Mood: Depressed

[dwgm]

My dear ones, I know you don't remember the helpless disillusionment of the '60's and early '70's. You will perhaps say that no, we weren't helpless, that the war was protested strongly. Yet it went on and on anyway, as you know, and it was later revealed that our leaders, people who supposedly cared for us and our country, concealed information, distorted information, let themselves turn a blind eye to truth that might have spared the lives of so many.

In many ways the world is a better place than it was a hundred, or even fifty years ago, and I try to keep that in focus to fuel the optimism that seems much more natural to me than despair. But human nature is what it is, and there are too many people who still consider violence, and particularly large scale violence, to be a viable solution to life's problems, and too many people who allow themselves to be sucked in by a shiny package of lies and propaganda and false patriotism. It breaks my heart. This country can be great, in very many ways it is great, but we need to look at ourselves with clear vision and see ourselves as citizens of the World, not just as Americans.

I generally try not to think of this stuff much, as it does provoke such a feeling of helplessness. However, firesignwriter posted this link, and I could not remain silent.

Comments

[kellenanne.livejournal.com]

*sigh* You just have to go and make me think. LoL.

A lot of my decision to vote for Pres. Bush is based upon socio- and economic views and some of it is strictly Democrat vs. Republican. (That's not to say I vote strictly Rep. all the time; I have voted Democratic on occasion when the situation calls for it. If, say, I can truly identify better with the Democratic candidate.) I am a country girl at heart, a preacher's daughter who identifies more with the farmer than the manager. While that's not exactly pertinant, it does give you an idea of my background, and I know that factors heavily into my motivations and beliefs.

For a completely general answer, I subscribe more to the idea of less government, less control and the economy will slowly regain its feet. While upping taxes is a quick fix to an ailing economy, it does nothing in the long run except to hurt the people who are reaching deeper and deeper into their pockets. I used to live in one of the most heavily taxed states (Oregon) and, don't it beat all, but Oregon also trailed in economic growth. They tried upping taxes again, which led to many small businesses closing up or moving out and more jobs were lost and more money was lost, so they upped taxes again. I moved out because I could not possibly pay.

Now I know that that's very, very general and not even really a pertinant issue this election year, but its part of my basis: Some of these heavily democratic states like Oregon are going down the drain when it comes to economic issues. Why subscribe to a vote for a man who holds the same beliefs that I believe ruined Oregon's economy?

I heartily supported America's involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq without the UN approval. We need to be able to stand on our own feet and take care of our own issues when the times call for it. And we did not go alone, and are still not alone. But, in keeping our own interests at heart, we cannot wait for UN approval for every move we make. I wholeheartedly agreed with presenting a case to the UN but frankly the US, I felt, had no good alternative.

Iraq would have been our next threat, and our next target, no matter who was in office. Whether it was now or later was the only question. Hussein had the power and the money and the opportunity to launch his own terrorist attacks against us in the next few years. I had wanted us to finish what was started twelve years ago, if only for the people of Iraq. Now that we are in Iraq, to pull out now would decimate the people. We can only leave when some sort of stability is achieved. It is a long term commitment; I don't think Mr. Kerry sees that. To change our approach now would plunge Iraq into disarray and turmoil, moreso than it already is.

Homeland Security, I'll admit bothers me, but I do see the need. I'm not sure, though how far to take it. I take very seriously my pride and my privacy. So, the addition of that layer of government, as well as its purpose, does frighten me, and I will admit that I am not sure if I agree with Pres. Bush on some of his HS policies.

And here's where I get into trouble: I, like I said, am a preacher's daughter and was raised in the Baptist faith, and have made a commitment to said faith. It shapes my thought processes and my beliefs. It is a huge influence on who I am.

I am pro-life, and I will gladly stand with anyone who is. It's an issue very close to my heart. I have never (knowingly) voted for anyone who was pro-choice because I feel I condone murder when I do. I am a supporter of the one man/one woman marriage amendment (Please don't hurt me; I've already been physically accosted for that...)

Yes, there have been things Pres. Bush has done that leaves me wondering and scratching my head saying "is this really who I want in charge?" but compared to my other choice and when held up with my own beliefs, the answer must be "yes".

Not very good answers, I'll admit. I typed this on-again, off-again in between piddling projects at work.

[ladymora.livejournal.com]

Not to creat horrible quantities of debate in my mother's journal, but I'm curious why you support an amendment that limits, rather than reaffirms, the rights of American citizens. Viewpoints on gays completely aside (I myself am a happily married bisexual), I shudder at the thought of anyone but me deciding who I am allowed to spend my life with, including who visits me in the hospital, inherits from me, and helps me raise my children. That is not within the rights I would give to any governement. What makes you see it differently?

[fnordelissa.livejournal.com]

may I also add that though Bush's ideology may agree with yours in principle, he has made the government larger, and he has imposed more restrictions/possible invasions of privacy than there were before... I second the comment that perhaps if you are dissatisfied with Democrats for ideological reasons, but perhaps have questions about Bush's actions, that you vote for a third party instead? Libertarians are good for the whole smaller government/less infringement on the individual's rights thing. (I have a good friend who was Republican but changed to be a member of the Libertarian party for exactly those reasons)... though I can't speak for their morals, etc. I guess I just feel like, if you don't like or you question his actions as president, that you shouldn't necessarily vote for him anyhow because his beliefs still match. there might be a better candidate out there for you? It's just a thought.

[fnordelissa.livejournal.com]

sorry; I had one other thing to say... I don't think Kerry advocates pulling out of Iraw unequivocally. My impression (I believe I read this on BBC World News) is that he wants to make the restoration a more international affair, and hopes to bring some of our troops home, but does not support leaving the country completely. I agree, it would be a very dangerous and chaotic thing for the Iraqui people. I think the same site said that Nader advocates that sort of immediate and total pull-out. I usually agree with the Green party on things like the environment or the issue ladymora's brought up above, but I do not agree with pulling out of Iraq in that fashion. besides, there's a sort of 'let's finish what we started' kind of feeling I have about it. I think Kerry does understand that... and also, I was told by my better informed boyfriend that Kerry has even said that he would have gone after Saddam, but that he would have gone about it differently. I guess on this issue, I feel like you are totally entitled to disagree with Kerry and not vote for him because he doesn't resonate with you (in fact, that's why I'm not voting for Bush) and his beliefs don't match yours, but do at least be clear on what he's actually said about specific things when you disagree with them.

(thank you Geek Mama for allowing debate in your journal.)