Ever since several left-wing gay blogs linked some of our posts on Sarah Palin, our spam filter has been inundated with nasty comments, some repeating the tired tropes about how self-hating we must be, others making wild, inaccurate and mean-spirited allegations about the next Vice President of the United States.
That said, some bloggers and pundits have offered some thoughtful criticism of the Alaska Governor and questioned her qualifications for the second highest office in the land. In the interest of having a civil discussion on the benefits of John McCain’s choice, I thought I would share some with you.
Of the conservative web-sites I check regularly, the folks at Powerline have expressed the greatest amount of criticism of Sarah Palin. John Hinderaker fears “she may be the Geraldine Ferraro of 2008.” Given her lack of “foreign policy and national security background.” Paul Mirengoff is similarly disappointed.
My friend Dale Carpenter calls the pick a “breathtakingly bad choice,” believing Palin “was chosen primarily as a political stunt to drive wedges and manufacture excitement.” He offers a more extended analysis of her weaknesses. While I don’t agree with Dale, he makes some pretty solid points, so make sure to check out his post — and, if you have time, the comments section which follows. (H/t Instapundit.)
I’ll make my case to Dale when we have dinner next Monday in Minnesota. 🙂
Of those who blog National Review, David Frum offered the harshest assessment of Palin, wondering whether she was the irresponsible choice. Ramesh Ponnuru has been similarly skeptical, throwing cold water on Palin.
On the whole, these guys do offer some strong arguments. If you’re looking for serious criticism of Sarah Palin, follow those links and consider their points. It’s too bad that some of those faulting her in the comments section of this blog are not similarly thoughtful.
UPDATE: Amy Alkon is not happy with the pick, offering “in a V.P. candidate, if we had a female, I was looking for something a little more…barren. Battle-ax-ish. Thatcheresque.” Now read the whole thing, bearing in mind they don’t call her Sarah Barracuda for nothing.
Palin was, I believe, chosen for two purposes, to secure the base, and second, to attract Hillaries disenfranchised voters. The form goal was definitely achieved. The latter, eh, maybe not so much.
My cousin lives in Alaska and she’s gay (does that apply to lesbians? I’m really not up on the right descriptions.). She’s conservative and an individualist. Probably someone who would support Palin even though Palin doesn’t support same-sex marriage.
Alaska is a cool place filled with people that understand that mother nature could kick your ass any time she wants to.
I guess I have to keep repeating the facts.
– Sarah Palin has 20 months’ more executive experience as Governor of a major State than Barack Obama has.
– Sarah Palin has several years’ more experience actually “organizing” a “community” effectively, as Mayor, than Barack Obama has.
– Sarah Palin has more actual foreign policy experience than either Obama or Joe Biden. As Governor, she has been to Iraq as many times as Barack Obama. The National Guard that she commands shares a military border with Russia, not something true of every State NG. It’s not like McCain’s experience commanding a squadron… *but it’s still more than either Biden or Obama*. And she has negotiated a gas pipeline with Canada, which is more formal diplomatic experience than Joe Biden or Barack Obama.
Yes, she’s young and not all that experienced. Meanwhile, BOTH Democrats are completely inexperienced, when it comes to life as a commander or executive who must be responsible for a new decision every 10 minutes of the day.
So, criticizing Palin’s experience level is a battle the Democrats are about to lose. And, shall we say, a “distraction” from “the conversation we should be having” about “what helps Michelle Obama’s kids” – i.e., it takes the Obama campaign delightfully off-message.
So lefties… Let’s keep it going, by all means. And Powerline: Normally I love you guys, but you have missed the boat on this one.
Dale Carpenter, as for you: McCain chose her because she is a reformer… FOR REAL. And his version of reform is, for better or worse, the theme he wants to highlight. And the fact that she generates excitement ($7 million in new donations to McCain in 2 days) and throws leftoids into a tizzy of outrage, is just gravy. Rich, excellent, tasty gravy. Mmmmmmm. Tastes *good*!
Always remember in life, things can be “multiply determined”. One good reason does not exclude another. You can have so many excellent reasons for doing something that even if you take away one, another remains and determines the same decision. Kind of like getting rid of Saddam Hussein: there were *so many* great reasons to do that. That’s the beauty of Palin. No, she wasn’t just chosen for her gender. Yes, she is qualified – at least as qualified as Biden or Obama. But isn’t her gender, in today’s circumstances, a wonderful plus!!!
The bottom line is this: Palin is a risk – because we all just don’t know her very well. She has to perform on the campaign trail… in her debate… etc. If she doesn’t perform, then she doesn’t help McCain and he has made a boneheaded move. If she does perform, then she helps McCain win and he is the political genius of 2008. That’s the nature of risk.
