The Republicans

It was so interesting seeing all the Democrats and Republicans on stage last night. The animosity was absent because right now they are not fighting with each other. The links between them were fascinating.

By the time I was thick into the Democratic debate, I had such a sense of cohesiveness among the arguments made, and trust for these sharp, experienced, articulate folks (not so much Richardson) that I realized the chaotic structure of the Republican debate was absent from this one. I remember looking at the stage of Republicans and thinking that Huckabee was the only one who seemed decent and somewhat grounded--and he's a zealot. It occurred to me that his zealousness for his religion is probably directly tied to his patriotism, which isn't necessarily a bad thing since he was the first to cite the Constitution when Gibson asked what the candidates principles were. My husband pointed out to me long before that moment that the #1 job of the President is to defend the Constitution, not to make us the strongest, toughest nation (McCain, Mitt). McCain seemed petty and defensive, even when he didn't need to be. Thompson is out to lunch and wings it. Paul is a theoretical purist who ignores historical precedents that blow serious holes in his extreme libertarian, anti-federal philosophy (although it's fun to see how he runs circles around his peers). Mitt seems like a policy wonk who likes social policies and loves pharmaceutical companies, but doesn't think we can change global warming in ten years (like Hillary?). Huckabee was pretty impressive with his compassionate rhetoric (is it real?) and he seemed calm and humble compared to the rest. Giuliani seemed confidant and sounded sane but he's full of misstatements (do Republicans still believe we have the best healthcare in the world? Does Fox tell them that?) and only about 30% of the country believes we should still be shaking our fists at the world in that bullying post 9-11 way.

I'll post about the Democratic paradigm later today.

Transcripts with links to actual debate footage.

A handy reference for Presidential Candidates.

Wow, the old McCain!

For a brief episode, the old John McCain rose to the occasion and gave an impassioned speech fighting the Republican machine of anti-Hispanic rhetoric. I can't find the transcript though.

The Republicans

Again, it's the outliers that are telling any truth, with their religious fantasies (this should be enormously irrelevant to governing) and anti-immigrant racism not counting. Huckaby, Trancredo and Paul the self-entitled "Champion of the Constitution."

Most stunning to me was how they CLEARLY put political/social "values" above our NATIONAL SECURITY interests. When not one single Republican supported changing the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy that has resulted in firing ARABIC translators, it became clear how shallow these guys are (Paul left some room for this possibility). It makes me go back to the radical idea that they really know that there is no real terror threat at all--otherwise, this is a totally IRRATIONAL position for them to take (and of course, they are not above irrationality). We need those gay Arabic interpreters and every other gay soldier in our military--how do they explain away the open English troops and other allies? They were never asked to.

So McCain believes that God created us whole and we did not evolve from apes--fascinating. It was infuriating when he told the sister of a dead soldier that this war has had a lot of mistakes, but we must continue it to keep her brother's death from being in vain. I want to call him something really nasty here but I'm working on my language/anger. Let me just say, he's one of those mistakes.

Brownback has everything to do with the mess we're in with Iraq....he's been in office the whole time ignoring the problems and being a cheerleader for Bush.

Guiliani is about to lose it. He is so deeply in fear and denial that he's resorted to telling the realists that they are in denial. He's living in opposite world, "Iraq is central to the War on Terror." Okay, so can we get a couple of Iranian and military and nuclear experts to tell us exactly how long we have before Iran develops nuclear warheads? Let's not rely on the gut check, okay, Mr. Nation Builder? He thinks our problems in Iraq are because our military's not equipped to be nation building...he'll fix that. I'm still stunned that he's supporting women to get safe abortions if they happen to live in a state where it will remain legal. Will he win a primary or is it just that all the machines are rigged nowadays? It looked like an anti-abortion protestor was rigging the buzzer when he was asked about this issue, Wolf said it was, "lightning!"

I don't think the other guys are getting anywhere, maybe Thompson, but only because of his name. And he keeps calling himself the best conservative.

"We [the U.S.] go under, Western Civilization goes under!"

That was Tom Trancedo. It's little gems like that that remind me that this is:

The party where individuals define themselves as "white," Christian, controlling, separatist, and supremacist.

If we understand that (and I'm finally accepting the reality of it--and believe me--that's personal), then we understand everything about most Republicans today.

The supremacist label doesn't just mean "white" supremacist, it means that having more money is better than, having children is better than, being straight is better than, not being elderly is better than, believing in God is better than, being American is better than, being Republican is better than. Not one single thing I just described makes anyone better than anyone else.

