October 31, 2004
The Weight of Decision
Those of us for whom the upcoming decision is blazingly obvious, aren’t likely to properly appreciate the burden currently felt by millions of Americans. Those who take their civic responsibility seriously realize the significance of this decision, and based on the premises and beliefs they bring with them, many are being powerfully pulled in two or more directions.
And make no mistake, this burden is also being felt even by many who already know for whom they will vote, or who have voted already.
On the right, many who are committed to conservative ideals are deeply troubled by both the fiscal irresponsibility of the Bush administration and the empire building of the neocons running our foreign policy. The American Conservative, magazine founded by Pat Buchanan, had editorial endorsements of five different presidential candidates, as well as one endorsement for not voting. Scott McConnell, in his tepid endorsement of Kerry for this election only, wrote:
Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations. The launching of an invasion against a country that posed no threat to the U.S., the doling out of war profits and concessions to politically favored corporations, the financing of the war by ballooning the deficit to be passed on to the nation’s children, the ceaseless drive to cut taxes for those outside the middle class and working poor: it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing cliché about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy.Buchanan's own endorsement of Bush was equally tepid, while other editors ready to throw their votes to third parties, even to Nader, managed considerably more ardor in their editorials.
On the left, those who rail against the blind faith in corporate beneficence, and the commodification of everything, remain dismayed at the utter abandonment of the rank and file for the corporate dollars seen as necessary for the survival of the party by McAuliffe and the Democratic Leadership Council. There is an argument, essentially the same as McConnell's, but from the perspective that discrediting conservatism for generations would be a welcome long-term development, that a Bush win is actually better long term for the progressive cause. But most compassionate progressives reject such a view:
A traditional revolutionary view of the current scene is tempting: things have to get a lot worse before they can get better. There is not nearly enough pain yet to ignite a revolution, so bring it on. That is how the line of reason goes. Bring on the pain! Revolution, the sooner the better! Of course, the fallacy of this extreme Leftist/Socialist world view follows from their compassion being rooted in their heads, not in their hearts. One cannot dwell in compassion and choose pain for others. Therefore, the irony of choosing strategic suffering should not be tenable—an interesting idea perhaps, but certain to cause great harm."
In the center there is no less angst. Even those not in battleground states worry about the legacy of their vote, when they feel that so much rides on the outcome. Many of strong faith, for instance, are deeply conflicted by what they see as vital moral deficiencies on both sides of the ledger. One such Texan writes:
In my gut, I feel myself ardently hoping for a Kerry win because, among other things, I think it would save the Republican party from the grip of the irresponsible extremists now running the show. The politics of ignorance, fear, and incompetence will have been repudiated, and such would, it seems to me, be good for the whole country as well. Changing horses midstream when your horse is drowning is a perfectly reasonable choice. But in my mind, I think of the unborn lives, those out-of-sight-out-of-mind living statistics, that might be saved as a fairly direct result of a second Bush term, and I can't help thinking that would be worth it.but three days later resolves his dilemma "I can't support a president singularly for that fact when he has proven a complete disaster everywhere else. I just won't be held hostage."
Here I have brought together three radically disparate perspectives. What they share I believe is an ardent desire to do the right thing in civic duty to their nation. The fact that these three all ultimately decided to pull the lever for Kerry perhaps has more to do with the fact that I, a Kerry supporter, was the selector. It would be possible to quote a wildly disparate group of earnest voters who have decided to support Bush. The point is that our nation benefits from the rational discourse among those willing to put principles ahead of politics. What I want deeply for our nation is an ability for our citizens to hear each other above the platitudes. For pro-choice Americans, like myself, to refrain from assuming that pro-lifers are hypocrites who care nothing about the fate of the babies they want to save. For Libertarians to understand that a desire to reign in the excesses of corporate behavior is not necessarily driven by a simplistic notion that government can solve all our problems. For pacifists, like me, to realize that some of the neocons really do have noble motives behind their willingness to use military force, in spite of our insistence that it is a morally untenable policy. For conservative Christians to realize that secular liberals can be motivated by deeply held moral principles. And so on. It is always possible to find adherents of any position who are shallow and simplistic, or mean and motivated primarily by selfish interests. But there are many on all sides who are genuinely trying to balance ideals with realism.
