![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
muck_a_luckSo? Wither the Republican Party.
Back when I was an idealistic young woman, I used to think that I could listen to anyone, keep an open mind, and judge them on their ideas not their party.
I really thought John McCain would turn out to be a Repulican I could respect and at least consider voting for, but during that primary campaign, I quickly learned that every time he opened his mouth I just wanted to punch him in the face.
So then I decided, well, I'm a Yellow Dog Democract, and that's that.
But today, talking about it with a friend I decided no, that's not it.
There are certain opinions that if you have them, you become not worthy of my consideration. They are all related to social issues. Religious freedom (real religious freedom, where you practice your religion and I practice mine and you getting gay married doesn't impact anything about my straight marriage, and we don't ask employees of a government we don't trust to tax us properly to rather teach our children how to worship God); issues that impact me and my daughter as WOMEN, not just as workers or as chattel of your God; minority rights. Cross certain lines of what I consider to be moral decency, and you become unworthy of my attention.
Unfortuately, essentially the entire Republican Party falls below that bar for me right now.
I would be *delighted* to have a competitor party actually attempt, honestly, to win my vote. I would like to be able to be that idealistic young woman again, who can imagine a political dialogue that actually leads me to make a difficult choice. Because for me, in this environment, the choice is never, ever difficult. It's really sad.
So I am watching the Republican Party now with much interest. What, if anything, are they going to do in response to the fiasco that was this past election season?
I personally wonder if they won't just collapse under the weight of the Christian Right, well, not so much collapse, as queitly lapse into a quirk of the gerrymandering system.
But the following are all interesting opening salvos in a possible discussion. (Well, for all I know, these discussions are ongoing within the Republican party - please note my long-standing aversion to ever listening to politicians talk.)
http://www.caintv.com/TimefortheGOPtorethinkabortion-744 - Interesting take on whether the complete overturn of Roe v. Wade would actually save babies. Excellent acknowledgement of the power of women to make the decisions here, for good or ill. Logical comment on the role of government in the small-government philosophy.
Mark McKinnon, on the need for a Progressive movement wtihin the Republican party. Funny that he identified Huntsman as the Republican candiadate that should have been nominated if the Republicans really wanted the White House, because that was the one Republican that *I*, socially liberal middle class woman, might have had a lot of interest in learning more about. http://www.npr.org/2012/11/08/164722734/after-election-day-defeats-whats-next-for-gop
And a group clearly not getting it - http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/08/164711265/for-religious-conservatives-election-was-a-disaster. On the other hand, what are they supposed to do? Just sit around and benefit from the separation of church and state and generally bask in American civil liberties?
Back when I was an idealistic young woman, I used to think that I could listen to anyone, keep an open mind, and judge them on their ideas not their party.
I really thought John McCain would turn out to be a Repulican I could respect and at least consider voting for, but during that primary campaign, I quickly learned that every time he opened his mouth I just wanted to punch him in the face.
So then I decided, well, I'm a Yellow Dog Democract, and that's that.
But today, talking about it with a friend I decided no, that's not it.
There are certain opinions that if you have them, you become not worthy of my consideration. They are all related to social issues. Religious freedom (real religious freedom, where you practice your religion and I practice mine and you getting gay married doesn't impact anything about my straight marriage, and we don't ask employees of a government we don't trust to tax us properly to rather teach our children how to worship God); issues that impact me and my daughter as WOMEN, not just as workers or as chattel of your God; minority rights. Cross certain lines of what I consider to be moral decency, and you become unworthy of my attention.
Unfortuately, essentially the entire Republican Party falls below that bar for me right now.
I would be *delighted* to have a competitor party actually attempt, honestly, to win my vote. I would like to be able to be that idealistic young woman again, who can imagine a political dialogue that actually leads me to make a difficult choice. Because for me, in this environment, the choice is never, ever difficult. It's really sad.
So I am watching the Republican Party now with much interest. What, if anything, are they going to do in response to the fiasco that was this past election season?
I personally wonder if they won't just collapse under the weight of the Christian Right, well, not so much collapse, as queitly lapse into a quirk of the gerrymandering system.
But the following are all interesting opening salvos in a possible discussion. (Well, for all I know, these discussions are ongoing within the Republican party - please note my long-standing aversion to ever listening to politicians talk.)
http://www.caintv.com/TimefortheGOPtorethinkabortion-744 - Interesting take on whether the complete overturn of Roe v. Wade would actually save babies. Excellent acknowledgement of the power of women to make the decisions here, for good or ill. Logical comment on the role of government in the small-government philosophy.
Mark McKinnon, on the need for a Progressive movement wtihin the Republican party. Funny that he identified Huntsman as the Republican candiadate that should have been nominated if the Republicans really wanted the White House, because that was the one Republican that *I*, socially liberal middle class woman, might have had a lot of interest in learning more about. http://www.npr.org/2012/11/08/164722734/after-election-day-defeats-whats-next-for-gop
And a group clearly not getting it - http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/08/164711265/for-religious-conservatives-election-was-a-disaster. On the other hand, what are they supposed to do? Just sit around and benefit from the separation of church and state and generally bask in American civil liberties?
no subject
Date: 2012-11-10 02:22 am (UTC)My favorite column of the day:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/opinion/brooks-the-party-of-work.html
On non-white male voters vis a vis government = bad:
"Moreover, when they look at the things that undermine the work ethic and threaten their chances to succeed, it’s often not government. It’s a modern economy in which you can work more productively, but your wages still don’t rise. It’s a bloated financial sector that just sent the world into turmoil. It’s a university system that is indispensable but unaffordable. It’s chaotic neighborhoods that can’t be cured by withdrawing government programs.
"For these people, the Republican equation is irrelevant. When they hear Romney talk abstractly about Big Government vs. Small Government, they think: He doesn’t get me or people like me."
Exhibit A: Hurricane Sandy.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-10 04:24 am (UTC)Interesting links, thank you. I once thought that I would face tough choices too, but I can't fathom what bout of insanity might motivate me to vote for any of those clowns.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-14 02:32 pm (UTC)I've voted a mostly straight Democratic ticket the last several elections, with some Green Party sprinkled in. Whatever the worth of the individuals running, I can't stomach giving the Republican Party any support in it's current incarnation.
It's too bad that Huntsman didn't get the nomination. While I probably wouldn't have voted for him, I wouldn't have been upset if he'd won. Sadly, he was far too rational to get it.