![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Now, anybody can make a mistake, especially when they're young and kind of stupid.
But I just want it remembered that Republicans are the only party having members who try to be America's moral compass and arbiter - championing abstinence-only sex ed (in other words, none); restrictions on availability of contraception and abortion, designed to force women either to be mothers whether they want to or not, or put them in their place with respect to sexual freedom (which, BTW, is not the same as simply going out and having sex with every passing man); a federal ban on gay marriage; and family, family, family values. It amazes me that if the Democrats trot out any of this when a Republican is found to be in the middle of a related scandal, it's poo-pooed as dirty politics - but John Edwards drops out of the primary because he had an affair and doesn't want it used against him or his party (or somebody strongly advised him to drop out - I have no illusions that he made that decision on his own) ... as it most certainly would be, by the Republicans. (Remember 2000 and the Bush campaign's questioning about McCain's "black baby?" There are Republicans who will use this tactic against their own party members if it'll get them what they want.)
And, these kinds of scandals land harder on Democrats when they commit them, than when Republicans do it. I have never been able to figure out what THAT'S about. If my neighbor is the one always preaching to passersby about what they should do in their own homes behind closed doors, and wanting to legislate it, and I don't, and we both turn up unmarried and pregnant, you can bet it's ME who'll somehow be the dirty liberal slut, while the neighbor is supposedly gestating The Second Coming. It seems to me that the judgment should land on the party of the preacher, NOT the party of "live and let live" in personal affairs.
This is not to say all Republicans are like this, as you will notice if you see how I've worded my second paragraph above. But by and large, it is the party that fosters these points of view and actively seeks legislation more often than not, to enforce them.
I have a Republican friend who was at me the other day complaining that people don't want to discuss politics anymore because they're afraid of getting their heads bitten off in debate (gee, where else does that sound familiar the past couple of years - for me at least?). So ... okay. I'm discussing it. If the country forgives Bristol Palin her indiscretions and elects her mother VP (and I mean REALLY elects - none of this Bush-bribing-Diebold-again bullshit), is that going to moderate those extreme members of the Republican party off their message of intolerance and limitation?
*smiles sweetly*
But I just want it remembered that Republicans are the only party having members who try to be America's moral compass and arbiter - championing abstinence-only sex ed (in other words, none); restrictions on availability of contraception and abortion, designed to force women either to be mothers whether they want to or not, or put them in their place with respect to sexual freedom (which, BTW, is not the same as simply going out and having sex with every passing man); a federal ban on gay marriage; and family, family, family values. It amazes me that if the Democrats trot out any of this when a Republican is found to be in the middle of a related scandal, it's poo-pooed as dirty politics - but John Edwards drops out of the primary because he had an affair and doesn't want it used against him or his party (or somebody strongly advised him to drop out - I have no illusions that he made that decision on his own) ... as it most certainly would be, by the Republicans. (Remember 2000 and the Bush campaign's questioning about McCain's "black baby?" There are Republicans who will use this tactic against their own party members if it'll get them what they want.)
And, these kinds of scandals land harder on Democrats when they commit them, than when Republicans do it. I have never been able to figure out what THAT'S about. If my neighbor is the one always preaching to passersby about what they should do in their own homes behind closed doors, and wanting to legislate it, and I don't, and we both turn up unmarried and pregnant, you can bet it's ME who'll somehow be the dirty liberal slut, while the neighbor is supposedly gestating The Second Coming. It seems to me that the judgment should land on the party of the preacher, NOT the party of "live and let live" in personal affairs.
This is not to say all Republicans are like this, as you will notice if you see how I've worded my second paragraph above. But by and large, it is the party that fosters these points of view and actively seeks legislation more often than not, to enforce them.
I have a Republican friend who was at me the other day complaining that people don't want to discuss politics anymore because they're afraid of getting their heads bitten off in debate (gee, where else does that sound familiar the past couple of years - for me at least?). So ... okay. I'm discussing it. If the country forgives Bristol Palin her indiscretions and elects her mother VP (and I mean REALLY elects - none of this Bush-bribing-Diebold-again bullshit), is that going to moderate those extreme members of the Republican party off their message of intolerance and limitation?
*smiles sweetly*