Yes, in the end it is impossible to have a policy that embodies all positions. At times compromise will prevent the best potential of an idea from ever coming to fruition. But in a pluralistic society, compromise we must. The world is a scary place, and it's easy to see the potential for disaster. But if we look hard enough we might discover that people of differing assumptions actually do have dialogs which lead to useful solutions, even in the contentious halls of Congress. One of the ironies of this bitter election season has been the extent to which it has brought home for me, how much I really do love my country. Let's resolve to continue to take care of it to the best of our abilities regardless of the outcome next week.
Walker,
You are correct. The weight of decision can sometimes be unbearable. That is why it is important to know that John Kerry supports a person’s right to chose partial birth abortion.
Al Maline points out under “Dear Bush Supporter” that many people simply don’t understand this procedure and directs them to this definition:
“The term ‘Partial Birth Abortion’ was recently created by pro-life groups when the procedure became actively discussed at a political and religious level. We will generally use the medical terms in this section.
The procedure is usually performed during the fifth month of gestation or later. The woman’s cervix is dilated, and the fetus is partially removed from the womb, feet first. The surgeon inserts a sharp object into the back of the fetus’ head, removes it, and inserts a vacuum tube through which the brains are extracted. The head of the fetus contracts at this point and allows the fetus to be more easily removed from the womb.”
Thank you, Walker and Al, for showing that John Kerry makes our burden easier to bear.
Posted by: A Mother at October 31, 2004 05:02 AMI agree with the mother. Women need to support each other in making these decisions and in protecting their children.
Posted by: Marylin at October 31, 2004 07:46 AMELECTION IS HERE: TIME TO BOTTOM LINE IT
This election is a referendum on Bush. If he’s bad, then it’s time to give the new guy Kerry a chance. If not, then let Bush have four more years.
KEY AREAS OF BUSH RECORD ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 10
BUSH RECORD ON TERRORISM – 2 OUT OF 10:
* BIN LADEN ON THE LOOSE. Why the heck hasn’t public enemy number one been caught yet??? The reason is Bush took his eye off the ball and invaded Iraq before finishing the job of catching bin Laden. To the point, by March 13, 2002 Bush said, according to an official White House transcript “I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.” Now the President says he wants bin Laden dead or alive. This is a huge FLIP FLOP on one of the most important issues facing our country.
* TERRORISM ON THE RISE. Never before have so many US and foreign troops and citizens died from terrorist attacks in Iraq and elsewhere. And the numbers are increasing. Bush hasn’t focused our military resources in the relentless push that is needed to completely dismantle al Qaeda. As a consequence, now the President admits it’s not a matter of if the next terrorist attack will occur against the US, but when. BOTTOM LINE: BAD JOB FOR BUSH.
BUSH RECORD ON IRAQ – 1 OUT OF 10.
* IRAQ WAS A MISTAKE. The reason Bush rushed us into war – that Iraq supposedly has weapons of mass destruction – was all wrong. Major major major mistake. For that kind of mistake, the buck has got to stop with the President.
* IRAQ IS A MESS THAT IS NOT BEING CLEANED UP. Iraqis can’t travel safely in their own streets. Iraqis avoid being near foreigners because of the risk of attack. Whole sections of Iraq are lawless war zones. Terrorism is increasing each month. Infrastructure is still in shambles. Why is the Iraq situation declining from bad to worse? The reason is we never had a decent plan to secure the peace in that country. Another bad mistake.
* WE TORTURED INNOCENT IRAQIS. We disgraced ourselves. Bush says we are bringing Democracy to Iraq. Then we round up innocent people without adequate proof of wrongdoing, nearly all of whom have since been released, and subject them to bizarre torture aimed at violating their deepest religious mores. Sadly, this is not surprising since Bush has said we are not following the Geneva Convention, which protects our troops and citizens from outrageous conduct such as beheadings. Instead, in doublespeak, Bush’s administration said we are following “the principles of” the Geneva Convention. Even more shocking, no senior administration official such as Rumsfeld has been shown the door.
