Jan 27, 2009

More Obama love

This,


This,

and, oh...

This.


That's why I voted for him :)

22 comments:

David L said...

Speaking of Obama love and knowing that you and many of your readers like him, I'm starting to find the things that I really don't like.

First, I give the man a lot of credit for his attempts at bipartisanship. It's the best thing that could happen right now especially after a president as dividing as Bush was. But beyond that, I see a lot of things that are truly scary to me.

I'm not a fan of his stimulus package. I can't see massive spending saving this nation especially when much of that money will continue to support companies that have and are failing. That is not a free market system.

It infuriates me that people keep blaming Bush and republicans in general for the deficit while simultaneously supporting a spending package that CNN just reported will cost upwards of 1.2 TRILLION dollars. You can't have it both ways, people!!! The name signing the check does not make it good or bad.

I'm also grossly disappointed with Obama's reversal of the abortion funds ban. I have trouble providing any kind of federal funding for abortion. To be blunt, please don't spend my tax money in support of abortion. A small part of me is annoyed that this money is largely for international groups as well. At this time, I'd rather see my money stay home doing something productive, which probably paints me as naive, uncaring, and a host of other things. I guess I just have a lot of trouble seeing how pregnancy becomes a choice AFTER the action that causes it in the first place. The choice is made then; live with it. (For a more accurate understanding of my opinions on abortion, I wrote a long reply on one of Nosurfgirl's previous posts on abortion.)

I saw the poll on CNN this morning asking my opinion of where Obama stands. Three options: Love it, okay with it, hate it. I marked okay because, to be honest, Obama has not yet walked on water as far as I'm aware and he hasn't done anything more or less than I expected. It hasn't all been good. It hasn't all been bad. And it's only been a week.

As my coworker said, "I'm Obama-ed out!" I'll second that.

NoSurfGirl said...

lol. And I'm still on an Obama high... plenty of time to come crashing down. As to the abortion funding and the stimulus package... yes. Complicated issues. I wouldn't mind a nice little discussiona bout those sometimes... I've got mixed feelings. :)

David L said...

You know, that's another thing I'll give him credit for... People like him and he has made a lot of people really hopeful. I'll give him a lot of credit for that one.

And yes, next time we visit, I'd love to chat up a storm about that stimulus package. I personally like my idea where we take the value of the stimulus and divide by the number of citizens and cut us all a check. At that rate, we'd get a nice little check for 10k. You and your hubby would hit closer to 13k. Now _that_ is stimulus!

A Girl Called Dallan said...

I used to believe in the Reagan doctrine of free markets and hands-off government, and held to the hope that we could all get along fine without government interference. I was influenced by Ezra Taft Benson and what he had to say about the proper role of government. What I understood Elder Benson to say was that government should have no more role in the lives of citizens than neighbors have among neighbors. I translated that to a belief that the less government we had, the better off we would be, and I believed that the Republican Party was on the right track.

The unhappy fact, however, is that the greedy and uncaring among us will deny us of all we hold dear--life, property, and freedom--if they are left unchecked.

I can now see the proper role of the United States government is one of protecting citizens from murderers and thieves--whether they are thugs in dark alleys or those sporting white collars or the uniforms of the military. Where choices are made out of selfishness and greed, good neighbors step in and protect their brothers and sisters. Good neighbors also set an example of reverent stewardship over the earth, and its people, for all to follow. (A stance, incidentally, which will do more, I believe, to reduce abortions than any other means.) I am confident that such neighborliness is in harmony with the views of Elder Benson, and of all disciples of Jesus Christ.

President Obama is leading out in bringing about such necessary changes. It is a blessing to see one so intelligent and caring in a position to truly make a much-needed difference in the world.

My view of the debt we are taking on as a nation is similar to what I feel when life and death health issues are at stake in a family. In such circumstances, we willingly take on debts in order to care for our loved ones. Our nation is in just such a dire emergency. Debt is lamentable, but necessary if we are to obtain a cure for our collective ills.

Thanks, No Surf, for once more standing up and speaking. President Obama is a man truly worthy of our gratitude and respect.

(I especially loved the third link, by the way. Here is a man we can like, as well as admire. I think that people are jaded and suspicious of this good man because it has been so long since such a person has been on the political scene.)

Putz said...

yeh, but my boy tony is still mad as hops at him and rush might move out of the us of a

Sherpa said...

I'm not a fan of his stimulus package. I can't see massive spending saving this nation especially when much of that money will continue to support companies that have and are failing. That is not a free market system.

