...Women Are Crazy.

So for whom will I vote?

I really have no idea and that's the honest truth. I wish that I could except myself from elections until I am convinced that I am not just voting for the lesser of two evils, which is what I feel I have been doing for quite some years now.

Is it too late to nominate Maya Angelou?

20 Comments:

  • At 6:44 PM, Blogger thailandchani said…

    Maya Angelou. Now that's the first sensible suggestion I've heard yet! :)

    She could do it, too. I have no doubt she could run a country.. and do it very well!

     
  • At 8:01 PM, Blogger flutter said…

    I would vote for Maya Angelou, and Mr Huckabee will not be getting my vote, either.

     
  • At 10:03 PM, Blogger slouching mom said…

    I am so tired of everyone's righteousness. Righteousness is the farthest thing from a virtue there is.

    On another topic: I've always wondered what kind of marriage James Carville and Mary Matalin REALLY have.

     
  • At 10:12 PM, Blogger Fairly Odd Mother said…

    I'd have to move to Canada if Mike Huckabee wins. People like him, who want to tell everyone how to live a moral life, are usually the worst hypocrites there are. Nevermind that "President Huckabee" sounds like a character on Hee Haw.

     
  • At 10:27 PM, Blogger PunditMom said…

    Huckabee scares me. If you can, check out John Edwards. He's my first choice.

     
  • At 10:47 PM, Anonymous Crider said…

    Actually, Huckabee and Edwards are scarily similar in many policies. If Huckabee became president, you probably wouldn't realize he's taking away your rights. You'd be too busy reeling from the glut of taxes he tries to take.

    I encourage you to check out Ron Paul. He is for upholding the rights of all Americans.

     
  • At 12:03 AM, Anonymous Wander said…

    I've already had 10 years with Huckabee as governor...I DO NOT want to think of 4 to 8 years with him as president.

     
  • At 12:22 AM, Blogger Amy Y said…

    Admittedly, I see blue almost all the time... so I have not done a lot of research into the Republican candidates. I pretty much know because of what their party stands for (anti~gay marriage, anti~abortion, anti~taxes, pro~war, pro~big government telling us what to do, etc) that if the candidate is a Republic, he probably isn't going to have a lot in common with me and will likely not do things that I'd want him to do...

    But wow. Men marrying children and animals? That's pretty dramatic for an old fogey isn't it?

    I respect your decision to keep your choice to yourself but appreciate your sharing this :)

     
  • At 5:09 AM, Blogger jchevais said…

    Fervent political/religious leaders give me hives just thinking about them. Please America: Don't vote for Huckabee. Beurk.

     
  • At 5:47 AM, Blogger Jenn said…

    I think Sojurner Truth said it best:

    "Then that little man in black there, he says women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wasn't a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothing to do with Him."

     
  • At 8:56 AM, OpenID wheelsonthebus said…

    A little off topic here, but did you know Tuesday is Blog for Choice day (duh -- because it is January 22)? Go to NARAL's website to check it out.

    I just mention this because between your Roe v. Wade button and your desire to be more substantive (like this post, btw). I thought you'd want to know.

    Emily

     
  • At 10:08 AM, Blogger Donna said…

    Can't stand Huckabee. I'm for Ron Paul, but he doesn't have a chance. So I don't have any idea who I'll vote for. Maybe nobody.

     
  • At 4:46 PM, Blogger Elaine A. said…

    I like your honesty and I totally agree about Huckabee. I almost lost my lunch when I heard about him wanting to change the Constitution. Personally, I think he's crazy. Ron Paul '08!

     
  • At 5:32 PM, Anonymous Wendy said…

    I don't know who I am voting for, but I have to take issue with one thing. The Constitution is a living document and it has changed quite a bit through 200 years: women's right to vote, the abolishment of slavery.

     
  • At 6:23 PM, Blogger Drowning Pisces said…

    "I don't consider spirituality and morality to be mutually exclusive concepts."- Well said!!!

     
  • At 10:26 AM, Blogger Mrs. Chicky said…

    I think some of these politicians have forgotten one of the pillars that this country was built upon - separation of church and state. Keep your religion out of my politics and no one will get hurt.

    Huckabee and his ilk scare the bejeebus out of me.

     
  • At 3:21 PM, Blogger painted maypole said…

    i would so vote for Maya.

    and you know my views about this whole crazy homophobia thing, and Huckabee is not getting my vote either

     
  • At 8:51 PM, Anonymous gurukarm said…

    It's interesting no one has mentioned Romney. Which I'm very glad to see, because as a resident of MA, I think our very less than illustrious ex-gov is a deceitful, two-faced, flip-flopping, "I'll tell you whatever you want to hear as long as it gets me what I want", disrespectful, creep. I totally can't believe how much he has the wool pulled over the eyes of so many in this country (read: Mich & Nev.) And yeah, I'm holding back here. :-) And, besides that, no Republican will EVER, EVER, get my vote.

    BA, I'm also really uncertain. And our primary is fast approaching. On the one hand, there's Hillary. She's a woman. That's a very good thing, just per se. And she's really quite a brilliant thinker. On the other hand, she has SOOOOO much baggage. Ex-prez husband who was in many ways an amazing leader, policy wonk, made things happen kind of guy, but also a moral reprobate. A lot of people think she's barely a half step below "Hanoi Jane" on the hate-ability index and wouldn't vote for her if their lives depended on it...

    On the third hand, there's Barack (and I'm purposely using his first name - have you noticed how the media does that all the time? It's
    "Obama this and McCain that, Romney the other, and Edwards too", and "Senator so-and-so or Governor someone else". But it's nearly ALWAYS "Hillary". Not Senator Clinton, not just plain Clinton. Seems very subtly demeaning and disrespectful to me. Anyone else?) Anyway, sorry for the aside. So, there's Barack Obama. Black man - this is also a good thing, per se. By which I mean, a good thing having our choices expanded to a woman and also to the African American demographic. But. But, he really doesn't have a lot of governing experience yet. A big part of me wishes he'd waited another 4 years, and then jumped in that much more seasoned.

    And on the last hand, there are several other interesting choices at the back of the pack, the ones the media rarely focus on, the ones who may have views well-aligned with our own. But have NO chance in H.E.double hockeysticks in this race. Whom the media cut out months ago. So unless one does a fair amount of in-depth research on one's own, you never really know what they believe or promote.

    Anyway. Sorry for co-opting your blog comments. Thanks though for bringing up the topic. As always, a thoughtful and thought-provoking post.

     
  • At 12:48 AM, Anonymous Bill said…

    I guess I have two comments.

    First, by having a blog you are sort of violating the "never make a spectacle of yourself" mantra that your mother lives by.

    And second, 'amen' to the anti-Huckabee rant. He certainly is a smooth talker (what is it about Hope, Arkansas?), but he is scary on policy.

    I am a Republican, but I'll vote for either Clinton or Obama if Huckabee gets the nomination. Actually, I'll vote for them if anyone other than McCain gets it, but that is another story.

     
  • At 12:28 PM, Blogger the end of motherhood said…

    Hey, don't look now, but I think this post counts as "trumpeting one's personal doctrine to anyone who will listen."

     

Post a Comment

<< Home