Private Matters, Public Consequences

"We have to take into consideration that this is a private family matter, and the family was hoping it would remain a private matter. ... I'd just hope that the private family matters would remain just that." - Tucker Bounds, McCain campaign spokescritter on PBS, 9/02/08

"And government is certainly not the church" - Michelle Bachmann (R-MN), Republican National Convention speech, 9/02/08

"We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby ..." - press statement by Sarah and Todd Palin, 9/01/08 (via)

I'm glad that Republicans are finally, kicking and screaming all the way, coming around to a feminist point of view. It's glacial, but you can see the cracks around the edges in the way they defend themselves from attacks like the agreement of former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan that Palin's not the most experienced choice and that the selection decision was based on "bullsh*t".

While the Republicans have tried to obscure the truth, these are all feminist and pro-choice positions: That medical and parenting decisions should be made by individuals and their doctors. That the government should not act as a church, making illegal all that is held by some to be immoral. That teenage women, like all women, should have the right to decide whether to become parents, whatever their choice may be. That they should be supported in those decisions, by their families and the larger community, rather than shamed, hidden away or shunned.

Not least, Republicans like corrupt serial adulterer Rudy Giuliani can say that Sarah Palin is being attacked because she's a parent all they want. They can suggest that Democrats and feminists look down on her because she's a mother of five. But what more needs to be said in response to that than, 'Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House.' The idea that a mother of five can be qualified for a tough job in public life is one that we've been championing for a long time.

So as I mentioned, and as irritating as the zealotry of the newly converted always is, I'm glad to see that they're starting to come around.

Though in typical Republican fashion, they make a distinction between their own private family matters and everyone else's. When it comes right down to it, they don't trust you, or your kids. They'd rather make the private family matters of everyone else a choice for the government to make in advance, based on an extremist and narrow interpretation of Christianity that fails to represent the diversity of America's religious communities.

And then they use their political stances on these private matters as a smokescreen for the disasters that they've visited on this country. They use belief checklists as a substitute for merit in public servants and people have died for it. At the last, the only response the have is, 'Look! Babies!' So I think Mark Twain said it best when he said,

"The words are there, my dear, but the music is wanting."

Now senior Republicans, in addition to their recent mass feminist conversion, even profess to Christianity. They say they follow the teachings of Jesus, whose words offer great compassion for people who've made imperfect decisions. They use their claim to faith in Jesus as de facto evidence for how much family means to them in both public and private life. So it'd be nice if, now and again, Republican politicians would act like they'd read Jesus' words in the book of Matthew at least once.

Matthew 5:46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? (NASB: Lockman)[via]

Everyone tries to take care of their own F.B.I.: friends, brothers and in-laws. It's the expected norm in every community, everywhere in the world. There's even a word, nepotism, for using that as your motivating philosophy. Yet both feminism and Christianity have bigger sights for their adherents.

"Heavy Burdens and Grievous to Be Borne"

Jesus, George W. Bush's favorite philosopher and sometime Republican talisman, had a lot to say about how the faithful should act towards people who don't love us and aren't our brothers. And though he never mentioned abortion even once, he also detailed his expectations for how people in positions of authority should act towards those they had power over.

(KJV) Matthew 23:4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devourwidows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.

23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.

But enough about John McCain. For a moment.

Republicans claim that Sarah Palin is being attacked as a mom, and that her daughter Bristol is being attacked for deciding to be one. That's wrong and anyone would fight back. Where do they stand when other mothers face hardships?

Sarah Palin's family cleared over $200,000 in income last year, so her daughters don't have to be worried about their financial security if they get caught in one of life's little ups or downs. But she thought other people's kids should get the state budget balanced on their backs.

Palin cut state funding for supporting teenage moms, just as John McCain fought federal funding for teen pregnancy prevention. For families that know how many houses they have, and whose incomes hit six figures, maybe that's not such a concern. Though when single moms end up as, have such high poverty rates and low standards of living, we might well ask where their mercy is for teens whose families can't so readily help them and whose partners aren't so supportive?

