?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

"Deep in the heart of Texas!"

So here I am in Plano, Texas. It's been in interesting week, most of which I've spent learning telecom stuff. I've spent the rest of the time either chatting with the Smoosh, getting lost (something at which I excel!), or playing video games at Dave & Buster's. Plano (which is just North of Dallas) is a nice town, but dammit I'm over it and want to go home! I miss the Smoosh and I miss my friends!

And now I am. I'm packing up as I write this. My flight leaves at 6:40 in the freaking morning, so my plan is to stay caffeinated, stay up, and rejoice in the knowledge that I'm not expected to go to work after I get home! I'll be having lunch with zensidhe and redheadlass, then heading to their place to collapse until everyone else gets out of work.

At some point I'll find the time to catch up on LJ, but for now here's a brief synopsis of my stance on the current hot topic: I voted for Michael Badnarik, knew he'd lose, and see Bush and Kerry as pretty much equally horrible. Life goes on.

Got a plane to catch...

Comments

( 11 comments — Leave a comment )
(Deleted comment)
anklesnake
Nov. 5th, 2004 06:32 am (UTC)
At some point I'll find the time to catch up on LJ, but for now here's a brief synopsis of my stance on the current hot topic: I voted for Michael Badnarik, knew he'd lose, and see Bush and Kerry as pretty much equally horrible. Life goes on.

You must know that I wouldn't be able to let this sit. So, I will question this, in the friendliest of manners.

I'm all for third parties, I came very close to voting for Nader in 2000. One of the major stratagies that third parties use to garner support is to tell you that the Republicans and Democrats are exactly the same. If you think this is true, you're not standing back far enough. Remember it's not just the President, but everyone he brings with him and we have some lovely fag hating, white supremicists in his cabinet. It can seem like the parties spout similar dogma, but in order for liberals to win, we have to secure some of the conservative votes. If we don't we won't win - I'd rather win and have a president that is straining to the left, then a president that strains to the right. This is the difference between a president that is sympathetic to me, and a president that hates me (but wants my vote!).

It is likely that in his next four years President Bush will appoint two or three new justices. The supreme court is pretty much the single interpreting power for the constitution. Without them the constitution is a bunch of words on paper. Bush is going to appoint very different people than Kerry would have appointed. Bush is going to pick people who agree with his conservative christian ideals - because he doesn't have to cater to the left when he makes these appointments. That means that next time someone challenges the right to have an abortion, it is going to be interpreted in a whole new light. That means that discrimination laws against homosexuality stay on the books. That means we're never going to get the fucking equal rights amendment. Oh, and it means I'm never going to get health insurance until I move back to Democratic California.
khepra
Nov. 5th, 2004 06:59 am (UTC)
One of the major stratagies that third parties use to garner support is to tell you that the Republicans and Democrats are exactly the same. If you think this is true, you're not standing back far enough.

Perhaps I'm mistaken but I don't think that he meant that they are both the same. Just that he thought both were equally horrible...

...probably for vastly different reasons.
anklesnake
Nov. 5th, 2004 07:16 am (UTC)
Perhaps I'm mistaken but I don't think that he meant that they are both the same. Just that he thought both were equally horrible...

Ah, good point... Though it's harder for me to imagine how you could see the differences between the Democratic and Republican parties and still think the Democratic party is just as horrible.
siren_sings
Nov. 5th, 2004 09:31 am (UTC)
It is likely that in his next four years President Bush will appoint two or three new justices.... Bush is going to appoint very different people than Kerry would have appointed.

We had a good dicscussion in this vein in Florida Con Law yesterday. Expect a repeal of much of the Warren Court did to create civil liberties that were enforced on teh States as well as on the federal government. That includes Rowe v. Wade (abortion) and Lawrence v. Texas (sodomy), both of which will likely be reversed. Also expect to see Miranda v. Arizona (Rights read before interrogation) and Maryland v. Craig (permissible to admit testimony of traumatized child via closed-circuit TV rather than facing their molester) seriously weakened.

What's even scarier is the trend to have the States be our guardians for individual civil liberties. Every gay or bi person out there should be terrified. As should blacks, hispanics, Jews, Catholics, and other minorities, particularly here in the South. I've read the Florida Constitution. It gives me little comfort.
anklesnake
Nov. 5th, 2004 09:39 am (UTC)
What's even scarier is the trend to have the States be our guardians for individual civil liberties.