We don't have a true free market system. If we had a true free market system, then I'd agree with you, Adam Smith's invisible hand theory would be valid, but we haven't had a true free market since the '30s in response to the failure of the market of 1929. So, you support redistribution (your idea of giving the money to each individual taxpayer) but not the corporations?

It infuriates me that people keep blaming Bush and republicans in general for the deficit while simultaneously supporting a spending package that CNN just reported will cost upwards of 1.2 TRILLION dollars. You can't have it both ways, people!!! The name signing the check does not make it good or bad.

Wait, Bush was a BIG supporter of the December stimulus package. Remember how he was drumming up support of the package?

I'm also grossly disappointed with Obama's reversal of the abortion funds ban. I have trouble providing any kind of federal funding for abortion.

It's more complicated than that.

David L said...

Just to clarify a few things... I'm not a fan of redistributing the wealth in any way: corporations, personal, whatever. However, given the option of spending $825 BB on failing corporations or putting the money in my pocket where I know I'll make the best choices for me and my family, well, I'll take the money in my pocket. And just for the record, my comment in the previous reply was somewhat tongue in cheek as anyone who personally knows me probably would have recognized. Sorry that wasn't clear.

I have never been a fan of any of the stimulus packages; Bush, Obama, or otherwise. I saw the necessity of _some_ of the early attempts at improving the economy, and I see the necessity of _some_ continued support, but this thing just keeps getting bigger and bigger and, frankly, is starting to smell really porky. And while we may not have a free market system, it doesn't keep me from wishing. :-)

Finally, the abortion issue. It may be more complicated than that, so let me paint it as simply as I can from my point of view: If abortion is defined as the elective termination of a fetus for reasons other than pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or a pregnancy that will severely impact the health of the mother, I am against it in every way, shape, or form, and I am specifically opposed to spending any amount of money supporting that institution when defined by those terms above. Period.

You said it was complicated. Please, enlighten me. I'm honestly not understanding why it is so complicated and would love to see your insights. Abortion is not a black and white issue for me, but it certainly isn't all gray either.

As an independent conservative, I've watched Obama with a measure of mild interest. I didn't vote for him, but I didn't vote for McCain either. Personally, I wasn't always pleased with Bush, but neither was I generally annoyed. Like all presidents, I found things that I liked and things I didn't. Obama is the same for me. Right now there is a pretty equal measure of good and bad for me, but I don't understand the demi-god status people seem to give him. Like I said, I haven't seen him walk on water yet.

Fred said...

I am extremely worried the stimulus package favors so much spending that's questionable, in spite of Obama and Biden's assurance that it wouldn't have any pork in it. I generally agree that we need to spend our way out this mess, but more work should be done to ensure we're getting our money's worth.

And, the deficit. At what point do we break the bank?

Gitmo? Absolutely the right move. The sooner the better.

NoSurfGirl said...

yup... problematic all the way around, as far as the stimulus package is concerned. what I am hoping (ha! I used a bad obama word) is that they feel a real need to cut out pork to keep up their 'we're the good guys here... no more politics as usual' image. We'll see how it all turns out....

NoSurfGirl said...

Dave, also wanted to add... I've had a lot of discussion about the abortion policies (including Foca) lately on a few different internet forums, and with my husband. And the conclusion I have come to is this: you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who wants to kill babies just because the mother's choice is "more important". Almost all these pro-choice measures are meant to protect the mother and her doctor from government interference when a decision to abort needs to be on the table. Two examples I was given: A mother is carrying a hydrocephalic baby. The baby literally has no brain, except what is required for bare-minimum functioning, becuase his head is full of fluid, and will die as soon as the umbilicus is cut. If the mother gives birth to this baby with a huge head, she will experience severe injuries, and the same problem with a C-section... the cut is likely to be so invasive that her fertility will be compromised if they take the baby out that way, endangering the possiblity of any future children.

It is for conditions like this (which yes, are rare... but they exist, and IMO are why the "partial birth abortion" thing even exists) that things like FOCA are put into effect.

I knew a woman who found out halfway through her pregnancy that her baby had the opposite problem; the brain hadn't developed at all, no frontal lobe, no cerebrum. Just a brain stem. The baby's head was tiny and, on the ultrasound, it was just a limp little thing, not moving at all, not developing really on schedule either... it was pretty clear that the baby had this condition. The doctor gave the mother the option to abort or have the baby.

