Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Anniethology Question(s) of the Day

I may live to regret this.
Ever since I posted pictures of Cindy McCain and Sarah Palin, my blog has become a lightning rod for political interest. My stat counter has lit up like a disco ball!
Despite everything that would indicate to the contrary, I don't like controversy.
I can't stand the back and forth of warring ideologies. I have a political opinion. I have religious beliefs, but I don't argue about it. I don't see the point.
"A man convinced against his will, holds the same opinion still."
That being said, people have come to my blog to voice their opinion and I am going to give them the forum to do that. BUT, I won't tolerate name calling. You may get away with calling someone "a disgrace to the human race" on other blogs, but not here. Look up and read the name on the blog again. It says, "Anniethology." That's me. It's still my blog. My sandbox. My rules.

1. Is there a statistic out there that says teenage girls with working mothers are more likely to get pregnant?

2.. Will Obama put his young kids before his presidency?

3. Did Obama pick Joe Biden because he wasn't a threat to his popularity?

4. How would Hillary Clinton respond to someone who says that a woman with a baby should not be Vice President?

5. I have more questions. Maybe I will save them for another day, if my computer doesn't crash from the massive amount of hits I'm going to get.

47 comments:

  1. Annie...you are the jedi master of awesome...Can I be your padawan learner?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Second!

    The fact that people are permitted to think and believe differently is one of the things that made this country great! So I'm with you on the non-arguing. There is no point.

    1) I googled it and found a BBC report that says just the opposite, that teenage girls with working moms are less likely to get pregnant. Then again, that's in Great Britain. They also call trucks "lorries," can their research be trusted? (Just kidding, Great Britain.)

    2) In many cases, I hope so!

    3) There aren't a lot of dems who COULD threaten his popularity, so it's hard to say. Hillary is perhaps the only one, and I don't think that she would have been a good choice for VP. Both because I don't particularly like her, and because they just spent the last year or so battling each other in the primaries. Republicans wouldn't have needed to come up with campaign ads, they could have just shown footage from any one of the debates during primary season.

    Follow-up question, if I may: By definition, "popularity" means being liked, admired, or supported by many people. Why is that a bad quality in someone running for public office? (not saying that applies to you specifically, you didn't say it was bad)

    4) I highly doubt she'd agree with that statement. Generally speaking, why anyone (including Palin and Obama) would WANT to run for public office with small kids is beyond me. I manage a help desk and I sometimes feel like I don't see my kids enough!

    5) wait, that's not a question!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would share my opinions...but mean people scare me. haha!

    I do have to agree with Omar...running for office with kids is too high of an ambition for me...I don't know why anyone would want to do that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This past week I have witnessed two people arguing over the election. In order to save their working relationship they had to agree not to discuss politics anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ...it's the permitting-people-on-the-ends-of-the-bell-curve-to-say-what-they-think-and-believe-without-having-to-pass-some-sort-of-idiot-test-first thing that's causing all of the problems.

    The republican/conservative/evangelical talking heads don't want to acknowledge the appearance of hypocrisy in their not wanting to discuss the application of their long-standing beliefs regarding the success or failure of abstinence vs sex ed, working vs SAH moms, and marital fidelity as a moral indicator on their candidates. (Although it looks like the RNC will be voiding Dr. Laura's membership after the opinion she's posted.)

    The democrat/liberal/heathen talking heads don't want to acknowledge that they tend to put their foot in their mouth about most everything else.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good questions!

    I can't answer for anyone else, but I think that if I had a five month old baby with Downs Syndrome I would not be running for VP. Not that I am knocking Palin for running, but I am just too obsessive and controlling to not be super involved in my special needs child's life. Being on a campaign like this is very exciting and busy. I applaud her for having the guts to run and let people so intrusively into her life like that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Don't have much time right now, but have many thoughts on the subjects you posted...here's what I'll say real fast;

    in most cases i would say mom needs to stay home with her kids....its for the most part, generally speaking, the best option...on the other hand, we (conservative folks) need someone like her to speak up& show another option, another perspective...in our corner!
    I am excited to have her and am looking forward to hearing what she has to say tonight!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Annie, let me begin by thanking you for the opportunity to talk seriously about Sarah Palin. However, I'm going to stray from your talking points for this reason: I believe that Sarah Palin's family is off limits. This election is about issues, not personalities and certainly not the candidates' families. You'll note that I haven't attacked her on any of the fronts you mention, so if you want a defense of those positions, you'll have to look elsewhere. I don't question Governor Palin's decision to be a working mom. I don’t judge her daughter, nor do I find her situation to be relevant to the campaign. I think we need to judge the candidates on their actions in office and the policies they support. (Let me also add that all of the smears I've heard of about the Palin family, I've heard from the McCain campaign first. Friends, I read a LOT of liberal blogs, and none of the blogs I read are talking about any of the topics Annie mentions. Maybe I'm reading the wrong blogs. And you can't pretend that the Obama campaign is pushing these smears and these low attack strategies -- that's plainly false.)