It’s been 2 days, sf. Give it 2 months.
Hillary’s hardcore, outraged, feminist-victim voters are not going to vote for a pro-life ticket – We know that. But what about the soccer mom and the average young gal and the average older career woman, who were going “I don’t know… having our first woman *would* be kinda cool”? Give them a couple months to think it over. See how Palin performs. McCain only needs to add 5-10% of women (or 3-5% of overall voters) to the poll standing he had a week ago. If Palin doesn’t do it, he’s a dolt. If she does, he’s a genius.
P.S. The real benefit of Palin to McCain is this: She gives the Republican base a reason to feel excited and proud. She neutralizes Obama’s “Hey, I’m a historic Black” advantage. Voting for McCain is now arguably a progressive, historic act.
Indeed. I think it was her fight of the Republican Machine in Alaska that was more of a deal maker than her being a her. That she was a woman, and could give a few more of the bitter PUMA folks a reason to not just sit out, but actually vote McCain, was gravy. Even if a third of the Pumas decide after the runup that Obama is “dissing” women and sit out, that is still a vote for McCain.
Nearly all the attacks Obama can try on her only enforces McCain’s points about Obama. Obama is from the Chicago Machine, She broke the Alaska Machine. Talk about Change.
I don’t think Palin automatically wins over the cougars… er, I mean, PUMA’s. But I think a few more weeks of vicious left-wing attacks on an accomplished woman and mother-of-five is not going to make women voters very happy.
I still seen o effort made by McCain or Palin to reach out to LGBT persons. The ways in which some anti-gay people attack LGBT person would affect the ability and/or rights regarding our families, employement. To be sure, employment, taxes (our tax code is too antiquated) are unifying issues. It’s a mixed bad. Want to be treated like everyone else, I do, but being gay gives me a unique perpective on America (in additon to being black), I don’t feel eiether candidate appreicates that perspective.
The Hot Librarian Speaks on energy:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=836304396
1: A major state? If you mean in size, then yes, the largest state in the Union. But as far a governance, that’s a resounding no. it’s population as of 2007 is about 683,000, ranking 4th of the 50 states and DC. Both McCain and Obama represent much more people as US Senators, not to mention Biden (even Delaware ranks 3 states higher in population than Alaska).
If Palin were a man, then I can’t imagine that she would be a VP pick with her experience. While there may be a few people who will vote for McCain solely because there is a woman on the ticket, I don’t see her grabbing disillusioned Hillary voters, given that their political ideology is completely opposite. Just because she’s a woman, doesn’t mean she has the experience to lead either. On the other hand, Americans have never really seemed to care about the choice of VP in their choice of Prez. Dan Quayle as VP proved that years ago.
You believe that, Kevin, because you know full well that Barack Obama’s only qualification is his skin color. Palin, on the other hand, has demonstrated intelligence, competence, and a willingness to take on those who break the law, both outside AND inside her own party. Obama fully supports and endorses corrupt Democrats, such as Chicago’s entire political establishment, and black racists like Emil Jones, who called black Hillary Clinton supporters “Uncle Toms”.
If you think Mccain picked Palin because she would make a great Vice President you are delusional. It is blatantly obvious that the purpose of picking Palin was to win over the Hilldog supporters who care more about Palins gender than her policies. Also it is a ploy to get the extreme right excited as well. Palin was mayor of town of 5500 and governor of state for 20 months whos population is less than 1/10th the size of NYC f. Saying she is inexperienced is a sever understatement. Personally if I was a Republican I would feel betrayed right now. It seems Mccain is more worried about winning than having a strong office. Mccain isn’t that stupid to pick someone so inept and really I think he left this pick up to his advisers which was a grave mistake.
VPs need to bring what the P cant, Biden brought competence. In this case she brings the pro (life, gun, family) to help make McCain(already solid in foreign policy) more attractive to the base. Frankly, its working. The more conservatives look, the more they like what they see.
“You believe that, Kevin, because you know full well that Barack Obama’s only qualification is his skin color.”
wow
If Obama had as much experience as Sarah Palin, he’d be qualified to be vice president, too.
Palin is a gamble, to be sure. But why not?
We’ve had years of government run by the so-called best & brightest. Harvard, Yale, Georgetown… and what has it got us? Out-of-control spending; out-of-control immigration; collapse of the inner cities; political discourse that sounds like a non-stop cat fight; the list goes on.
For God’s sake, we have Nancy Pelosi two heartbeats away from the Oval Office. Can anyone listen to that woman for ten minutes without thinking that she really is stupid?
So, for my part, I’m willing to take a little risk in having a VP with a real middle-class background and who still thinks it’s possible for politicians to actually do what’s best for their country.