* DID WE INVADE THE RIGHT COUNTRY? At the same time we were invading Iraq, North Korea already had nuclear weapons and was building more. Iran was busily obtaining nuclear weapons. Lot’s of people are asking if we invaded the right country. Was Iraq really that urgent? Should we have gone into Iran or North Korea? Or nowhere! BOTTOM LINE: BAD CHOICES, BAD JOB FOR BUSH.
BUSH RECORD ON THE ECONOMY: 3 OUT OF 10.
* THE TAX CUT FAILED. Nice tax cut for the rich but it didn’t help the rest of the country. For the first time since Herbert Hoover’s administration, we lost more jobs than we created. Net net more than a million jobs are gone over the past four years. Even over the past several months during the so-called “recovery”, job creation hasn’t even kept up with population growth. Government deficits are out of control and we will be paying for them for years to come.
* TOO MANY AMERICANS ARE STRUGGLING. How are Americans getting by with rising health care and fuel costs? Not with much help from the government. There’s no help in the fuel area. The federal drug program is limited to seniors and is very hard to understand. This is really a drop in the bucket compared to Bush’s failure to make good on his promise to let everyone buy drugs from Canada. The President’s broken promise demonstrates that he holds the interests of big drug companies above those of the public. Drugs in Canada are the same drugs manufactured in the same factories as the drugs we take in the US. Whole communities have been forced to break the law by sponsoring bus trips to Canada to avoid their elderly and sick from becoming impoverished from the astronomical cost of drugs in the US.
BUSH ON SOCIAL ISSUES: 5 OUT OF 10.
* THE PRESIDENT HAS HELD THE LINE BUT IS DIVISIVE. Social issues are what is keeping the President afloat. The country is divided down the middle on social issues. There are reasonable arguments as well as misinformation on both sides of the aisle. It’s a shame Bush couldn’t build more unity, but you can’t blame him entirely for people being put off by his folksy swagger persona.
* OUT OF TOUCH ON STEM CELL RESEARCH. In a recent Annenberg poll in August, 64% favored and 28% disfavored use of embryos to conduct stem cell research. In the abortion debate, it’s a real live fetus lost on the one hand versus no health benefit for the mother. The stem cell debate balances a tiny embryo against health gains for millions of sick people. Bush says he is permitting stem cell research, but according to stem cell researchers, he really isn’t. There are only a few old and sick cell lines that can be used. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of embryos are frozen only to be ultimately discarded because it’s against the law to use them for stem cell research. If Bush gets elected, cures from stem cell research for millions of sick people are at least four more years away, and the US could lose the edge in this promising and potentially profitable field of research.
BOTTOM LINE: Bush’s record is weak. Time to give the new guy a chance. Kerry proved himself capable and Bush’s match during the debates. Many of the people hollering about Kerry should remember all the similar hollering about Clinton, who turned out to do a pretty good job for America. No big wars on Clinton’s watch. A great economy. At least four terrorist attacks averted by the Clinton administration through hard work leading up to the turn of the millennium, whereas the Bush administration ignored similar signs leading up to 9/11. Maybe that’s why bin Laden was so surprised that 9/11 exceeded all his expectations in running flawlessly.
Posted by: j at October 31, 2004 11:50 AMJ,
Excuse me. Go ahead and have a referendum on Bush, but Mother and I were discussing John Kerry’s support for sucking the brains out of live unborn children. And what do you think a tiny embryo develops to become? Perhaps a child that will cure cancer?
I agree with Marylin. As “A Mother”, I will nurture each of my children from conception to adulthood hoping that someday one of them may actually develop a non-destructive way to cure a crippling disease. Thank you, Marylin.
Posted by: A Mother at October 31, 2004 01:13 PMJ,
1. Much of what you have stated is not correct. For example, the 9/11 commission states that we are safer now than before 9/11, major economists, including Greenspan and economy.com all agree that the stimulus plan did help the ecomony a lot and Iraq was not a mistake, even Kerry was calling for this very action when Clinton was in office.
2. Kerry has proven nothing. He offers no good proof of anything other than he knows what to say and how to say it. His actions, on the other hand, lead people to a different conclusion. This doesn’t help those that aren’t interested in past actions and look to ‘who sounds the best’ when it comes to choosing a president.