    Here are my reasons for believing Sarah Palin to be a bad candidate:

    Dishonesty: Sarah Palin has lied or been misleading on record more than once. She lied to the Alaskan public about whether she, her staff, and her family pressured the state's top cop to fire her brother-in-law. First she claimed that she and her staff had never even discussed the matter with Public Safety Commissioner Monegan. Later evidence forced her to admit that her staff had in fact repeatedly contacted Monegan, and Monegan himself claims that both Palin and her husband pressured him themselves. Source. She lied to the American public when she first appeared with John McCain, claiming she opposed the "Bridge to Nowhere" earmark supported by Sen. Ted Stevens. As residents of Ketchikan can tell you, Sarah Palin was a strong proponent of the bridge until she realized it would be more politically expedient to oppose it, leaving citizens who thought they had her support high and dry. Source.

    Not so fiscally conservative after all: During her six-year tenure as mayor of Wasilla, Palin lowered taxes disproportionately on big corporations, while creating and then raising a sales tax that even taxed food, disproportionately affecting average Wasilla citizens. Despite her tax hikes, she took the town from a $3 million surplus to a $20 million+ deficit in less than 6 years. Source.

    Palin loves the earmarks, despite her "Maverick" claims: Palin claims to oppose "earmarks," part of her Maverick, anti-corruption mystique. However, as mayor of Wasilla, Palin embraced $27 million worth of earmarks for her tiny town. Source. That means that you and I, non-Alaskan citizens of the United States, paid for Wasilla's infrastructure projects. Now, let's consider the fact that Alaska heavily taxes oil companies that operate in the state and use that money to pay citizens an annual dividend. An average Alaskan could get $2,000 in their annual dividend check just for being a resident of Alaska. Governor Palin had the opportunity to use that money to pay for Alaska infrastructure (including the oil infrastructure that provides fuel to the United States and generates the dividend money to begin with). Instead, she'd rather give $2,000 checks to Alaskans and let tax-paying citizens from the rest of the United States to pay (through earmarks) for Alaska's money-making oil infrastructure. We pay for Alaska's oil industry, and Alaskans reap the benefits. No wonder her approval ratings are so high.

    Now, I also happen to disagree with Palin's social conservatism, but I know we'll just have to agree to disagree on that front. I think she's shown a lack of good judgment time and again (take another look at this Palin bio, which gives a thorough summary of her career). Beyond the fact that I disagree with her vision for American, I doubt her ability to be an honest, upright, forthcoming champion for the American people. I continue to be shocked that Senator McCain chose her as his running mate, leading me to believe that Senator McCain, who I used to admire and respect, also shows a lack of judgment. This has nothing to do with Palin's gender or her family and everything to do with the way she handled herself in office as mayor and governor.

    I know I'm not likely to change any minds around here, but let me thank Annie again for the opportunity to have a civil debate on the topic. Sorry for the novel-length comment, and thanks for your patience. And while I'm at it, let me apologize for my snarky, sarcastic comments on your "If You See Her" posts -- I went over the line with those, I admit, and I hope no one was offended. (In my defense, those were light-hearted posts, while this is clearly meant to be a serious discussion.)

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Annie/Omar 2009!

    Just like you Annie, I have very strong political and religious beliefs therefore I see no point in arguing about them.
    Not one mind has been changed by force or great arguments, not one ("A man convinced against his will, holds the same opinion still") But by personal understanding.

    So anyway:
    Gasp! People have different opinions form my own? How is this even possible? Curse you Internets!

    ReplyDelete
  11. The only convincing I am willing to do is that Omar need to watch Napoleon Dynamite.

    ReplyDelete
  12. But seriously: Annie's Blog is an asset to Blogtopia and my life in particular.

    To all the haters:
    :P

    ReplyDelete
  13. There's a bazillion places on the internet where people can go bash each other over politics. Why do we have to stink up this nice little corner of the blogosphere with that junk?

    Let Annie post her pics of Ms. McCain and Ms. Palin and let her do her surveys and have her fun!

    I'm a regular reader precisely because this *is* a light-hearted place. Every time I visit I feel like I've taken a mini vacation back to my beloved home town.

    (That plus she's a top-notch writer.)

    So there.