BTW: Kevin, you should look at Quayle’s resume and compare it to Obamas. In his second term in the Senate when he got the VP spot; two terms in the House. I think he defeated a 3-term senator and an 8-term congressman.
Arrggh! Spam filter just lost another brilliant comment.
Again (but shorter): Don’t care that Palin doesn’t have the pedigree that most of our leaders have (not from Harvard, Yale, Georgetown, you-name-it).
We’ve had the best ‘n’ brightest running the show for a long time now. And we have runaway spending, corruption, open borders, looming entitlement collapse, political discourse that sounds like a nonstop cat fight, and so on.
And can anyone honestly listen to Nancy Pelosi (two heartbeats from the Oval Office) for ten minutes without thinking that she really is stupid?
For my part, I’m certainly willing to give Palin a shot. She comes from a normal background and still believes that politicians should do what’s best for their country.
as to LGBT people: my heroine, Sarah Palin has 5 children, and a husband (a gorgeous first Dude), who works WITH HER in raising those kids. Roger Simon at PamamasMedia has twin grandchildren (little girls), brought into this world by his gay son and his partner: and Roger is teary eyed, looking at his grandchildren. That is what it is all about, my friends: children, raised in 2 parent homes, and grandchildren.
I have had problems with this gay marriage thing, and a lot of sympathy with the freedom of religion aspect… that is, if a church doesn’t want to marry a same-sex couple, then so be it. However, I have met heterosexual couples, married in churches, who are clear that they do not intend to have children. Well, they shouldn’t have been married in a church or a synagogue, either, not one that looks to the future, and the children that we want to live in it.
So, I’ve come down to this: it is about the children, people. And that is all that should matter.
It’s been 2 days, sf. Give it 2 months
Agreed. I very interested to se how this developes. Palin is a grand money wrench thrown into the system. There are things I like about her, and things I don’t. Her disdain for towing the party line in favor of balancing the budget very much appeals to me instinctively. Had GW Bush had ANY of that gumption, he might have vetoed a few of the multitude of egregious spending bills that came across his desk and tainted the Republican image of smaller, cost efficient government for decades to come. But I don’t think Palin is going to appeal to the liberal Hillary voters, who I suspect, didn’t buy McCain as an all out true conservative for the same reason many conservatives didn’t buy McCain as an all out true conservative. Palin makes the McCain choice a heck of a lot more scary to them.
Every time a governor runs for national office, we hear the same criticism — no foreign policy experience. That didn’t stop Ronald Reagan from defeating the Soviet Union and winning the Cold War.
Conservatives need to stop parroting Obama talking points.
On the gay marriage topic, I’m of the oddball “Freedom of Religion + Separation of Church & State” view. I.e., if Church A doesn’t want to perform marriage rites over a set of consenting adults – well, fine and dandy. In that instance, let Church B down the street that’s perfectly willing (or the local Justice of the Peace, with substantially less discretion) perform the ceremony.
I don’t require a candidate to jump up’n’down crying out “LGBT IS WONDROUS! OVERTHROW THE PATRIARCHAL HETERODOXY!” – I can even be ok with a candidate that has deep and troubling issues with LGBT but can see past them to follow the Constitution and the appropriate sets of statutes. It’d be *nice* to have a bit of icing like “equality before the law, if we have a shred of intellectual honesty, REQUIRES that government treat LGBT marriage and military service precisely as it treats heterosexual marriage and military service”.
But I don’t see that coming from either major party in the next 4 years, and quite possibly not in the next ten to twenty.
Palin rather tidily harvests the “purely woman” vote (i.e., “we don’t care about anything beyond seeing the first female to take VP and, quite possibly, the Presidency”).
Palin brings the Pro-Second-Amendment folks who have largely viewed McCain with skepticism to active scorn. She brings the Evangelical vote (though many of us wish they were not necessary), she brings charisma, and she brings a reputation of successful reform.
And it won’t take but a week or two of harsh and bitter attacks from the left on a beautiful woman who’s managed to integrate a successful political career with her roles as wife and mother of five (I’m surprised she isn’t wearing a red cape with a big blue “S” on her chest…) to provoke a rather harsh reaction from many women.
As an example, the screed I read on (I believe) KOS suggesting that Palin’s latest child is actually her daughters, and that Palin is “covering it up”.
As for the “trooper thing”? I’d refer folks to http://www.adn.com/politics/story/476430.html for a beginning on trying to understand that mess, but at this point, I certainly can’t blame Palin for actions she took before she was elected governor (as such actions were perfectly legitimate).
To me, it looks an awful lot like that the absolute kindest view of Wooten I can summon is that he is a dangerous loose cannon, and that part o the *job* of a Governor is to attempt to remove such risks from positions where they can harm others.