So, you’re arguent to ‘let the new guy try’ is a bit of a scary proposition when so much is at stake, the devil you know…
Posted by: Rhinehold at October 31, 2004 02:03 PMI was undecided and pretty torn about which way to vote. Mostly I would read the center column because I’m not Democrat or Republican. I thought the title of this article might help me decide. Ladies, thank you for your comments. I had never undertsood partial birth abortion and, now that I know the details, I wish I never did. I can’t even consider John Kerry anymore. Maybe I won’t vote and maybe I’ll have to vote for Bush just so that John Kerry can’t support any more damage to these babies.
Posted by: Pauline at October 31, 2004 03:36 PMHe doesn’t support it, that’s the thing. He wants exceptions for medical necessity, such as when a child dies in the womb, and further carrying of the child would cause irreparable harm to the woman’s ability to have other children. On the other bill, parental notification, he made the reasonable argument that parental notification may not be such a good idea if the child is a product of the father’s incest with the daughter.
I agree with Walker, who has argued well, what I have been thinking for quite a while.
Politics is conflict. You will never get perfect candidates. There will always be something you would be for that your candidate will be against, always some evil or perceived evil that your candidate would allow that you would want stopped.
America is a secular nation, a nation where the government is not allowed to determine or fund a church for all citizens. It must be recognized that our nation was assembled of everything from Jews to protestants to Catholics to Atheists and deists.
I am against abortion, but not for trying to legislate a legally shaky solution to the problem, or trying to push a constitutional amendment on the subject. I believe, in such a case that abortion should be a matter of personal choice and community standards. The quickest and most efficient way to take on the question of abortion at this time is to counsel and comfort those in this dilemma.
There are moral issues beyond the question of abortion that are getting ignored for its sake. Questions about just war, for example. Many people know that the Catholic Church is Pro-life, but do they also recognize that it is against the death penalty, and said that Iraq did not fall under the category of just war?
Additonally, there are questions of how honest this government’s been on this war. Should we countenance a goverment that has been so disingenuous about the reasons it’s sent our soldiers to fight and die? Is it worth it for our president to commit actions for political gain whose ultimate effect gets our soldiers killed?
In judging the morality of a President, we must look past his piety to his actions, past his intentions to his means and his mistakes, with all their implications.
Also, there is an issue of Bush as a stumbling block. If most of America looks at Bush, and because of his actions sees religious influence on public life as just a source of hypocrisy, then there will be many who shun biblically based principle on that basis. He will do much to reinstate the terrible prejudice against religious people in public life.
In the end, when you elect a president simply to have him be your compatriot in the White House, you should be careful as to how he represents you in his time in office.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 31, 2004 03:38 PMDear Stephen,
I know that nobody is perfect. Certainly I am not. But how can someone who professes to be Catholic and goes to Catholic church in front of TV cameras still even think of allowing such horrible things to be done to an innocent child asleep in the womb? Maybe he should have proposed a law to support more adoptions. Lots of loving couples are not able to have children and would love to have these babies that are being destroyed. Even with the stem cells thing. Those embryos could be implanted for infertile couples. They are babies too. I’m not a Catholic like you and John Kerry, but, I’m sorry, Stephen, I’ll have to vote for George Bush and tell my friends about this.
Marylin,
In case you didn’t know.
In a 5 year study between ‘93 and ‘98 the abortion rate actually went down while the adoption rate stayed the same. It’s a falicy to think that if abortions were stopped tomorrow, that all of the children given up for adoption would find a home, let alone a good home.
Stephen,
I disagree. Politics in not about conflict, it’s about compromise.
Kerry is, after all, a politician.
Well, when it comes to children and babies, I don’t believe in conflict or compromise. I guess I’ll have to vote for George Bush. And, Marylin, I’m going to tell my daughters and grand-girls that they should vote for George Bush as well. We all love children so much and I can see that Laura Bush is a lovely person. She must love her girls so very much, too. Maybe I should be happy in the end that this Al fellow told the mother and Marylin where to find out about how horrible partial birth abortion really is and about how John Kerry can’t make up his mind to really be against it. Once again, thank you, ladies, for helping me to decide and to be able to give some good advice to all my girls.