    ReplyDelete
  14. i'm glad that you and "pedaling" are my political go-to gals, which enables me to be politically unresponsible like i like it....

    oh, the haters. they make our lives so much more interesting, don't they? or at least they think they do. mine always like to hide under the cloak of annonymity. chickens.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Annie, let me begin by thanking you for the opportunity to talk seriously about Sarah Palin. However, I'm going to stray from your talking points for this reason: I blah blah blah...

    Oh Annie, after reading all that I'm sure you're a new woman,heck, I bet you're taking down those offensive pictures and denouncing the whole thing!

    I agree with anonymous: please kelli and others, take your sweet little thoughts somewhere where they agree with you, you know, like your own blog.
    You are getting boring

    ReplyDelete
  16. To anonymous and friends, I do believe that Annie brought up this topic for conversation. If it was meant to be a "yes ma'am" only post, then maybe the comments should've been turned off.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I brought brownies! Who wants a brownie??

    *throwing the pan in the air*

    ReplyDelete
  18. ElasticwaistbandladySeptember 4, 2008 at 12:41 AM

    I was one of those Palin naysayers. Well, that is until I heard her speak tonight and I studied up on some of her remarkable accomplishments during her brief career in Alaskan government. The woman can handle her business. I'm really amused at all the shrill females who scream and shout about how women have choices in this country and yet they're the very same ones vilifying Palin for balancing motherhood with a career. Harpy Hypocrites!

    I'd very much like to see the list of "Accomplishments" that Senator Obama can produce. I mean real tangible items that you can put on a checklist other than being a great speaker and being hotter than your avergae politician.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think it's telling that none of the "hater" haters are trying to refute any of the points I make about Gov. Palin. Interesting. I hope you all watched her speech last night and noticed that she touched on many of the issues I mentioned.

    ReplyDelete
  20. FYI, this list of legislation proposed by Senator Obama, all of which became law, calls out Sarah Palin's lie last night that he hasn't authored a single law or reform. Ouch, Sarah. Maybe fact-check your next speech before you give it, eh?

    (Click those links, friends. Educate yourselves.)

    OK, sorry Annie. I promise to stop hogging your comments thread.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Ah kelly, I was thinking about you last night! Everytime people clapped for Sarah an angel got his wings.
    How are the liberal blogs this morning? Good and happy?

    Hey Elastic, here's the Senator addressing his friends.
    Anyone who associates with K0S is a big fat zero in my book.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ack! I'm not going to touch these questions with a 10-foot pole. ***Running back to hide safely in my private blog...***

    But I will come back to see what other people say! :)

    Annie, your are truly a brave and strong soul!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Okay Kelly you were articulate and clearly wanted to make some points, and I feel compelled to respond. On Annie's blog. In the comment section. Because I'm cool like that. But it needs to be said first: You came to this blog with no intention of ever even considering McCain and Palin as worthwhile candidates. Seeing as how this isn't even a politically charged blog, just a good ol' girl having fun, expressing herself, these comments sort of strike me the same way as when my 5 year old and 3 year have the nuh-uh/uh-huh fight. Really? Are you that desperate for an argument? I loathe politics for this very reason. I like O'bama. I run in a predominantly Republican crowd and I get the same grief that I'm not willing to bash him every turn. I actually REALLY like Biden and was pretty thrilled when Obama picked him. I have issues with some things about what he/they believe or propos, but to me, it's downright pointless to go around preaching it because this country is too freaking set on being established conservative or established liberal, and doggonit, ain't nuthin' gonna sway 'em.

    I remember hearing crap even as a young child about Reagan being a monkey on a string. Now he's being revered by both parties as the great initiator of change. Clinton was loved and defended to the death by his “believers” He's still one of the most likable, charismatic, engaging people in the public eye. My personal opinion, that man did more damage to our social culture than any one single person I can think of. My personal opinion.

    So: Sarah Palin. A regular person, not a superhero, not a god, not even Miss America---nominated for a position. And suddenly she's rotscum and how dare she try to fool us into believing she's even remotely a decent person? Why? Why does this have to be our response? Is this how WE'D want to be treated if we were capable, competent, and INTERESTED in trying to make changes we believe in, and actually get up off our futon and do it? People disguise their abuse of candidates as “discussing the issues” but it's always only one-sided. Always. There is crap to be said about both candidates. Nobody is perfect (yes I am) and we are willing to accept that about our own party, but absolutely not about anyone else.

    Legislative achievements - If Obama would have had any significant ones, everybody would have heard about them already. His legislative achievements are thin gruel and everyone knows it. So what? That doesn't mean that Obama is the devil.