On the whole, Palin makes it less difficult for me to hold my nose and vote for McCain – as I absolutely cannot support and must actively oppose anything oozing from the Chicago Machine taking national office.
GC
Are you sure about that? And what about the other states Comrade Obama spake into existence?
And Joe Bigot was selected because…..? Oh yeah. We need to speak French with an Indian accent when we order our doughnuts (Kolaches for Pete) so as not to embarrass Comrade Obama.
If it were not so, the liberals wouldn’t be running around screaming “racist!” at everybody who won’t vote for him. What’s more, please tell us in your own words what sort of qualifications Comrade Obama has? I’ll be damned if I can figure it out.
Brilliant. You figured it out. Also:
– Energy production. Alaska produces 20% of America’s energy.
– Only State to share a border with Russia.
– Only State, other than Florida, to border a U.S. adversary.
And yet Obama, with LESS experience than Palin, is the Democrats’ PRESIDENTIAL pick. Take a moment to imagine that. – Also, you’re just wrong… Palin has a record of real change, real hope, real reform. That’s what McCain wanted.
Exactly.
As one not completely won over by either candidate, Obama DOES have a law degree. Surely he must have studied the constitution in greater detail than McCain or Palin.
All candidates have a desire to achieve the esteemed office they seek, though. All love their country, and all definitely have differing ideas as to how they will make ALL Americans they have a stake in our country’s future.
So did Bill Clinton. Did it keep him from committing perjury?
And remember, whether from the perspective of a supporter or an opponent: George W. Bush is a Harvard MBA, and got better grades at Yale than John Kerry.
11: Is the only exercise you get jumping to conclusions and making false assumptions? Cause you’re starting off you’re post doing it yet again. I offered some fairly cogent points about the topic (even researching population numbers) yet you veer completely off topic to make a ludicrous comment. Is it because you have no actual thoughtful response to my post?
Can I ask by what sort of senses you possess that you make these statements about me personally as if you know me? You don’t. It seems however very easy for you (and a few others here) to throw out random statements about people you don’t know (of course 99.999999% of them attacks) to feed your personal agenda. pretty fascist as far as I can see.
24: Oh dear, here we go again. I’ve said it before: Let’s just start asking all elected officials if they’ve engaged in extra-marital affairs and then we can use their answer as the litmus test on how they perform their duties in office. I personally would like to see how the 2 Bush presidents responds to those queries. talk about veering off topic.
Take away his skin color, and Obama is a doctrinaire left-liberal, most left-wing member of the senate (socialist Bernie Sanders is actually to the right of Obama in his voting record) with dogmatic positions on raising taxes, redistributing wealth, increasing government regulation, socialized medicine, anti-capitalism, activist judges, and a view of America as nothing special.
The Democrat primary season began with several such people, all of whom more or less ideologically identical. All of whom were far more experienced than the junior senator from Illinois, who had worked in the senate for all of 143 days before deciding to run for president. If he were white, he would have been laughed off the stage.
Apart from the melanin content of his epidermis, there really is nothing special about Obama.
JUST SAY NOBAMA !!!
Oh stop whining Democrats … for the past year, you’ve been trying every trick in the book to shove an inexperienced, empty suit, Barack Hussein Obama, down the throats of Americans. Sure, maybe you sweetened the bad taste by adding pretty speeches, big swooning crowds, and fireworks … but, you still tried to shove him down our throats, at every opportunity. Democrats, it was a lot easier to highjack the primary election than it’s going to be with the general election. Looks like America is going to elect McCain/Palin for President and V.P.. And, that means: No Wright, no Farrakahn, no Ayers, no Rezko, no mean Michelle, and, NOBAMA !!!
Kevin at #26 – Bizarre. Who even mentioned extramarital affairs? Who was talking about that? I know I wasn’t. As usual, you’re out there talking with the voices in your head, I guess.
The left is all atwitter over Palin because she lacks the (whatever) to be President. Therefore, she should not be Vice President.
John McCain has given us the task of examining our souls about “who†is qualified to be President.
Like Obama, Palin lacks foreign policy and national security background. Ditto: John Edwards, Bill Clinton, Michael DuKakis, Geraldine Ferraro, and Jimmy Carter. Carter and Clinton became President and, apparently, ignored the advice of their “qualified†foreign policy and national security background qualified vice presidents.
So, we have Obama who has linked himself to Joe Biden to gain the “gravitas†in foreign policy and national security. And we have Palin who can be a quick study in a McCain presidency where foreign policy and national security are great strengths. Is there any reliable evidence that Palin is not a “quick study†or that McCain will croak before she can get her homework done?