Posted by: Pauline at October 31, 2004 04:29 PMThere are cases where partial birth abortion is necesarry:
1 in 80,000 pregnancies result in a severe form of anecphaly. A case where the child’s brain cavity is filled with gallons of fluid (no brain at all). This condition is obviously incompatible with life, and the child itself represents a danger to the mother. The safest way to deliver this child is vaginally, but the head of the child is so large, the fluid needs to be removed from the head cavity to be able to get it out.
This effects real women. And imagine if a woman that this happened to was reading this comment section. Would you want here to hear you talking about it this way?
Anacephely happens in 7 in 10,000 pregnancies. Again, a condition this severe happens in 1 in 80,000 pregnancies. But it does happen. Please be kind.
Julia
Posted by: Julia at October 31, 2004 05:10 PMthis is a message from Europe:
Please
stop bush stop bush stop bush
your leadership affects everyone on this planet, think about it:stopbush
tell us your opinion
if you think that this is political crap we are sorry for bother you
thank u
To a mother, pauline,
How utterly transparent you are! You would vote for someone who has falsely invaded a sovereign nation and killed TENS OF THOUSANDS of IRAQI, men women and CHILDREN just because he is against partial birth abortion. How lame! Please, this one issue pales in comparison with the realities of war. (I suspect that you are just here propagating your viewpoint in the interest of getting Bush reelected, because your post is such hypocritical blather.) I am a democrat who abhors abortion and I look forward to the day when the majority of Americans come together to denounce it. But, to vote for a divider such as Bush will not save any more unborn babies or human lives.
Posted by: Gene at October 31, 2004 08:43 PMMarylin-
If I wrote:
How can you profess to be a Christian and allow innocent people people to be shot, eviscerated, crushed, blown apart… Shocked? That’s war. A hundred thousand innocent casualties, in various forms. Even innocent little children.
How would you feel? I’m describing war here, a war your pick for president got us into. Appeals Ad Misericordiam muddle more than they illuminate.
Fact is, PBA is half myth, half distortion of a procedure rarely used, and mostly used out of medical necessity. If I’m not mistaken, abortions are otherwise illegal during the third trimester in nearly every state I can think of. Kerry’s vote came because he didn’t think some unfortunate mother should have to pay with her life or future motherhood because something went lethally wrong with her child.
I would never see such a procedure of any kind committed upon a child who wasn’t already dead or on his or her way to dying, and delivery wasn’t a hazard.
You see, you’re making snap judgments on almost abstract representations of things. Abortion must be weighed at an issue, but we can’t let the rest of such important issues go to hell simply to get what we want on those few wedges issues. Morality as a whole must be the issue, not merely on one issue.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 31, 2004 11:01 PMMarilyn wrote:
>>>Dear Stephen,
I know that nobody is perfect.
Agreed.
>Certainly I am not.
Nor am I.
>But how can someone who professes to be Catholic and goes to Catholic church in front of TV cameras still even think of allowing such horrible things to be done to an innocent child asleep in the womb?
Yes, this is one platform of the Democratic party that I disagree with, however it fails to account for abortions of babies born anacephalic or in cases where it is guaranteed to die upon birth. There are some instances where it is medically necessary, albeit a small percentage.
>>Maybe he should have proposed a law to support more adoptions. Lots of loving couples are not able to have children and would love to have these babies that are being destroyed.
Then I would have to ask what legislation Bush has introduced that would streamline the adoption process, in other words, “get big government out of the loop?” If you know of a specific link. I know people who try to adopt today (married couples) and it’s still a mountain of red tape and paperwork. How do I know? My brother and sister were adopted.
That is one of the core beliefs of the Republican Party, am I not correct?
>>Even with the stem cells thing. Those embryos could be implanted for infertile couples.
I have been told here are new techniques for utilizing stem cells which do not come from embryos, I’ll try to find the link I was reading on this and post it.
>They are babies too. I’m not a Catholic like you and John Kerry, but, I’m sorry, Stephen, I’ll have to vote for George Bush and tell my friends about this.
Abortion would not be nearly the issue it is if we did not attack its root causes: the decline of the structure of the nuclear family, the alienation of our youth (look what they do to their own classmates), the general malaise in the attitudes of most Americans about sex and its consequences, a lack of access to birth control, a lack of sex education opportunities to promote healthy relationships or abstinence, the promotion of subtle sexuality in advertising and literature which induces the human subconscious to seek sex (aside from the natural desire), A huge influx of adult related materials and content not being policed by parents (notice I didn’t say the government), a failure to confront the issues about why we have so many failing marriages and so many strip clubs, the list goes on and on…and nobody’s saying a word about it.