Then last night, Palin talked about how Americans were hurting from high fuel costs, something that everyone knows affects lower income households the worst. She got the whole convention mocking and jeering against the idea of taxing businesses to help with this burden, even though the oil industry has been making world record profits. But this is what she did for Alaskans:

... Over the opposition of oil companies, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Alaska's Legislature last year approved a major increase in taxes on the oil industry -- a step that has generated stunning new wealth for the state as oil prices soared.

... Alaska collected an estimated $6 billion from the new tax during the fiscal year that ended June 30, according to the Alaska Oil and Gas Association. That helped push the state's total oil revenue -- from new and existing taxes, as well as royalties -- to more than $10 billion, double the amount received last year.

...Palin's administration last week gained legislative approval for a special $1,200 payment to every Alaskan to help cope with gas prices, which are among the highest in the country.

That check will come on top of the annual dividend of about $2,000 that each resident could receive this year from an oil-wealth savings account. ...

Alaska is one of the few states in the country where a blue collar family can still be comfortable to well-off. Palin knows Alaskans, and I don't doubt she cares about them. In fact, she cares about them so much that she and her husband seem to think Alaska should secede from the Union. That's the view of the Alaskan Independence Party, whose annual convention she addressed. The AIP's founder was killed in a "plastic explosives sale gone bad;" and perhaps he was trying to start some sort of war of western secession, to prevent Alaskans having to put up with the rest of us.

So I don't doubt that Palin cares about Alaska and puts Alaska first. Maybe she thinks that the oil companies only have enough windfall profits to help out that one state, and that's why she'd gladly cheerlead a hall of Republicans in mocking the idea that taxing them would help. She's just trying to put people off the scent of Alaska's private honeypot.

Though that isn't going to help the families who're losing their jobs at a plant in Ohio because of John McCain's campaign manager. If she wants those people to trust that her governing philosophy is based on more than nepotism, maybe she and McCain should suggest the same policies to help families in Ohio that she used to help families in Alaska.

Real Choices

Some people look at the strawman image of feminism and wonder why, if feminists and choice advocates really want to make social progress, they don't
call for more support for parents so that no one would ever have to choose to terminate a pregnancy because they couldn't afford a child.

That's an interesting question and a good line of thinking. Though the answer to that question is that feminists in general, and the pro-choice movement in particular, have been in favor of exactly that approach for a very long time. So yeah, it sounds like a great idea.

How about getting families some good quality, guaranteed healthcare so they don't have to worry that medical expenses from accidents or chronic illness will leave them destitute?

Medical bills cause half of US bankruptcies, even hitting those who are insured, but with substandard plans. Lack of guaranteed coverage can keep people in jobs they hate, can affect private decisions about marriage and divorce, can cost people their homes and, definitely, can affect whether they think they can support a new child. For many teens, the situation is even worse, as they're far less likely to have access to prenatal care.

It's as terrible when would-be parents decide that they can't care for a much wanted addition to their family as it is when people who don't want to be parents are forced into it against their will.

So where does the Republican ticket stand on healthcare?

Palin didn't mention rising healthcare costs, or anything to do with health, in her address to the RNC last night. But as of 2006, healthcare consumed sixteen percent of the US GDP. It was big news last year when employers were told only to expect single-digit cost increases in health premiums, so increases that were going up at a slower rate than before, but still outpacing both inflation and economic growth. The news this year is about the same: costs are still rising, still outpacing inflation and earnings, but not too fast compared to increases in other years. Great.

McCain thought that Bush was right to veto expanding children's healthcare to cover more middle class families.

Palin favors radical deregulation of the healthcare industry as a solution, even where it's likely to raise costs.

They both want to let The Market sort it out. They also both have government-funded healthcare for themselves and their family members, but they'd never suggest it for the rest of us. I guess we aren't important enough to them.

