Anyone knows me knows that I am very for Obama and very aginst the other. I want to keep the rights I have, thank you. Also, there is a reason that church and state are divided.
As much as I love shopping, this is just discusting. Read all about it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
You spelled disgusting wrong. No wonder you support Obama. What do you mean about keeping your rights? Why would you lose your rights? Who's business is it how she spends money?
Heard this topic discussed just this morning. Turns out that the $ amount, as reported, has been grossly exaggerated. It was also disclosed that she, in fact, does not own the clothes, rather after the election, if the Repub.s win, she has the option of personally buying the clothes at the cost paid for them, or, continue with the currently in-place plan, that being they are ear-marked to be donated to a charity for women who are attempting to get a 'second chance' in careers/life.
I appreciate your passion for your candidate, yet, I guess personally, I am not ready to share what I work hard to earn in the form of 'federal subsidies'with others. Will be interesting to see if your opinion changes once you leave the academic world for one of work and self- sufficiency.
If the rights you are refering to relate to same sex marriages, you need to review the recent speeches of J.Biden as he agreed with the 'Pubs' on the definition of marriage.(Google search Joe Biden definition of marriage.) As in the posting above, I am also interested in hearing what rights you think you would be losing as we have had a Dem. congress for years now and they have had multiple opportunities to introduce legislation and chosen not to do so. Would also be interested in knowing where/ you have personally 'suffered' as a direct result of having a Rep. president for the last 8 years. Given some evidence, I will gladly re-evaluate your point of view.
Having followed your blog over a period of time, I must admit, I am surprised at your political stance. You appear to maintain a strong feminist position, yet, choose to degrade a party that is championing the role of women in the political arena. Will need to view your comments much differently if you choose to present yourself as a strong feminist advocate, yet, in actuality, only support those women who share your personal agenda.
AMEN!!!! Well spoken by all of you!!
My question for you is - what rights are you giving up? If you can explain in detail what rights Obama will preserve and what rights McCain will take away, then maybe I'll consider your thought process.
If you think it's the right to marry your girlfriend, then I beg to differ. Individual states have been voting that down for years now. I'm not saying that I'm against gay marriage (I'm not - many of my friends and co-workers are gay and I want them to be happy), I'm just saying that I don't think having Obama as president will change anything. And, as we all know, Biden is against it.
Ladies and Gentlemen....We are putting way too much thought into this post. It appears there will be no response to your questions. Perhaps she is busy counting the votes that were cast when she asked for public opinion when it came to whether or not she should have her own hair cut.
My wife told me about this string and thought I would get a kick out of it...
If a person's spelling and grammatical aptitudes are the basis for their political affiliations Mimi could just as easily be a republican v. a democrat supporting Barack. Read Ronald Reagan's memoirs and strap yourself in; they are rife with misspellings and grammatical errors. And please, don't get me started on how incapable W. is at putting together a complete sentence without a teleprompter, Karl Rove, and an editorial staff. A great number of the most revered authors in history had atrocious grammar and spelling, so please check your cheap shots. Or, at the very least put your name on your "anonymous" junior-high posts.
The fact that everything you write is posted as "anonymous" takes away from any credibility that your arguments may have. It gives your posts the air of a jilted friend/acquaintance/whatever; or, worse, it makes you seem like a stalker obsessed with Mimi's views.
I would also recommend you review what your ideas are in terms of what qualifies as being a "champion" of women's rights. Sarah Palin is a political stunt, not a groundbreaking blow for women in this country. Go to Wikipedia and watch the republican primary debates. If you can find one person on that stage that isn't a white man I promise you they are a moderator or they are moving the chairs around (Allen Keyes doesn't count by the way, he had less support than Tom Tancredo and was only allowed in I think one debate and the moderator clearly wasn't happy he was there distracting from the event). Even during the convention they had to show the same African-American man three times to make the crowd seem more diverse--and I am not joking when I write that.
You could easily conclude that Palin was an attempt to gain Clinton supporters who have incredible loyalty to Hillary and are still up for grabs. This is probably the most accurate conclusion given that Palin made it a point to say during I believe her first speech after being nominated that women in this country still had a chance to break that glass ceiling that has 2million cracks--I'm paraphrasing here so don't go nuts.
And please don't be so self-righteous to presume you understand Mimi's life or her view on her rights under the current administration. Personally I can find a great deal of suffering to be had under this administration and at the hands of the republican AND democratic parties. The core of the republican party, this obviously excludes Giuliani, wants to amend the constitution to define marriage as one man, one woman. They aren't thrilled that any state grants even civil union rights to homosexual couples. Only the republicans and republicans in democrat costumes stand in the way of extending basic human rights to homosexuals. That group, and the intrusive religious zealots, are the driving force behind civil unions not being allowed in all states in this country. Why is it too much to ask that you allow two people who love each other protection under the law? The republicans pull out their bibles and pound on their chests for votes, but the bible I read preaches the primary tenets of love, acceptance, and God is the only judge. I'm catholic, so I'm not sending hate mail to the Pope for Mimi to marry in my church, churches are separate from the state so majority rules; but, if another church allows it I'm all for that and I'll call it a marriage. Hopefully, someday, the Catholic Church I am a part of will allow gay marriages but I'm not holding my breath. At the very least, civil unions should be allowed in all states. And don't argue for federalism and that the states are free to choose their own laws. If that were a valid argument in a case like this we would still have slavery in the south.
Scott,
I bow to a master when it comes to someone being self-righteous when it comes to expressing their views. Not to presume to know what your life has been like for the last four years, but if you have been physically safe, have food on your plate, a roof over your head, a job that pays enough to meet your needs, not to mention guarantees you the ability to express yourself freely in on public forum, I would have to say you have had it far better than many people.
H
Post a Comment