That's the beginning and the end of the entrenched difference between the parties.

(okay, Democrats get the rub for thinking that education is better than, but that one's hard to argue against, although there are different kinds of intelligence and talents, but even so we advocate GREAT education for everyone, not just us).

Riveting Debate

Wow, the Republicans are getting some tough questions on Fox News (not that the questions didn't set some ridiculous implications, too)!

Most amazing, TRUTH SPEAKER RON PAUL! As my husband points out, not even Democrats running for President have publically admitted the historical truth behind 9-11. Rudy Guiliani had a caniption fit and was actually cut off by Fox for his second response, I'm sure he'll get another word in, but for now, WOW! He never said, "we invited" 9-11, he just said, it was a response to our foreign policy blunders. No sh**.

Peace.

Bullies and the Culture of Life

It's striking to me that the party of Republicans, that thrives on bullying tactics and ill-defined machismo, barks about a "culture of life." It only counts, they say, when you're talking about unborn human beings. According to most conservatives, once we're out of our mother's wombs, we're on our own in this test called earth--don't ask them for humane respect again until you reach your heavenly father.

So in this great wash of LIFE that actually counts for the rest of us, and them, actually, we encounter a lot of tests that, in my opinion, show whether we are REALLY PRO-LIFE:

Clean air
Clean water
A healthy work and living environment that includes foods without poison and furninishings without chemicals.
Finding God in ourselves and others with traits like dignity, respect, and humane treatment of the insane or criminal.

So I'm appauled that we are using our soldiers to hold up a government that operates like this, until I remember that people in our country also LOVE the death penalty--so it's not like we can expect Republicans to see how brutal and inhuman this whole affair is.

Motivation and Interpretation

Last night my husband and I watched our Moxi recording of the Republican "debate." It was relentless in it's "I'm the meanest dog," appeal, and "Reagan is a god," or my new nickname for Reagan, the big woof woof (considering the pack mentality of these guys). You know, all the attitudes that have made us one of the world's most hated nations and a country full of bullies.

What bothered me the most about the rhetoric was the amount of blame they placed on immigrants, pregnant women and Democrats for America's problems. Here are a bunch of men, who are in the majority, blaming minorities for our country's "problems" within their majority's rule; both in society and within government. When Preppy Sam Brownback was asked how he responds to the laundry list of Republican corruptions and prosecutions, he made one corrupt Democrat sound like ten, and then he blamed society--reaching all the way into the homes of unmarried pregnant women. My God, don't have a baby out of wedlock and don't have an abortion or a Republican will bribe an Indian tribe! The way these guys casually stand over the gyneclogist's table is astounding--that's exactly where the Supreme Court has positioned every anti-choicer in our nation and these guys are eager to turn over Roe. No one asked how they can morally live with abortions in New York but not Louisiana.

Over and over the message from these guys was OBEY US WOMEN! FEAR US WORLD! The former message woud go over a lot better with me if they could just lead by example and say, TO MEN, "I don't go around f***ing women I'm not married to, or who would be put in the position of considering an abortion." Perhaps that's difficult to say? They certainly aren't promising any other incentives for bringing healthy pregnancies to term like universal prenatal care and postnatal support.

My point is, these guys take responsibility for stuff they shouldn't (building walls between here and Mexico, unwanted pregnancies), and don't take responsibility for the stuff they should (corruption in politics, government reform, bringing our troops home)!

Chris Matthews asked these men a dozen times, "How do we win the war [in Iraq]?"

What planet is he living on?

And the thing that really got me blogging about this was EVOLUTION.

Brownback, Trancredi, and Huckabee admitted they all think evolution doesn't exist in a yes or no question. These people scare me. There was no follow-up question on that!! That a few people just decide to reject mountains of evidence that scientists overwhelmingly agree on, and then gain political power, is scary. I did a little opposition research and think that the crucial part of this debate has to do with Darwin saying that evolution is "purposeless," or basically, without divine intention. So what? What does Darwin's INTERPRETATION or the data matter? So we don't like what Darwin SAID so we throw out the whole theory, that has HUGE evidence, and logic? Isn't GOD bigger than Darwin's WILL? Doesn't evolution look like a pretty AWESOME, perhaps DIVINE plan to you? I'll just never get creationists--why do they think Darwin's opinion is such a big woof woof?

I couldn't shake the idea that some people were watching the debate to find the biggest bully. That bullies somehow make them feel safe. Even now.