And when it comes to that decision on whether or not to be a parent ... not only does the Republican ticket oppose comprehensive sex education for teens, not only does McCain want to see Roe v Wade overturned, not only does Sarah Palin oppose abortion for rape and incest victims, but McCain has voted against requiring health insurers to cover birth control.

I'm not sure that many families on the brink can afford that sort of government control in one of the most personal and important decisions anyone can make. Children not only require healthcare, food, clothing and shelter, but the time and attention of their parents. All these come at great cost to the typical family.

Considering how many women terminate pregnancies because they don't think they could provide adequate care to a child, who are John McCain and Sarah Palin, with their wealthy, supportive families to countermand their decisions? Who are they to say that they know better than us how we should live our lives?


Matthew 25:34 Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.' 37 Then the righteous 16 will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' 40 And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.'

41 Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.' 44 Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?' 45 He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.'

Jesus didn't ask the faithful to give good speeches. He didn't ask of them that they should be from small towns, or some certain geographic region. He asked that they do something real, something material, to lighten the loads of their fellow travelers in this life.

But Republicans are the ones who most routinely invoke Him. Usually right before talking spitefully about people they don't know, whom, it almost goes without saying, they distrust. The faith of these Republican politicians is too often an identity card that, instead of informing their private spirituality, tells them which other people they need to be nice to and which they can screw over with impunity.

Last night, I saw a lot spite. A lot of nepotism. Not a lot of mercy for strangers.

Last night, I heard a lot of rote, feminist talking points. I didn't hear anything that might help lift up more women and their families. And among the pseudo-empowerment rhetoric, I heard nothing that would really help this current generation of young women better take their lives in their own hands.

It's still all words and no music.

Update [2008-9-4 8:52:51 by Natasha Chart]: Date correction at top.

Tags: feminism, John McCain, RNC08, Sarah Palin (all tags)



Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

My letter to a friend who left me a message that she was less than happy with Palin and her speech:

Dearest Mary,

I hope and pray that your voice is the voice of middle america and not just the voice of an intelligent well-reasoned woman living in  nyc. The hypocrisy kills me.  We struggle as working parents to do right by our children and give them the information they need to live lives that are safe, healthy and productive.  It is a juggling act.  We need all the help and tools we can get (like sex ed in school).  Most people, liberals included, would acknowledge that the model of having a full time parent at home is preferable to having both parents working.  We make choices and compromises.  Do you mean to tell me that now premarital sex is okay with the lunatics in that convention hall?  Does it dawn on any of them that the choices that this particular mother made in having a fifth child while campaigning for office and then working as a governor had some bearing on her daughter getting pregnant?  Does it dawn on any of them that her choice to run for the vp, at this time, is not in her children's interest?

My feeling was that the woman's performance was pretty much in line with my expectations but trusted bloggers that I read seem to have been wowed by her speech with one calling it a grand slam.  I couldn't sleep after the speech.  I keep thinking of the questions I would like her to answer especially her position on sex ed.  Again, the hypocrisy.  The standard approach with us and most practical parents is to encourage our children to delay sexual activity as long as possible but to make sure they have the info they need when they do become sexually active.  I'm sorry, Bristol's pregnancy represents a failure and Palin deserves at least some blame for that failure.  Yet the people in the hall are jumping up and down like she is some kind of freakin' hero.  I want to barf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I had zero expectation that Palin would be an eyes-stuck-in-the-headlights Qualye.  The speech gave her the opportunity to present herself in the best possible light in a controlled setting before an enthusiastic home crowd.  In the future, she will not have that same degree of control in presenting herself and in framing the issues.