Remember when "States Rights" was a euphemism for "Niggers Go Home"? It's a good euphamism, almost as good as "morality" for "hang the fags."
tacit
Nov. 5th, 2004 08:03 am (UTC)
If you look at, say, economic policies, or foreign policies, or attitudes about the war on Iraq, yeah, Bush and Kerry are both equally horrible. But the problem is, that's not where it ends, When you look at the larger picture--the personal and religious philosophies of both candidates--it becomes glaringly obvious that they are not equally awful. Not even close.

To give you some idea about what I mean, let's consider a couple of quotes:

"Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land-of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ. Christian dominion will be achieved by ending the separation of church and state, replacing U.S. democracy with a theocracy ruled by Old Testament law, and cutting all government social programs, instead turning that work over to Christian churches. World conquest. That's what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less. Only when that conquest is complete can the Lord return."


A Fundamentalist whacko who happens to support Bush? Not quite. That was said by George Bush's Secretary of the Interior.

"The war between America and Iraq is the gateway to the Apocalypse!"


A fanatic Christian, trying to justify exterminating the Arabs? Not quite. that was said by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

The politics of the President are not as important as the people he surrounds himself with, and--in this particular election--the Supreme Court Justices he appoints. Bush in this term is expected to appoint four new Justices, something to think about when you consider that so far, every single Supreme Court decision upholding civil liberties over the past twelve years or so has been decided on a narrow 5-4 margin. You still think both candidates are equally bad?

Consider this, then:

The official platform policy of the Republican party is that homosexuality is a sin against God, and should be outlawed. Senate majority leader Trent Lott said "Homosexuality is a sin" when he blocked the political nomination of James Hormel as American ambassador--because Hormel was gay. And it's not a fluke; former House majority Leader Dick Amey gave a speech recently in which he said "[T]he Bible considers homosexuality a sin and my faith is very important to me.... I do not quarrel with the Bible on this subject."

During the Republican National Convention, Mississippi congressional candidate Clinton LeSueur said, "The very foundation of this country is Christianity and faith in Jesus Christ."


And so on, and so on. On issues of the role of religion in public politics, on issues of toleration of homosexuality (and other non-traditional family structure which, I might gently point out, affect you directly), the two are most assuredly not equally horrible. It's not a matter of how they would spend the national budget or what they would do with taxes; it's an issue of what their goals for the country are. Bush and his allies want you in prison, period. You are a sinner, you're against God, and that means you're an un-American, unclean, faggot-loving monster and you deserve no voice in American politics. Think that's an overstatement? You may want to start reading some more conservative Republican Web sites.

No, they are not equally horrible, and the effects of a Bush presidency are going to be felt for a long time after we've forgotten what the tax rate was this year, how much money we spent on foreign policy or tax incentives, and what the price of gas was.


khepra
Nov. 5th, 2004 12:17 pm (UTC)
I voted for Michael Badnarik, knew he'd lose, and see Bush and Kerry as pretty much equally horrible. Life goes on.

Ditto on Mr. Badnarik.

I did not care for either candidate (possibly for the same Libertarian and personal reasons you didn't) but in my opinion Kerry was the lesser of the two evils. But then again I'm a single pagan mother so perhaps I have some bias against the Republican Party and the Religious Right that makes me lean in that direction. Their overall stance and leanings toward the merging of Church and State and the imposition of their moral values on the nation remind me of someone we both know. ;-p

And life does go on, lets just hope that it's quality level isn't subterranean by the time this term is over.
datan0de
Nov. 5th, 2004 04:00 pm (UTC)
Thanks to everyone for sharing my joy at being back home.

phyrra, lunch was great, and I made a point of voting for you last night. :-) Love the pic.
bonedaddybruce
Nov. 5th, 2004 06:56 pm (UTC)
I got her up to #1 in the top ten earlier today.... Drug everyone else down in the process. :)


BTW.. Welcome back.
anklesnake
Nov. 6th, 2004 08:41 am (UTC)
Thanks to everyone for sharing my joy at being back home.

I'm thinking this is maybe sarcastic and you feel attacked :(. It's hard to seperate the personal from the methodilogical (is that a word?) sometimes. For me, the democrats losing isn't like my team losing - it's not like a baseball game. It's about me losing my civil rights. So when someone says they don't care, it makes me feel like they don't care about me losing my civil rights. So I react accordingly. *obviously* you don't feel that way - you just have different ideas about how to accomplish a better world for all. Oh, and welcome back!
( 11 comments — Leave a comment )