One Mom's Political Manifesto

I whole heartedly agree with Blogger Helen (and Margaret) who stated: "You just can't teach an old dog a new trick… even if you put lipstick on it. Change is needed. I know because I am a fat, old dog. For too many years I've been eating more pie than I should. Jenny Craig had me doing pretty good for a few years but eventually I started eating pie again. John McCain has been part of the Republican party in Washington for 26 years. It doesn't matter what he has been saying the last few months, eventually he's going to eat the party pie again. He's old. I'm old. That's what we do. We don't suddenly switch to salad."

Here are my reasons for NOT voting Republican.

First - the war: It is my feeling that we did not go into the Iraq war to provide freedom for Iraqi’s. We began that war because there were "supposedly" weapons of mass destruction there and later potential Al Queda ties. There was no link to Bin Ladin or the atrocities of 9/11. As it turned out, there were no WMD’s.

There are many areas in this world whose people are mistreated, abused and murdered daily that we are not going to war in, or for. At the exact same time we attacked Iraq for having weapons of mass destruction; North Korea had admitted and even bragged that they were developing a nuclear weapon arsenal. In addition, their people are living in a communist society where they are not allowed freedom either, yet we did not go to war there. This may be because they do not have oil? Or at least a contributing factor.

While I greatly admire our service men and woman, I do not support the battle they are there for, regardless of how strongly they feel they are doing good there. We can not win a battle that is not ours to fight. When we discovered there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction to be found, we should have left then, rather than stay and aggravate and even participate in their civil war. I do not feel that our lives as Americans are being protected by our presence there.

There is no doubt the Iraqi’s are benefiting greatly by our presence in their country, but it is our people, our own service men and women who are losing their lives there, and our money, that is going down the toilet, everyday we remain there.

I wonder what it is that we Americans are gaining by our presence there?

Dufar can benefit from our presence.
Georgia could benefit from our presence.
North Korea could benefit from our presence.
Heck, we can’t even get aid to the victims in Myanmar because of their political control.

But we are not at war in any of those places. It is my feeling that we are greatly handicapped in terms of defense because there are so many troops in Iraq fighting a battle that is not ours. Our country would benefit more from them searching in Afghanistan and Pakistan for Bin Ladin and other Al Queda forces, not fighting and cleaning up their civil war.

So for anyone to imply that I am in some way unpatriotic because I don’t support the Iraq war is an insult. My patriotism is for doing what’s right for OUR people and OUR country, and I don’t think the Iraq war has done anything for either.

And for McCain to say we need to stay there until we "win the war" is ridiculous. It is not OUR war to win. We need to get out and use that money to help our OWN country win our current battle - the economy!

Let’s talk other issues.

My son is gay; out and acknowledged gay. Let me assure you, this is NOT a choice a person makes. Would someone CHOOSE to be spit on, harassed, and discriminated against?

Would I prefer he was straight? Yes. – but not because I care who he may sleep with. How would you feel, knowing that your child will be discriminated against, picked on, harassed, and given less rights than others? He gets out of bed every day and does the same things that every other 17 year old does. He’s no different than any other kid. But he will be treated differently than others every day of his life because he’s gay. It is for this reason, and this reason alone that I wish he was not gay.

I can tell you, that he was suicidal and suffered major depression while he struggled with his sexuality. I can also assure you that this is not a choice. Does the Bible say it’s a sin? Maybe – JUST as it says in the same chapter that eating shell fish (shrimp, lobster and the like) is the same term - Blasphemy. Is it OK to forgive and forget our shrimp cocktail, but condemn our gay children? I think not.

While it may state that homosexuality and eating crustaceans are sins (blasphemy), it also states in other books of the Bible that a woman who is raped, should marry their rapist, and a widow should marry and become the property of her brother-in-law if her husband dies. I do not believe that the Bible is a book to follow literally, but a book to learn from. It is stories written thousands of years ago by mortal men. THEN interpreted and reinterpreted a thousand times, by (yet again) other men. Not one book in the Bible is written by Jesus.

Why is it that there are so many cafeteria Christians trying to force their beliefs into the lives of others - those who pick and choose the parts in the Book - or buffet - that they like, (or want to take literally) and those they choose to leave off their tray or no longer applies today or to them. They can live in sin until they decide to get married, then (BAM!) ask for forgiveness. They too cheat on their spouses (I personally know several "Christian" men who have) and (BAM!) ask for forgiveess....Besides, the point, doesn't the Bible state that it is not for us to judge anyways???

More over, and more importantly, is it our government's role to reduce or limit anyone's benefits because of who they have sex with OR what the Bible says? (What ever happened to the term separation of church and state?) Particularly since this abhoration is almost ALWAYS based on a religious opinion (or homophobia.).

This country is so great that it allows us to choose what religion, if any, that we want to worship. We have no right to prevent civil rights and federal benefits to someone who has different religious beliefs than the masses. They (those who push the religious aspect of marriage being only between a man and a woman) also use the issue that marriage is (in God's eyes) to promote procreation...So should those who CAN'T have children (or choose not to) be discriminated against and be denied the right to marry?? Would you like it if your son or daughter were denied these rights because he or she eats lobster with their steak? All seem ridiculous reasons to deny them the right to marry...

Take a look at this document that shows how our GOVERNMENT gives specific BENEFITS to (straight) married couples. Offering federal and state benefits to one group of people that is NOT offered to another group is discrimination. Period. A marriage license is a license issued by the state that extends specific benefits by having one. It is the state, not a church that issues this license – therefore it should be offered to all regardless if it is a straight couple or a gay couple. NOT offering it to every US citizen is absolute discrimination.