I think that there is a reasonable chance that our outrage at her and with Republican hypocrisy will be shared by others who are on the fence about this election. Her speech reminds me of something that happens during trials.  You put in your case and you are convinced that it went well.  Then your opponent goes and no matter how well your case went in you have doubts and there is a sense of deflation.  But that is just the nature of the contest.  When the jury thinks about all this, I think they will have problems with her.  And if not... maybe the National Enquirer will help us.  Supposedly they will soon be breaking a story about Palin having an extra-marital affair.  Hmmm...



by citizen 2008-09-04 05:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

I don't think it's appropriate to publicly second-guess her parenting choices and I'm glad she's not ashamed of her daughter. That's pretty much all I have to say about that.

And I really hope we've had done with The Enquirer as a breaker of real news for the year. Honestly, it's as bad as having to agree with Palin's idol, Pat Buchanan, on something. You can imagine how irritated I was to have to admit that he was one of the few pundits who got it right on Iraq, saying that it was a bad idea.

by Natasha Chart 2008-09-04 05:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

I have to assume that Palin, as an evangelical, is either opposed to sex education in school or argues that sex education in school be limited to teaching abstinence only and that she is opposed to premarital sex.  Bristol's pregnancy legitimately raises the issue of sex education.

The religious right is more than happy to tell the rest of us how we should live our lives and how our values are deficient by their standards.  Palin was selected in large part because of her appeal to the religious right.  She talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk.  No sane person would question Palin's standing by her daughter.  But we are entitled to examine the gap between Palin's stated values and the reality of her inability to live those values and inculcate those values in her daughter.  Palin is not a hockey mom.  She is the governor of Alaska and I think it is apparent that on some level her daughter paid a price for her mom's absence.  The idea that all is well merely because the pregnancy wasn't terminated is insulting to the struggle of real hockey moms and dads to be there for their children.

I suspect I am older than you.  My and wife and I are happily married and have three teen-aged children who are a blessing and credit to us.  You cannot imagine the anger that I have accrued over the last 8 years of these people on the right who are so quick in their criticism and so long in their forgiveness except of course when it comes to themselves.

by citizen 2008-09-04 06:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

You probably are older than me, but perhaps not by as much as you suspect. That's neither here nor there.

It's unseemly to me to question other people's decisions about how they balance their career and their family and assume that everything their kids do that's less than ideal is their fault. I certainly didn't turn out the way my stay-at-home mother raised me to be, though both of my sisters did - was she a good mom or a bad mom, was I a good daughter or a bad daughter?

Most everybody tries to be there for their kids and it's hard. Todd Palin is fortunate enough to have seasonal work that allows him to stay home part of the year and enjoy being with his kids while they're growing up. There's nothing wrong with that.

But unless you're going to refuse to allow your kids out unsupervised, these things can happen. Now I think that young people should be told about contraception, but you can't make them use it even if they're told. And we don't know what happened in that family, we don't know at all.

by Natasha Chart 2008-09-04 09:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

The cynicism of the Republicans amazes me.  The most shameful, to me, was using that poor baby as a prop.  There was no reason for that baby to be in that crowd.  Don't most parents want their children to get a good night's sleep?  Couldn't they get a babysitter?  No, they wanted to play the baby for all it was worth.  That's using those poor children for political ends.

I also feel sorry for Bristol.  Nothing like having your mom broadcast to the world that you are having a baby as a teenager and as yet unmarried.  What self-respecting mother would put your child through that?  An ambitious zealot would.  It is so sad that the Republicans continue to take Americans for fools.  The saddest part is that many of us fall for it.

by MDMan 2008-09-04 05:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

I am so glad to see other's post this sentiment.  It's been bugging me and bugging me.  Sarah is shamelessly using her children as political tools, but then calling foul when the media brings them up.  She can not have it both ways!  It's insane.