This is where I see Bush has smugly turned the other way. I had a very bitter argument with a dear friend of mine recently who said abortion was murder (which I agreed with him on most instances) but said he has no problem whatsoever supporting the very businesses (i.e. strip clubs) which indirectly foster an influx of abortions, so to me this is comparable to saying “You can’t kill that baby, but if there’s things out there that foster abortions indirectly that’s just perfectly fine.”
WRONG.
Root causes, not issues. Why can’t a soda fountain worker who worked 40 years ago and could afford a home not even think about it if he is doing the same thing today? Why can’t we have affordable fuel-cell powered vehicles when internal combustion has been outdated for decades? It’s scary how you look back and remember how cheap things used to be, and how horribly expensive has become (and people wonder why there is such division between the rich and the poor). Why the hell is it a crime to say “made in America?” Aren’t our workers valued citizens? Aren’t we supposed to be amongst the smartest, most educated peoples on this planet? How do you tell someone in America who can do a job that it is better for someone in another country to be doing the job and making the money? Whatever happened to the days when you could watch cartoons like the Smurfs, GI Joe, or Transformers and catch a 1 minute segment on doing the right thing (like not littering, or lying, or being respectful of our elders), and why has our country become so embroiled with a culture of violence? For gods sakes, think about this (and I know I’m getting way off topic): nearly every action hero movie today features some macho jerk who has no regard for the safety or feelings of others (let’s see, Bad Boys II, Fast and the Furious, Triple X, Rush Hour, Lethal Weapon, Die Hard), just as nearly ever “romantic comedy” is about how many people he or she has slept with. People whine about “black” and “white” like in movies such as The Lord of the Rings or Star Wars and prefer “reality.” But where are all the role models that my generation grew up with on the big screen? They are gone forever from the face of the world, whether to return we know it not.
America is in trouble, it is rotting from the inside out. It’s time for change, hopefully this time someone who will realize that it is always internal problems not external forces that have brought down the world’s greatest civilizations.
Just my thoughts. Yes abortion is murder in most cases, but I still plan to vote for Kerry because there are so many other problems that need solving that I have faith he will solve.
Notice that phrase: “have faith.” And I’m not even about to get into a tirade about the spiritual degeneration of this country. Trust involves risk, we do not live in a Dr. Seuss world made of Nerf, there will probably be many horrible things unequaled in history that will have to happen before this world can finally be at peace, and we must be willing to accept that these things may happen regardless of who was in power. But I am a believer, and like Anne Frank believed, in spite of everything I believe deep down that people are generally good.
Just FYI, Marylin and Pauline have the same IP address.
If I were a betting man, I’d put my money on that whole conversation between A Mother, Pauline, and Marylin being a GOP scam.
AP,
Thought so… about Maryin and Pauline. What does that tell you about “republican family values” when they use DECEIT to further their cause? Hypocites.
Gene
Posted by: Gene at November 1, 2004 12:40 PMWow, when I began to read this I was very impressed with the even-handedness and healthy ambivalence with which these heart-rending issues were discussed by Walker W. Though Walter and the Texan (whom I am acquainted with) come to different conclusions than I do given all the issues, I deeply respect the struggle and conflict of these honest people.
I must say I was disppointed at the level to which the discussion had dropped by the end of the comments,to name-calling and paranoia. This cannot further any good goal. BTW, I am not part of any scam that I am aware of!
Posted by: Californian at November 2, 2004 01:47 PMWow, when I began to read this I was very impressed with the even-handedness and healthy ambivalence with which these heart-rending issues were discussed by Walker W. Though Walter and the Texan (whom I am acquainted with) come to different conclusions than I do given all the issues, I deeply respect the struggle and conflict of these honest people.
I must say I was disappointed at the level to which the discussion had dropped by the end of the comments,to name-calling and paranoia. This cannot further any good goal. BTW, I am not part of any scam that I am aware of!
Posted by: Californian at November 2, 2004 01:50 PM