SOme mothers feel strongly about having the baby and being able to watch it die afterward (sorry so graphic, but we're talking real life here). Others want to terminate so that they can get on with greiving and maybe try again for a baby that will survive, sooner.

personally, I could not abort my child even if I knew they wouldn't survive (unless for some reason giving birth would have a certain chance of killing me, thus leaving the rest of my children motherless and my husband, wife-less). But other mothers make other choices, and i can't say I don't understand those choices. I understand them. Don't necessarily agree with them (in the gospel we have an understanding of children, even the unborn, as eternal spirits, etc) but I'm not going to judge another mother for making that choice.

ANyway, it's not black and white. ANd like I said... I think there are very few people out there who would use late term abortion as a means of birth control. VERY few. earlier abortions... yes. And this is a problem. But to oppose all abortions... what if the baby is already dead? Are you going to expect the mother to go through the invasive procedure of a C-section, or give birth to her dead child, and say that removing the child less invasively (and yes, that means cutting it into pieces and removing them... still keepin' it real here) is irrevocably a wrong choice?

There is room here for agreement... on both sides of the debate. I wish "pro-lifers" and "pro-choicers" would work to see where they agree, instead of engaging in vitrolic, divisive debate. It really makes me sad when people tell me that, because i support Obama, I'm OK with killing babies. that because I look into things like FOCA instead of deciding, based upon the rhetoric spread around by one political faction, to reject it outright.

OK! So that's the whole abortion thing. I hope nobody who reads this imagines me talking in an upset way... imagine it in a reasoned tone, with smiles interspersed. :)

David L said...

Nosurfgirl--Thanks for the information.

And you are right; it's not black and white. That's why I tried to clearly define my stance on abortion. In cases of rape and incest, I think the mother has the right to choose. In cases where the pregnancy will likely kill or seriously affect the mother, I think the mother has the right to choose. I'd even expand that definition to include what you have mentioned.

But in the case of elective abortion (defined as "I don't want this baby" or any other similar thought), I am not in favor of abortion.

I think there is a serious difference between pregnancy caused without choice (rape and incest), pregnancies that are not medically viable, and pregnancies that are "inconvenient."

I personally believe that one of the biggest problems facing the world today is a lack of personal responsibility. "We" aren't responsible for buying homes outside our means. "We" aren't responsible for the $9,000 of credit card debt the average American carries. "We" aren't responsible for this pregnancy. And for some reason "we" feel we should get a second chance or a do-over.

Do-overs might have worked when we were kids running around on the playground, but last I checked, I was an adult. If I buy a home too big, if I run up the credit card too high, and if I am part of a pregnancy, I am responsible. If we are old enough to make adult decisions and perform adult acts, it's time we fulfilled our adult responsibilities, and that includes bringing a child into the world.

NoSurfGirl said...

I definitely agree with you on all points, Dave. I think it's hard to know what to do, then. How do we allow necessary abortions, and make it so that emergency abortions can happen within, say minutes, and also achieve the effect of not allowing abortion as a form of birth control? I'd looooove, love some ideas there... the cynical side of me thinks it isn't really possible, but I want it to be possible.

A Girl Called Dallan said...

Your comments on abortion were the best I have read. Thank you for the clarity. I think that having absolutely no abortions is the worse of the all-or-nothing options. As I said above, I think that the best way to battle the wrong-headed types of abortion is to encourage, with kindness and understanding, a reverence for all life.

NoSurfGirl said...

I think you're right, too, Dallan...

I'd really like the conversation to shift from "pro-choice or pro-life" to a general consensus on teaching kids about abstinence and also how to prevent unwanted pregnancy, and also about the options other than abortion. A three pronged approach, if you will. :) To me, the whole abortion debate shouldn't even be about birth control, it should be about medical emergencies. And yet I"ll admit that some of the liberal element of the population woudl use abortion as an acceptable means of family planning... not acceptable in my book. That would be where I diverge from the true "pro-choice" position.

Thanks for your comments, Dallan. And Dave and Sherpa, too. I really appreciate others weighing in on this matter.

And Fred: I'm still high in the sky about Gitmo. I'd be interested know how how the discussion in your class went :)

Putz said...

how do you do it/???????........14 comments on O......I WISH I COULD GET THAT MANY....OH WAIT A MINUTE REMBERBER THAT 21 COMMENTS I GOT ON o FROM SHEL, TONY , YOU AND me???????????????????? tony hasn't been liking me at all lately...now he is mad about my ideas on VACTIONS

Putz said...

this is personal,,,not about O.....YOU MAKE THIS VAcATION DILEMA WORSE BY ALL THE RATTLE TRAP ABOUT CALIFORNIA....NINE GENERATIONS THAT IS TOO BAD....I DATED A GRIL ONCE FROM CALIFORNIA ANS SHE WAS SO WIERD...AFTer two dates we were going steady...byu coed, and someday california will drop into the sea....are any people really normal down ther???