Instead of just saying she was a mom of 5, she stated that she was a mom of 5 and that she had decided to keep her baby when she learned he had downs syndrome.  That wasn't needed!  What a manipulative b*tch!

by Pa Woman 2008-09-04 06:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

I am so in agreement on this one. That poor baby being passed around the screaming, frenzied crowd like it was a muppet!! That child is being used as a prop.

by Dari 2008-09-04 07:53AM | 0 recs
If they really believed it, it would be better

Sadly, this is all just a play for Hillary Clinton voters.  They don't believe in feminism any more than they actually believe that a community organizer has no "real responsibilities," but they think it will scare up votes (and some semblence of the moral high ground) if they can go after the strawman they've championed all these years.

by Dracomicron 2008-09-04 05:37AM | 0 recs
Former Hillary supporter

Although admittedly not an avid one, I was a Hillary supporter - actually still do support Hillary as I think she is STILL working for people in her Senate job, in campaigning for Obama, by being one of the village that it takes to raise a child, on and on.

If there was EVER any tiney hope that I would vote for McCain, Palin's remarks made it clear to me that there's no way.

One more time I heard exactly what I can't tolerate about Republican speak - snide, biting, cutesy but hateful remarks, belittling others' accomplishments, bleery eyed glee in the audience at the nasty remarks .... Palin was just another Republican voice in the crowd giving Republican supporters what they want.  Sad in many ways, but disgusting in many other ways.

Proud to be a Democrat today!

by Southern Mouth 2008-09-04 06:00AM | 0 recs
Pretty much the point

They have no idea why people would support Hillary Clinton aside from the fact that she's a woman, because they don't understand Hillary Clinton or the substance behind her.  They see a woman who stepped out of place in 1993 and figure there must be a lot of women out there who thought that was pretty cool... AND was enough to vote for her now.  Cynical to the extreme.

Palin will probably play to the West Virginia Clinton crowd, but not beyond that.

by Dracomicron 2008-09-04 06:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences
Thank you for this insightful diary.
I was listening to a talk radio show this morning, and they had John Nichols from The Nation on, and he said something pretty interesting.
All those lawyers up in Alaska aren't post vetting Palin, they are up there telling people that there will be 4000 open jobs in the administration when GWB leaves office, so maybe you don't want to talk about her problems with her brother in law, or her negotiations with Trans Canada, or her hiring of lobbyists to secure $27 million dollars in federal earmarks for Wasilla.
Not to mention the scrambling to stymie the ethics investigation.
by skohayes 2008-09-04 05:39AM | 0 recs
Not surprising

What do you think they offered Bristol's "fiance" to keep his mouth shut?

by Dracomicron 2008-09-04 06:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Not surprising
A chance to be on national TV, of course! Did you see him last night? He looks like he's 14 years old.
I feel sorry for both kids for being forced into marrying.
by skohayes 2008-09-04 06:21AM | 0 recs
Don't feel too sorry

These kids have a future in reality television.

by Dracomicron 2008-09-04 07:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Not surprising
I belive he made a brief comment the other day.Something along the lines of "Sarah Palin..well she don't take no guff off nobody"
by Lodgemannered 2008-09-04 06:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Not surprising

This is exactly what I've been thinking.  I'm not horrified by Bristol's pregnancy, I'm horrified that they are requiring these kids to get married!  

by Pa Woman 2008-09-04 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

One telling thing is that the press statement said they support "her decision to have the baby", not "her decision to keep the baby".  The second would imply the intellectually consistent pro-life position that the alternative is to give the baby up for adoption.  But the wording they used gives as the alternative to not have the baby, i.e., have an abortion.

'Nuff said.

by irger 2008-09-04 05:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

Great post Natasha.  This election is so clear, the contrast couldn't be clearer.

by nzubechukwu 2008-09-04 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

Here's the gender card should not be used by the Republicans: They can't even convince themselves of what they are saying.  

Case in point: Alex Castenellos on CNN last night said that Sarah Palin's story is the Annette Benning story, the one where the girl can get the high powered job...(not bad so far, but then he continued)...and find true love, and marry Michael Douglas.

I actually watched that with my husband 3 times; it's like he was trying to do a 180 on saying Hillary was justifiably called a "bitch," but couldn't quite hold it, and went the whole way back around again.

by trustno1 2008-09-04 05:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

Thanks for this post. I found Palin's speech compelling -- not on the issues, but on the personal level. She shouldn't be underestimated.