Religious beliefs should be kept in the church, not our government. I have no problem with a religion not allowing a gay couple to have their ceremony in their church if they are so inclined– but DO NOT intertwine federal and state benefits with religious beliefs.

My son deserves the same rights with his partner in life that you and I have. (shared retirement, health care benefits, tax benefits, shared social security benefits, medical decisions, etc.)

I am aware that Obama has stated that this issue should be left to the states, but at least he isn't stating that he "tolerates the gays". Palin's views are twisted and discriminatory. Exchange the word "blacks" with gays and see how that reads. "I tolerate the blacks". Hmmm....ridiculous. Simply ridiculous, and it would never be acceptable. But it's OK to use the same term for gays.

Let me say this – putting it on a ballot for the majority to decide is ridiculous. I sincerely hope you vote NO on Proposition 8 if you live in California.

Think about it this way: If we were to put it to a vote in Mississippi to make it illegal for a black man to marry a white women today, it might STILL pass making it illegal. Sometimes majority rule is not the right rule. James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper 51: "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part."

A woman's right to choose..

I have friends who have had abortions. One was because of a date rape that occurred at age 15. I have much more I could say, but I do not need not go any further than that on the abortion issue... but suffice it to say that Sarah Palin is no friend of mine.

Big Government - the uberwealthy and the economy:

Take a look at this documentation about national debt. It sure appears to me that the Republican Presidents have overseen the increase in our national debt a lot more than any Democratic Presidents in office. As this document shows, "If you look at the 59-year record of debt since the end of WWII, starting with Truman's term, the difference between the two parties' contributions to our national debt level change considerably. Since 1946, Democratic presidents increased the national debt an average of only 3.2% per year. The Republican presidents stay at an average increase of 9.7% per year. Republican Presidents out borrowed and spent Democratic presidents by a three to one ratio. Putting that in very real terms; for every dollar a Democratic president has raised the national debt in the past 59 years Republican presidents have raised the debt by $2.99"

So which party really makes government "big government"? It's all just talk until you look at the numbers. It is the Bush administration (and McCain) who have continually pushed for deregulation the past 8 years - which has hugely contributed to the current status of our economy and Wall Street. (Remember the Keating 5?) The uber rich aren't hurting at all right now. The top selling zip codes in our country continue to increase in value, while the rest of our properties see huge reductions...how does that work?

Was it AIG who take a $400,000 spa junket after getting bailed out?? Nice. Oh yea, that was a different pool of funds...(Are you KIDDING ME??) It's the middle and lower classes that are feeling the crunch.

Bush and his buddies are all sitting pretty. In fact, the typical taxpayer (Middle income levels of $29,000-$46,000 per year - average $36,600.) got a tax cut of $289 in 2003. That is only a cut of .789% ( For clarity, that is LESS than 1% - .point 789%) In contrast, taxpayers in the top one percent of the income scale, whose average income exceeds $1 million, (average $1,082,000) got tax cuts in 2003 of $30,127 each. That's 2.7%,! Their tax cut was more than 3 times greater than the middle class. (These figures come from information found in the Citizens for Tax Justice website - ) By the end of the decade, more than half of the President’s proposed new tax reductions would go to the top one percent.

And McCain continues to insist that Obama will raise taxes... Obama's proposed tax plan only increases taxes to the top percent of tax payers - the rest of us will see cuts. I consider his proposal a leavening for the unequal portion of the pie they got from the Bush cuts...

Now Let's talk gun rights.

Yes – I agree that we absolutely we have the right to bear arms. Our constitution's second amendment states "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." I guess that guarantees that right. Does that mean we should all be able to own an AK47 or a sub machine gun? I do not think that the general public needs an AK47 or any other other hyper powerful gun to protect our homes or for use in recreational hunting. (Or shooting wolves from a helicopter?)

It's OK to tap our phones (which I DO agree with) but it's not OK to track our guns? Why are they so afraid to require background checks and registration of their weapons? I don't get it. If you don't have anything to hide, you wouldn't be against this. Own a gun. Own 10 guns. Just pass a background check and register them all.

Finally, let me say this and I'll end my rant.

They (politicians) all twist the facts, and choose what to admit and what to omit…I just believe that the Republicans do it more and are better at it.

I whole heartedly support Obama. And until last year – I was never even involved in politics. However, although I have supported Obama since he got the Democratic nomination, it wasn't until Palin joined the McCain Ticket that I wrote a check to the Obama/Biden campaign.

For those of you who continue to send me stupid emails with rumors of Obama being a radical Muslim...or his tampered with birth certificate...or his ongoing association with terrorist Ayers...or the Democrats registering known felons...keep them to yourself. I'm not interested. I would like to suggest you check the facts before sending them, but unfortunately, the Internet has enabled facts to be distorted so much that you can find "fact checker" sites and documents that support whatever angle you want to believe - so even trying to be educated is difficult right now.

I for one, am DISGUSTED with how this administration has "managed" (MISMANAGED) our country. And I must repeat Helen's message from above.

"John McCain has been part of the Republican party in Washington for 26 years. It doesn't matter what he has been saying the last few months, eventually he's going to eat the party pie again. "

I'm tired of Republican pie...it's time for something different.... We all deserve better than the last 8 years have given us.