Obama and Palin may well have been “chosen primarily as a political stunt to drive wedges and manufacture excitement.†Certainly, Obama would not be anywhere on the national scene had he been born white. Palin would likely be a mere “curiosity†if the governor was Todd Palin who has a wife and five kids. Would Governor Todd Palin been nominated and accepted as a quick study on foreign policy and national security? Doubtful.
Politics is not too distant from Hollywood. Sound bites, snap shots, posturing, tenacity, even role playing. Obama is playing the Messiah. Biden is the wise Senate advisor. McCain is the maverick with fierce determination to fight through all comers to get his programs in place. Palin is the female American Gladiator, the triathlon mom, the Mrs. Smith goes to Washington. But Obama is seen as a political stunt and Palin is feared as being the real thing. Big difference.
So, we must get in touch with ourselves. What, in fact, is an “irresponsible choice†when we go into the voting booth? After all, it is all a spectator sport up to this point. The cards have been dealt and the hand is in play.
Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin? I would vote for the McCain/Palin or Palin/McCain ticket over Obama/Biden or Biden/Obama. In the democrat ticket, I know all too well what I am in for.
Because, Kevin, your “facts”, such as you call them, vanish into thin air when you are challenged. Point out, for instance, that Palin fought and ended major corruption in her own party, while Obama actively participated in it, and all of a sudden, you don’t care about corruption; it’s something else. Point out that Alaska is huge in terms of geography, challenge, and energy production, and suddenly you don’t care. The only consistency in your argument is that the black Obama is always right, regardless of how much you have to contradict yourself in the process.
I left a comment over for Amy; turns out Lyda Green, the Republican President of the Alaska Senate, isn’t exactly a disinterested party. She’s feuded with Palin for years, just decided not to run for office again after finding out that a Palin supporter who is would destroy her at the polls, and….is currently enmeshed in the VECO scandal that is taking down Ted Stevens. In short, the only Republicans whining about Palin in Alaska are the ones she’s outed as corrupt and hounded out of office.
Kevin, until you can denounce illegal activity as you’ve been challenged to do, I don’t find your arguements worth the electrons they’re written on.
You swoop, squat, squawk and fly away before your ‘posts’ have time to cool.
Shame, because you seem clean and articulate, as your VP candidate would say.
W did get an MBA…And I still remember an article in Der Spiegel in which he asked the leader of Brazil if they had black people. Still not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
The comment regarding the law degree was simply meant to denote an knowledge of how government works. Whether the knowledge is used for ALL Americans or not is the question.
I call bullsh*t. Time for you to put up a reference.
As you wish.
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,196865,00.html
My father was a commissioned officer in the US Army. I grew up in Germany, and remain fluent in the language.
Snopes also BS on this. The only source for this is one Bush-hating German reporter, who heard the story third hand, months after Bush allegedly made the remark.
Um…since there is no Konjunktiv I used in the text, there is no indirect speech. It is considered directly quoted per German grammatical rules.
That’s irrelevant. No one will confirm that Bush said it, there’s no direct sourcing on the story, and the White House says the report is complete rubbish.
But, hey, don’t let that stop you from reporting urban legends as fact. Might interfere with your BDS.
Thanks, V the K. That’s quite polite of you. 🙂 High marks from Emily Post, I presume?
Okay, so the article may have been a blunder on my part. To get back to the main topic, what will any of the candidates do to make sure the government doesn’t [continue] to intrude in people’s lives because of sexual orientation, and with the intent of legislating morality. Clearly, not all LGBT-identified persons are cruising public places for sex. Some of us have families, or woul dlike to have families, and would prefer our children not be “penalized” for us being who we are.
It seems that sometimes gets lost.
Where I was headed. Thanks, V.
Bush-haters enjoy misinterpreting Bush’s remarks… and then spreading *their* error “from friend to friend, as [if] the knowledge proves the teller wise.” (Tolkien, _The Silmarillion_) Also known as urban legends. I’ve seen it in action before. And I speak German too, and have lived in Germany before and have no doubt that a left-wing reporter who works for _Der Spiegel_ is capable of it. And situations where multiple languages and translators are present would be particularly prone to it. Bottom line: James, you got nothing but your own schadenfreude, here. Snopes’ analysis is more believable than yours.
Can you give us an example of what intrusion you mean? I know sodomy laws were voided around 2003 or so. Are government cameras installed in your bedroom, nonetheless? (Mine seems to be free, but I need to make another sweep.)
what will any of the candidates do to make sure the government doesn’t [continue] to intrude in people’s lives because of sexual orientation
Jeez, what a drama queen. Has the Bushitler regime been sending spies into your favorite bars and making lists of all the sodomites?
Never mind. I figured out where the libs are going with this.
30: Whoops, that was supposed to be a response to a different topic elsewhere.
32: “the black Obama”?? jeez, what is your problem?
I believe that this choice was a mistake for McCain. His arguments over experience are washed away with this choice. Being the governor of a “major state” as some may have called it is ridiculous. The lowest population per square mile that has been the US oil producer for the past 50 years which supplies their budget with more then enough money does not mean she has governed a “major state.” Additionally, I need to hit on her stance as a mother. With a newborn, she needs to spend more time at home with her child and the 4 other children she has. It is irresponsible to the family to practically runaway from the child to run for VP. Her priorities were in the wrong place.
Gay marriage is not only not recognized in my state, but banned per constitutional amendment as of 2004, even when there was no move made by anyone to have gay marriage legally recognized.
An individual can be legally fired in my state for sexual orientation. It has just happened based on gender identity (a transgendered employee told her employer she was transitioning, and she was dismissed because it was felt it would make other workers uncomfortable). The decision is currently supported through state law.
I can think of no greater intrusion on the part of government. You can be sarcastic if you wish, but could you offer suggestions as well?
I can think of few greater intrusions than the government telling private employers who they may hire and fire, or whom landlords may or may not rent to, or dictate the membership policies of private clubs and organizations. And yet that level of government intrusion and micromanagement is eagerly embraced by the same types who whine that what they do in their bedrooms is none of the government’s business.
See, James, it’s not government “intrusion” that bothers you, it’s government not intruding the way you want them to, to enforce your values on other people whether they like it or not.
Sorry, but that’s not a government intrusion. intrude: v. come into a place or situation where one is unwelcome or uninvited
Your real complaint here, James, is that the government is NOT intruding. You think the government should intrude on your behalf, in a particular way. And it is failing to.
I’ve been advocating for gay marriage for close to 15 years, James, so please let me explain a few things. A State marriage license creates a new legal entity – a fictive third party, “the marriage” – with interests of its own, and with the ability to compel fourth and fifth parties (other people and institutions) to change certain of their behaviors toward you. In other words: By *granting* the license, the State intrudes on the lives of others. Not by failing to grant it.
Now, that intrusion may be legitimate. Or, at any rate, it may be something the People want, and have voted or legislated in. God knows I favor extending that intrusion – that is, the State granting marriage licenses – to deserving gay and lesbian couples.
But please note lack of a marriage license does not stop you and your partner from making a personal commitment to each other, or from making health and legal arrangements reflecting that commitment. If you and your partner truly loved each other, you would; whether or not your State government is going to grant you a license.
Again, that’s not government intrusion. That’s *lack* of government intrusion – lack of a particular government intrusion on your behalf, that you believe is legitimate and desirable.
You mean, examples of what would be government intrusion? Already have. Just about anything government does is an intrusion on what would exist, if they didn’t. Some government intrusions are legitimate and desirable: say, criminal justice; national defense; controlling a rioting crowd; enforcement of contracts and tort claims; the minimum of taxation needed to pay for the preceding. Other government intrusions are illegitimate and undesirable: say, social engineering through re-distributive taxation; or the enforcement of slavery; or criminalizing gay sex and monitoring people’s bedrooms for enforcement of that.
Basically, the legitimate intrusions have to do with protecting individual natural rights to life, liberty and property; while the illegitimate intrusions are (in themselves) violations of individual rights to life, liberty and/or property.
Stay tuned, I have a detailed answer in moderation. GPW may not get to it until tomorrow.
So a landlord should be able to not rent to hispanics even if the references would be impeccable and the credit good? Employers should hire based on sexual orientation in addition to qualifiecations rather than letting the same criteria apply to all?
Putting yourself in the shoes of a person living in an area where employment opportunities might not be as numerous in other areas, and being closeted means the difference between food and shelter and none at all, what would you suggest?
I apprciate that we have differing points of view, but rather that criticism, I’d like to hear suggestions as to how to achieve the same quality of life as an openly gay individual, who pays taxes, is a proud American, the same as a straight counterpart.
The market solves those problems with great efficiency. People may be black or white, or gay or straight, but all money is the same. There will always be unfairness, and there will always be bigots. But people are plenty capable of working these things out for themselves without huge expensive bureaucracies, or lawsuits that take money and resources out of the economy. And suffering the occasional injustice is, IMHO, the lesser of evils compared with government micromanagement of everyone’s life.
And I already am wearing those shoes. I don’t particularly like the area where I live, but it’s good for my career. And at some point, I’ll have the experience and credibility to take my skills to a part of the country I like better. I’m not going to demand that the government create a job for me somewhere where I’d rather be living. Life is about choices, and most choices involve compromises. Grown-ups accept this.
52. What people have been doing for centuries… move.
Oh, as to a state’s passing an ammendment ‘even though no one has tried to have it recognized’ Funny how a federal system works. Ohio passed their DOM act, and, when the courts showed the ability, and the willingness, to strike down DOMActs in other states, the people decided to escelate it to an ammendment to take it away from the courts.