That said, she is a typical right-winger in that she fights the class war on a cultural level for blue-collar folks, while giving away the store to the wealthy and the corporations -- the very interests that have eroded jobs, incomes, and security for the vast majority of Americans.

I'd like to see Obama and Biden pushing back on that tack. It's something HRC did very successfully in her primary campaign. I saw a clip of Obama giving a talk to labor, in Ohio, I think, where he did just that, and it was very impressive.

by Coral 2008-09-04 06:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

I found this incredible diary at Daily Kos, written by a small town mayor, priceless! /4/74648/39275/835/585968

by Pa Woman 2008-09-04 06:22AM | 0 recs
I Remember When

The Bush campaign said that Chelsea Clinton was as ugly as Amy Carter. The Republicans have never believed in privacy and not attacking the opposing party's children.

That said, McCain has a new problem. The MSM loved Palin's speech so much that they have made her into a star. Historically, its never good for a presidential candidate to be outshone by their running mate. Palin's speech actually puts a lot of pressure on McCain tonight. If McCain does not knock it out of the park tonight, then people will look at him as another boring Bob Dole.

by Zzyzzy 2008-09-04 06:55AM | 0 recs
They are not "coming around"

Republicans just say what they have to to get elected.  As soon as they get a chance they will appoint Supreme Court justices that will take away the right of women to make this choice. McCain will veto any healthcare bill that helps the poor and/or children.

God help us all if these two are elected and something happens to McCain.  Having Palin as President would be like having Scalia as President.

Much of what women have gained in the last 40 years is at risk in this election. Palin is a trojan horse for the right-wing/evangelical movement.

by Do Something 2008-09-04 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re: They are not "coming around"

They're not coming around in any sense that most of us would recognize as real progress. But it does mean something that they're moving beyond telling women to stay home.

You know, Iran's government doesn't have much to recommend it to feminists, but they did open up college as an option to girls from conservative families. Today, years later, that country is like the US in having more women in college than men. They are slowly changing as a society, in the sense of what's right, even if the laws haven't caught up to where the people are.

They'll get there eventually, they will. It'll start with the hypocrisy, and it'll end with women taking over their party who won't understand why they can't have a side of equal rights to go along with their aristocratic fiscal policy. Which'll be another argument, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

by Natasha Chart 2008-09-04 09:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences
That's how it ususally goes.
A liberal is a conservative whose teenaged daughter is expecting?
by spirowasright 2008-09-04 07:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

Fundies may be able to accept the situation if the girl conforms to their rules by having the baby and marrying, as in the Palin case. But if she chooses abortion or refuses to marry, decisions which would take enormous courage on her part, she may be thrown out of her home and her church. It happens.

by DeanOR 2008-09-04 09:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

or in other words, she didnt make the right choice, she made the only 'choice'

by KLRinLA 2008-09-04 10:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Private Matters, Public Consequences

When your platform contradicts your personal story, it does become a matter of public consequence.  Actions speak louder that words...always.

Women in America need to unite about how to keep our individual freedoms from being snatched away; this is as big of an issue as the wars, deficit, crime.

If the Republican party is re-elected they will gladly, gleefully, boastfully take us back to the dark ages with Palin carrying the torch.  The ultimate irony of it all.

I found this incredible diary at Daily Kos, written by a small town mayor, priceless! /4/74648/39275/835/585968

SEND THIS INFO to all your female friends, sisters, moms, aunts, teachers, business associates and to your brothers, uncles, dads, husbands, boyfriends.....many things can be done at the grass roots level.

Please make sure that all females are educated about how so many women before us have suffered and that the Republicans party does not represent who we are or our ideals.

The Republican ticket does not represent the women of way, no how, not now!!!

by anorth 2008-09-04 03:35PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads