In comments, Gentle Reader Mama Gaea brings up an issue I have obviously not made clear enough:
Yeah, I am a liberal democrat who reads a conservative republican’s blog (I’m assuming conservative republican since LawDog likes McCain).
Oh, dear.
For your reading pleasure, allow me to suggest:
And for last, one that you may find particularly interesting,
The only difference between John “Possible VP for John Kerry” McCain and Barack Obama is the speed at which they are turning my beloved United States into Europe Lite — Obama wants to do it in four years; while McCain is okay with a twenty-year timetable.
The only thing that makes McCain even half-way palatable is the fact that he did pick Sarah Palin as his running mate.
And I understand that you don’t like Sarah Palin — but if we all liked the same things, this’d be a boring old world, wouldn’t it?
Now, the “conservative Republican” thing — that’s a whole other kettle of fish, and one for another time.
Welcome to The LawDog Files.
LawDog
Amen brother! Nailed it right on.
you totally rock, ld.
If I had to classify myself using only the two main presidential candidates,and what they stood for, I would no longer be able to do it. They both leave a bad taste in my mouth. Either way we’re screwed, how long and hard depends on the next pres.
Face it, Bro’, anyone who uses “Mama Gaea” as her (I ass-you-me) has rather a grandiose self-image, and I’m amazed she (I ass-you-me) deigns to comment on a blog by mere a peasant such as us.
Not to mention “Mama”, obviously wasn’t very well aquainted with your blog.
Funny how some people scream bloody murder if you call them a liberal or (what they really are) a dang dirty socialist, but they are very quick to slap the “conservative republican” label on anyone that disagrees with them.
Let’s be fair, folks. It’s not always easy to distinguish even big honking differences, if you aren’t familiar with the spectrum of views that someone works within. An atheist who doesn’t know much about religion is not going to see any difference between an Episcopalian and a Full Gospel Church.
I didn’t really care about the political name calling, but why does being hair challenged and liking metal make you a skinhead? I’m a going bald redneck who likes German metal, do I need to have my wife standing by with a stake the morning I wake up completely bald?
I’m a Conservative, not a Republican.
I usually vote for the Republican candidate as I usually disagree less with their positions. I never agree totally.
It is also assumed that I am Christain because I’m a Conservative. Wrong!! I ain’t religious in the least!
In fact, it’s the one thing I think Marx got right! And the only thing…
LOL! Sic ’em, son.
LawMom
Don’t worry, Shortbus. The morning you wake up bald…you can become a plumber!
As another man with a cranial follicular deficiency (they all became dorsal follicles), I feel your pain. And every breeze that wafts across my crown.
Poor Joe the Plumber has already been accused of being a skinhead. Nobody makes Barry look bad and escapes the consequences!
The only thing that makes McCain palatable…
McCain is the only candidate who might keep the Obamanation out of the office.
Of course, as a voter in Oregon, I can write in anyone I want to (NOTA, if I vote my conscience,) confident that the three most populous counties will overwhelmingly send our electoral votes to Obama.
Can I please get some candidates to vote FOR? All I seem to get are candidates to vote against.
hehehe- dontcha just ‘love’ assumptions….
I’m with you, chuck dye, but that seems to be an epidemic. We have the same problem with our local city government and our county government as well: no one to vote FOR.
LawMom
Alas, I am in the same place of no one to vote “for.” I had to admit recently that I was voting for John McCain simply because he is not Barack Obama. I don’t like voting against somebody. Thankfully further down the ballot I can vote for someone who voted against the bailout. Twice.
You preach it, LD!
Well, that and McCain isn’t a racist. Sorry, but swap the words black and white in his ‘sermons’, and have it come from a white guy, and almost anyone would roundly agree that his preacher sounded like a Grand Dragon of the KKK. And they weren’t just soundbites, they came off a ‘best of’ DVD that the pastor sold at the church. So, frankly, if someone I knew attended a church where the pastor sounded like that, then I wouldn’t hesitate to call them a racist.
The only thing that I don’t understand is, why is it OK to vote for a black guy if he’s racist?
Heck, some of the things in his first book are inflammatory enough. On, sure, he was playing to the crowd that would elect him to his prior office, but he put it out there with his name on it, so he should be held accountable for it.
But, yes, both of them nauseate me. Heck, even Sarah Palin wouldn’t enough to get me to pull the McCain lever, were it not for the fact that I believe that Obama is a racist.
You all are never going to get someone to vote for. Neither I am.
The only person who agrees with me 100% of the time is me, and I’m not running for POTUS or any other office. Lower the bar to 99%, or 95%, and there still aren’t a lot of worthwhile (from that point of view) candidates out there.
So, when I vote, my choices are someone who I agree with 30% of the time, and someone who I agree with 0% of the time. Well, that’s life. Because all of the high-sounding rhetoric and intricate electoral schemes come down to “I want a President who thinks just like me, and act of carnal intercourse everyone else!”
And if you thought the last eight years were bad (for whatever reason), wait until one of those schemes is implemented, and this country can have a President who won with only 2% of the vote. Then you’ll see some real political and perhaps literal) bloodshed!
A long-time friend of mine, closer to family than friend since childhood, has gotten caught up in the Obama thing. Yes, he is black. Its funny tho, as prior to this election, he never had the slightest interest in politics, and recognized his white father and heritage just as readily as his black mother and her heritage. Since Obama, he ignores his white side, and is almost militantly black. He is working for the agencies here in Ohio who were involved in the voter fraud loophole, by rounding up homeless and such and shipping them to voting offices.
What concerns me the most is this radical change and fervor with which people support this man. I hate to make comparisons, but to ME it seems like the blind faith and fanatic followers remind me of those of a 1930’s charismatic leader. My friend has never acted like this, ever.
I asked him out of the 1000’s of people he has talked to about Obama said they were NOT voting for him ONLY because he is black. He said only TWO. He said they were horrible racists.
I then asked him how many of these same people said they were voting FOR Obama simply because he IS black. He laughed and said TONS!
I asked him doesn’t that make them racist, and he said no.
Now forgive me if I’m wrong, or not PC, but how is it that if a white man says he is not voting for someone because they are black, make him any more or less racist than a black man who says they are voting BECAUSE the candidate is black!?
Why is it acceptable to be militantly pro black, but racist and unacceptable to be militantly pro white? Not that I am either, but why is this type of thing still acceptable at all in 2008?
And, why is ‘acceptible’ to be a member of a church for over 20 years and quit it because it’s not politically expedient?
Why is it ‘acceptible’ for John McCain to have produced his birth certificate when asked for it, but Obama is still sitting on his-if he has one?
Why is it ‘acceptible’ for Obama to publicly agree with McCain to accept only the tax allowable donations to his campaign and then renege on it, while McCain sticks to the agreement?
Why is it ‘acceptible’ for a university to remove from access Michelle Obama’s highly racist thesis?
Why it it ‘acceptible’ to emphasize Cindy McCain’s couturier clothing rather than her vast contributions to the poor of the so-called ‘third countries?’ What has Michelle Obama contributed except gaudy clothing and a spew of hatred toward whites?
Why haven’t we risen up and smitten a man who refuses to salute the flag that represents the country he wants to command?
This is just in the realm of the surreal-that is, if you’re not thinking Black Hitler-and I’d like to know why we’re putting up with it at all?
“mama gaea”? got rather an inflated opinion of herself hasn’t she?
“gunner”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Goddess
How did I miss this thread? Been too busy in school and stuff. Bummer. I haven’t read the links yet for I am at work, but I will make time later in the week. I am sure it will be an interesting read.
I only found this blog after the pink gorilla story. It’s not like I’ve been reading the blog for forever or anything.
As for the “inflated opinion of herself” comment, if you saw me in person, I actually look very much like the Venus of Willendorf, one of the most ancient of Earth Goddesses. And I didn’t choose that name, it was given to me and it stuck in my circles. Oh, did I mention I am pagan? That might explain a bit.
Yes, I am for Obama, though I was for Hillary originally. If I thought a Green party candidate had a chance, I would vote for them. In Oregon, there was a black lady on the ticket. Now wouldn’t that have raised a ruckus? And btw, when I take “what political party are you?” tests on the internet, I am socialist. So there. ;P
LawDog – I noticed in the Snark post you said “Goddess knows…” Are you one of us?
@ shortbus – you did notice that I didn’t make the original comment, right? I said a friend of mine said it. I never thought that originally, so I was just making sure that wasn’t the case. I guess some people I know are more racist than I originally thought.
We don’t take the name of the Supreme Creator in vain, no matter by what name, particularly not in a blog comment. Dog and his siblings have been taught to respect religions from the time they were born, in Malta-the original home of an earth goddess, by the way, called the Hypogeum-, in Libya and the Persian Gulf, where Allah is the supreme deity, in the American Indian cultures where the Great Spirit, by whatever name, prevails, and in Nigeria, where there are forms of both Christianity and ‘paganism’ which few people have ever seen.
We do not deliberately cause offense to anyone about their choices of worship. It is disrespectful and dishonourable.
Religion is an untouchable with all of us; we do not discuss it, nor do we flaunt it. However, if you want a tiger up your ying-yang, mess with us about it.
No, Dog isn’t one of you; his chosen profession precludes that.
LawMom
@LawMom
“Religion is an untouchable with all of us; we do not discuss it, nor do we flaunt it. However, if you want a tiger up your ying-yang, mess with us about it.
No, Dog isn’t one of you; his chosen profession precludes that.”
Religion shouldn’t be an untouchable. People can agree to disagree but still be able to hold philosophical discussions about what they practice and what they believe. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. And what in the world would make you think I would “mess” with anyone regarding their religion? Your statement was very antagonistic. Am I to assume because of that you are an antagonistic person by nature? I wouldn’t normally do that, I would hope you wouldn’t do the same with me.
As for “preclude” there are MANY law enforcement agents who are pagan. Being in law enforcement does not preclude one from practicing anything. Unless you meant discussing religion as opposed to “being one of us”. And for your information, Kerr Cuhulain, a very prominent Wiccan author, is a detective in Canada. Besides, it is against the law to discriminate based on religion, so law enforcement can be any religion they like.
mama gaea-
You can ‘assume’ anything you like and I am sure that you will, judging from some of your previous commentary. Somehow I do not imagine that what you think is going to have a lot of influence upon me.
I am not about to discuss my religion or anyone else’s with you because for one thing, religion is a highly private thing to us, and for another, because you have proven yourself, in my opinion, to be one of those aggressive people whose day isn’t made until you can interpret someone’s comment however innocent, as insulting you, your politics, your religion, or very probably the way you part your hair.
Before you can display what seems to be a bent for vulgarity towards those who disagree with you, this is the end of this discussion.
LawMom
@LawMom
Since you said this discussion has ended for you, you probably won’t read this. But I feel compelled to reply anyway. I never expect anything I have to say to sway anyone’s views on anything, but I share my thoughts anyway as a way to encourage deep thought and discussion
If religion is deeply private for you, that is fine. I happen to enjoy discussion spiritual topics. And that is fine for me.
I do not know why you have decided to have such harsh criticism towards me. I used a crude comment towards one person who decided to stay under his/her “anonymous” moniker instead of actually revealing their true person. But perhaps they reveal their true person by being “anonymous.” But that is neither here nor there.
I give respect to those who give respect to me. As you have decided to condemn me across the board, we will just have to agree to disagree.