OHio’s a pretty easy state to get ammendments on the ballot. So when society finds a compromise, it can be removed.
Oh, to look at it another way, why would a state in the 1850’s move to ban slavery? After all, it was legal in other states…
The market solves those problems with great efficiency is a lie.
It depends how far you want to take it. In my own view, yes. BUT… The point is, if the government steps in and says “Landlord, you must do X”, un-invited by the landlord… That is some type of intrusion. We can then debate if it is a legitimate intrusion (needed to protect actual rights) or an illegitimate (something that violates someone else’s rights)… whether it was legislated democratically… etc.
My company offers insurance for same sex partners as do many other companies. There’s no law that requires it. Therefore, the market DOES solve that “problem”.
In descending order of importance:
1) STOP WHINING. Stop pretending you don’t really, already have “the same quality of life”. Since 2003 (suspension of sodomy laws), we have it. Don’t pretend otherwise; it only makes you a negative whiner and that definitely undermines your quality of life.
2) If you have (and are yourself) a worthy partner, make a commitment to each other.
3) If you and your partner are committed, make whatever legal arrangements you need. Wills, Advance Health Care Directive, Living Trust, etc. There are lots of good legal self-help books out there… some specially for gays.
4) If gay marriage is important to you, work for it in your State. And/or, consider moving to a State that has it.
56. You make several good points as to how to persude possible employers to make more equitable hiring practices. Because I’m also black, I find myself, due to my upbringing, viewing the prospect of unfair hiring practices with the same eyes and heart of a person who would not want his employment (or lack thereof) based on race. That employers have taken it upon themselves to implement non-discrimination policies is a testament to the progress made. That government, even the government itself, would allow companies to hire based on any aspect other than abilities seems inherently un-American to me, though I do, personally, abhore affirmative action programs.
You may have slipped on one shoe…In my case, moving would mean leaving my partner, which I have no intention of doing. His father is ailing, and for his own peace of mind, he is committed to being there for him until then end. After that, relocation would be a possibility. I did make a great effort to select an employer with a good reputation with regard to equality, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, or anything else. That heterosexuals don’t necessarily have to worry about that (unless it is of personal interest) indicates an imbalance of sorts. The question then becomes, did I make a choice of compromise, or was the choice made for me by the state in which I live?
61. Thank you for answering my question as asked, albeit, with a nice hint of sarcasm.
1) On July 25 I had the experience of excluding my partner’s testimony in my bodily injury case because the opposing attorney said she would have to question him about our relationship as he’d have a possible financial stake in the outcome of my case (though we can’t legally marry and have no joint banking accounts). The state in which I reside is socially conservative with regard to LGBT issues, and has quite the reputation (a little case of Bowers v. Hardwick, which was overturned finally in 2003 in the Texas case). That is a fact of life here.
2) We have made a commitment to each other. Mom was especially supportive since she is leary that my sister will ever marry, and mom really wants grandkids 🙂
3) Believe it or not, this has actually already been taken care of. When it became apparent that we both wanted to spend our lives together, I proactively did the necessary research.
4) Having spent most of my life on the move, relocation isn’t an issue for me personally. But, please note the second paragraph in my comment in 62.
I do actually work in support of gay marriage in my state. Because I think the issue transcends party affiliation, I work in a non-partisan group rather than HRC to raise LGBT support.
64. Good to hear James.
Which is, of course, more than a hint of sarcasm.
Stop the whining, James. Stop playing victim cards. You’re doing it right in front of us – for example, with the constant references to others’ sarcasm, whether that be imagined or real, inappropriate or appropriate. And, you apparently do it in the rest of your life.
On your point (1) above – So let yourself be questioned about your relationship. Big deal. Or, if it really is a big deal, then move to a State that suits you better. Or, if you can’t because you are committed to your partner and he is committed to taking care of Dad: Then go with that. Life is all choices and tradeoffs. EVERYBODY makes them. Grow a pair. The whining and self-pity are what undermines your quality of life.
You know, we’re all just very, very lucky to be here. Alive. And, in America. Click here for a book that may provide some needed perspective.
66. It is my personal choice to always take the high road, and to attempt to address all persons with respect and dignity. Sarcastic comments seem to run contrary to that belief, so I shall simply accept that my choice is not your own. 🙂
It is not my intention to sound like a victim or that I pity myself. I actually abhore self-pity, am very assertive in life and am proud that we have a system of government that allows our voices to be heard. My examples were meant to illustrate that every situation is different, and that your stance seems to be quite rigid in that regard.
I find it somewhat offensive that you’d use the overturning of sodomy laws as evidence that I have a good quality of life. I should hope you don’t you mean that my quality of life is dictated by my ability to privately “bumsen”?