    Dishonesty - Let's not get into a pissing contest about this - Obama has way more to lose in a conversation about questionable contacts - source material - democratic primary
    Tony Rezko
    Jeremiah Wright
    William Ayers

    Energy Policy: - There is one way to tell if a candidate is serious about energy policy - he or she supports nuclear power. Obama doesn't, but he is quiet about it. Energy independence? He opposed drilling offshore until everyone started making fun of him, then he changed his mind. (What's that? He changed his mind!?!?!) But it's all solar panels and windmills for him (which I support) but no mention of nuclear power - which means he's beholden to fossil fuel vested interests

    “She's not so fiscally conservative after all” is something you could say about all politicians.
    Bottom line is, when you're governing you have to make compromises. Obama people are kind of making a big deal out of this, but they have not shown how Obama would do better. That's important.
    The only one that really comes out shining on the fiscal conservatism thing is Romney, and it turns out that that issue isn't the burning issue in the majority of voters' minds.

    Bridge to nowhere - She supported it then didn't support it. Hmmm, first politician in the history of time to ever change her mind. She should get an award for that!

    I suspect Kelly, that the real reason you don't support McCain Palin has nothing to do with the reasons listed. I have serious doubts that you were holding out to see who McCain picked to see if you would go Republican this election. If I'm wrong, I apologize for the false allegations. If I'm wrong, you are probably the only person in this country who's done this.

    I think at the end of the day everyone has to make a decision as to who they are more comfortable with, and they pull the lever for that person you're most comfortable making decisions that are important to you.

    I'm not about flinging stones to try and enhance the appeal of who I CHOOSE to vote for, but just so you are entirely clear, A lot of people have strong opinions and points of view--even people who are generally on the sidelines

    http://www.johntreed.com/Obamabus.html

    And for the record, I'm still undecided.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Finally, someone responds and addresses real issues! Thanks, Nobody. While we disagree, I appreciate the fact that we're talking about the campaign and not just attacking my teremity in commenting on a post where Annie asked for opinions.

    Make no mistake--I don't think Obama is a perfect candidate (or the messiah, despite what McCain thinks). I take issue with a number of his policies, and from the beginning of his campaign wondered whether he was really the right man for the job. Now that it's down to Obama and McCain, I confess that I prefer Obama and will almost certainly vote for him, and Ms. Palin wasn't likely to make a whit of difference for me.

    That said, a lot of people ARE undecided, and McCain is hoping to scooop up those people with attractive, charismatic, socially conservative Palin. My fear is that people aren't looking beyond her smile and examining her actual record. Yes, let's talk about Rezko and Ayers and Biden's plagiarism gaffe and McCain's Keating Five scandal AND the Bridge to Nowhere and Troopergate and all the rest. Obama and Biden aren't getting a pass on their supposed scandals and gaffes. Neither should McCain, and neither should Palin.

    Obama's legislative record: Can most people name anything McCain did in congress (after 36 years!) other than McCain/Feingold (which he seems to have abandoned)? I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to name legislation supported by senators outside their home district, Obama included. I DO expected people to do their homework before accusing him of doing nothing.

    Flip-flopping: Obama changed his mind about offshore drilling as he educated himself on the topic. I applaud that. Palin changed her mind about the Bridge to Nowhere when she realized it was a nonstarter, and now she lies about having ever supported it. I call that craven. I don't have a problem with politicians changing their minds. I do have a problem with them lying about it.

    You're absolutely right: Sarah Palin is human, as are all politicians. That doesn't mean she doesn't get close scrutiny, or that we should give her a pass on her previous record. She's going to be a heartbeat away from the presidency if McCain wins, and it's perfectly reasonable to inspect her record thoroughly. I invite the exact same discussion on McCain, Obama, and Biden. Come on over to my blog. We'll chat.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Blog Author's Note:

    Just like I suspected, yesterday was a record setting day for hits to my blog. I won't tell you the exact number because that would be unseemly. Just like you don't talk about how much you make or weigh.

    So, if you have something to say, "Get`er said Fred," because I don't know how much more of this I can take. I'm no Ann Coulter.

    Whatever you have to put out there, be sure you can stand by it.

    And remember, no name calling.

    "Thank you. Thank you very much." <--Said like Deputy Chief Brenda Leigh Johnson. If you don't know who that is, imagine a sweet, polite, Southern accent;)

    ReplyDelete
  26. Just a happy commenterSeptember 4, 2008 at 10:33 AM

    "My fear is that people aren't looking beyond her smile and examining her actual record."

    Yes, because that how must of us vote.

    Oooh look, shiny!