Lucy Stern said...

No Surf - There are thousands out there that use abortions as birth control...I personally know a girl who gets pregnant and has an abortion to end the pregnancy. This girl has had seven abortions, including a set of twins. She is now thrilled that the morning after pill is available. She could care less about the education of abortions. There are plenty of young girls who only want to be popular and have unprotected sex and then worry about a pregnancy later.....There are many who don't share our Mormon beliefs and could care less what we think.....

I agree with a lot of what you and David said about abortion, but there are many who don't believe like us and will take advantage of abortions. From what I have read about Obama's thoughts on late term partial birth abortions, where the baby lives, he said "Doesn't that defeat the idea of the abortion?" He is all for killing the baby as it is being born or just after birth. Even Hillary Clinton voted against late term partial birth abortions.... Obama was campaigning for it.

Gitmo: If they close down Gitmo, were are they going to put the really violent prisoners? Should they be put in with our prisoner population? Maybe they could recruit they they are in prison...

The stimulus plan: I would vote against it....way too much pork added in....How much "funny money" are they going to print? And David: If you were to get 10K dollars of the stimulus money, who do you think is going to pay for it? Probably you! and Me! I just as soon not get it period...... The government did not put any provisions on how the money is the be spent and there are banks out there giving bonuses and one bank that bought a corporate jet...... Back in the 80's there was the savings and loan ordeal, many of the institutions had to be bailed out....The banks don't worry about what is going to happen because they think, "Well, they will just bail us out again."

Don't even get me started on the mortgage scandals. Nothing like giving out loans to people who don't qualify. Any house we ever bought, we had to prove every penny we ever made and pay 10% down...... No funny loans for us. Of course we weren't stupid either and didn't try to buy a house we couldn't pay for. No, don't get me started....

How many, after Hurricane Katrina, got "free money" from the government and whet out and bought big screen TV's and diamond rings? I know that about 25% went out and bought what they really needed but most of them bought luxury items and then wanted more....It has been three years and four months since Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and Houston still has people, from N.O., living off the government on housing allowances. These are not people in wheel chairs or disabled, but healthy people able to go out and get a job. All of the truly disabled are on special programs and getting help they need.

Sorry, didn't mean to rant!

Putz said...

had to promote my new theory which will probably make you mad or you will say i am preaching false doctrine, but what the hey, i am a democrat so my ideas are suspect anyways, what i am trying to say is my council if the 12 eggs on my new post barlow putz...read

Anonymous said...

Obama = Satan in angel clothing. The hero-worship, the demonization (via teleprompter) of anything representing free market or patriotism and the developing myopic view of foreign relations and military roles are following the Third Reich template of Adolf to exactness. The ONLY difference is the sub-faction of populace being appointed to the SS Corp.

NoSurfGirl said...

Anonymous:

comments like yours, and in general, the extreme emotions in the face of worldly politics, are what scares me, and what makes me feel pretty sure that Satan wreaks havoc with our feelings when it comes to the philosophies of men.

To me, the real perpetuators of Satan's plan in politics are those that stir up emotion on purpose for their own gain. I'm thinking of people like Rush Limbaugh and Al Franken.

Anonymous said...

I cannot believe that a member of the church could support Obama! He is against everything that the gospel is all about. Look at the type of people that he surrounds himself with, look at the causes he espouses, look at what he wants to do to our freedoms.

It should come as no suprise that he is being compared to Adoph Hitler. Both came to power on the basis of their oratory abilities and their promise of change. Neither had any real political experience and both had the "rock star" appeal to a population looking for a quick fix to their problems.

If we survive the next four years as a country it will be a miracle, one that I am praying for.

NoSurfGirl said...

I cannot believe that, after all that has been said by our general authorities about politics and political viewpoints, there are still LDS members out there who think that there is a "righteous" way to vote and an "unrighteous" way to vote. IT's pure bigotry, justified by self-percieved (but really, culturually inspired) "value" systems.

Don't tell me that you've never voted for a political candidate that diverged from your moral standards. They're people. They're politicians. Even Mitt Romney, an LDS man in good standing with the church, is troubling... he was once pro choice.

Please don't bring hysteria and silly generalizations to this conversation... if I were interested in that type of thing I'd listen to the Rush Limbaugh show, or go read Al Franken's books.

Quite frankly, You, (second anonymous) are what troubles me about Mormon culture and its intersection with politics.