I thank you for the reading recommendation. I’ve already found inspiration in the teachings of Christ, and in the example of such figures as MLK and Niemoeller. 🙂
Except you didn’t. You employed sarcasm at #63. As I accurately quoted at #66. Or does it not count, if you’re doing it? 😉
Excellent, then. Keep it up.
Once more, you’re a bit easily offended. But, in a spirit of goodwill, I shall make a last attempt at explanation.
The government isn’t intruding on you. That is what we were discussing. The last time the government intruded on gay people, was when some states still had sodomy laws in effect. And that intrusion has been suspended or abolished. So there is nothing the government is doing to intrude on you, James, that puts you at any disadvantage with respect to your straight counterparts.
There may be some intrusions on your behalf that you want the government to make on other people. Same with me – for example, my longtime support for gay marriage. But the fact that the government fails to make that intrusion on my behalf, in no way limits my quality of life. I mean… unless I should want to play victim about it.
One last thought:
Thank you. Functionally, you have used ‘rigid’ as an equivalent to ‘consistent’ or ‘principled’ – i.e., those words would function as well, in your sentence – and I take that as a high compliment. I always strive to be principled.
I’m more of a literal communicator; my comment was not at all meant to be sarcastic. My attempt at taking the high road stands.
As for the subject of government intrusion versus a lack thereof, I suppose I shall continue to respectfully disagree, with the exception of our shared stance on gay marriage.
70. I think your stance would be consistent or principled if it accounted for the realities all Americans who identify as LGBT persons face. The idea of relocating to, say, the West Coast, where LGBT persons seem to have a great deal of support, would seem no better to me than fleeing. It would make my life easier, but would do nothing to help that little gay kid in the backwoods of N. GA.
I keep thinking of a little line the priest always mentioned. Something about the very least you do for your bretheren…
Happy Labor Day to all…I’ve got a blackberry cobbler to bake and a little prayer to say for my father. He’s 1 month into a 2-year assignment in Afghanistan. 🙂
I hope the cobbler was delicious and the prayer was well-received. I would also like to comment that James is by far the most civil and … pardon the word … articulate dissenter that’s ever shown up on this blog.
And yet, it was. Look, I really don’t mind. It’s OK.
…Because #35 equally *isn’t* (sarcasm again – oopsie!) an instance of your trying to propagate a ‘delightfully’ malicious legend.
So now your choice is about helping the little gay kids of the backwoods? Cool. I mean, whatever. As I said, life is all choices and tradeoffs – for everybody. America, for all its imperfections, is still THE country offering you and all its citizens the best opportunities.
V, I would have said Pat was, hands down. Or others, whose exact handles I can’t remember. Currently I’m perceiving the gap between James’ holier-than-thou pretenses on the one hand, and the fairly standard Left-victim / BDS / etc. thrust of his arguments on the other. But, if you disagree, I’ll step aside so you can interact with him.
74. I’ll be direct: I apologize for my sarcastic comments. They weren’t not meant to be that way, and I should have been clearer in that apology.
Likewise, I apologize for any language I used that would dennote a holier-than-thou pretense or victim-like attitude. I would say that I’m hardly a victim. I have a great appreciation for our system of government, and have always pro-actively participated in it on a variety of issues, including LGBT ones.
I was convsersing with my partner last night, and I’ve come to one realization. If it were just the two of us, living our lives as a plain ole couple (doing the gardening, caring for our home, climbing the corporate ladder), I most likely wouldn’t make a fuss with regard to equality. I’d probably keep writing to my representatives, lobbying in a polite and civil manner against legislation targeted against members of the community. But, now that we’re seriously discussing becoming parents, with both my parents’ support and that of all of our straight friends, I feel more aware of issues we will face as a couple, and how our child may be treated. We’ll continue to fight in a civil manner for what we think is right, and history tells that progress has been made. Every once in a while, in looking at the road that lies ahead, it is frustrating to think that what we and others feel is just and fair contradicts what others themselves believe.
73. Thank you. I’m still working to tweak the recipe, though mom gave it rave reviews before heading back to the island to start the school year.
I’m sure the prayer was well-received. I’m hopeful my dad will have an easier/safer time there than he did in Baghdad.
Oh and just to reiterate, my best friend throughout College has been a conservative for the majority of the time I’ve known him, he voted for Bush in 2004. And even though now he considers himself a liberal and supports Obama, I had nothing to do with his change in attitudes, nor did I ever pressure him to change, as I love him as much today as I did the day I met him, regardless of his beliefs. I just want to reiterate that I have no problems with gay conservatives, but I DO have a problem with Sarah Palin as an individual. Thank you and God Bless.