    ReplyDelete
  27. *makes porpcorn*

    This is getting good.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I admit I enjoy reading what everyone else has to say, until people start getting mean. I just don't like arguing with people and am a chicken--probably because I have never been a good debater (I would probably just cry).

    But, I do know that I like Gov. Palin and was very impressed with her speech.

    (I just didn't want to be a visit you counted without a comment--sorry, annie ; )

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am sorry people are mean that is just not right --but I know (have learned in a 2 party family)to stop talking politics as soon as someone says 'Yeah but', so no 'yeah buts' here just love to see you having fun while still spreading awareness. You go Annie!! and I was very impressed w/ her speech -- If you do want any 'yeah buts' you can email me.:)

    ReplyDelete
  30. So, can anyone tell me what makes Obama qualified to run the country? Just wondering... because I get all my political info from Annie's blog. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  31. I've read a lot about why Palin shouldn't be veep, but nothing that tells me why Obama should be pres. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

    ReplyDelete
  32. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  33. What qualifies Obama to be president? I don't get why people (especially the ones that consider themselves constitutionalists) keep asking that. The US Constitution qualifies him.

    Article II. Section 1. Clause 5:
    No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.


    The qualifications being that simple is what's allowed parents to tell generations of kids that they can grow up to be president one day, too.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Here's somethin'; I don't believe that "abstinence only" works very well without a more comprehensive education to complete the picture. Ms. Palin apparently advocates the idea that we can tell our kids to just behave when we all know that when a boy and a girl spend enough time together, they may very well explore each other. That's been going on since the beginning of time. The best way any of us have to argue a point is to be able to point out an example, preferably associated with someone or something of importance or prominence. Ms. Palin fits the bill on that issue as her views on the topic don't seem to have worked out so well in her own family. Some might say that it's a family decision as to what our kids should be taught. I agree, and an "abstinence only" policy takes that option away from those of us that want our kids educated and protected. Thank-you.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Annie,
    Kudos to you for being bold enough to go "political" on your blog. I can't even get into a political discussion with my very own parents... the ones who raised me to be a conservative Republican and then once I was married off, fell in love with the Clintons and it's been downhill ever since. My dad finally changed his voter registration over to Democrat this year and he's a HUGE Obama supporter.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Well played BadAti2d. Well played.

    Daily Hero and I agree 100% politically. Call me obtuse, go ahead, I just could not live with someone who didn't match my political beliefs.
    YES!
    And I admire people who can, like a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  37. NCS - You're obtuse.

    Wait, is that still name-calling if she said to do it?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Real mature Big JaySeptember 4, 2008 at 8:38 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I checked on the Rules Book. It says it's not name-calling.

    See Omar? Our amigoship remains intact!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Sorry Big Jay your comments had to go. Spammers scan blogs for topics you might be interested in. I don't want any e-mails about e.d.

    ReplyDelete
  41. My blog. My sandbox. My rules.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Awwww-
    LOVED the video. Thanks for the link.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Good points by all. I like a healthy discussion.

    I think my feelings are not whether it is not ok for Palin but is ok for a man to have a young family (I mean technically there shouldn't even be comparisons between her and Obama because they aren't running for the same position), but my point is that one of her biggest appeals/platforms she touts is the whole "hockey mom" thing, which she in no way will be able to fulfill if she is in the role of VP. Meaning:

    If her kid has a game or her kid is sick or her kid is clinging on her leg because he doesn't want her to leave, it's not like she can go postpone her meeting with world dignitaries or put the Senate on hold, etc. She will have to make a choice and inevitably that choice will have to be (should be) to fulfill her responsibilities as the VP.

    I do believe the mother is the prime nurturer in the family, no matter how great the Mr. Mom dad is, and I think her choice and the consequences of that choice for her family ARE different than if a man is in the same position. BUT that does not mean she will not be able to fulfill those leadership responsibilities the same way a man with small children would.

    I do not think people should judge her for it or that that it should sway their vote one way or the other. It's her life, her family, and her choice, so I really think it should be a non-issue as far as the election goes.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "I do believe the mother is the prime nurturer in the family, no matter how great the Mr. Mom dad is, and I think her choice and the consequences of that choice for her family ARE different than if a man is in the same position."

    Given that, and also given that people will judge (and should judge, according to all the political "character counts" rhetoric) - wouldn't her choice and its potential consequences bring her character into question?

    ReplyDelete
  45. So to get back to the real issues...Did Cindy McCain look fabulous last night or what?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Yes she did! I'm going to buy myself one of those smart looking jackets with the 3/4 length sleeves!

    ReplyDelete