Not a Liberal Nor Conservative…

In response to why I’m still fence sitting on Scalzi’s ‘Whatever’, I figured I would post this for all of you who read here. Take what you want and leave the rest, but don’t ever label me as a liberal or a conservative. I might just bite off your head.

1.) I don’t think banning guns is a good idea. For all the lawful people who would turn them in, the criminals would still have them and still be able to get them through black markets, which would leave all those law abiding citizens unable to protect themselves. An armed society is a polite society and protects against a tyrannical government.

2.) I don’t believe the government should have any power over a woman’s body. Yet, personally, I am pro-life.

3.) I do not believe in big government.

4.) I do not believe in raising taxes when poor and middle-income families are hurting! When we stop paying exorbitant amounts of money for toilet seats and hammers, perhaps we won’t need to pull money from already broke tax payers to fund social and war programs.

5.) While I want to help the environment, I do not subscribe to the ‘end of days’ hysteria that is currently hitting both the psyche and appropriately, the market.

6.) I think it’s asinine to negotiate with terrorists. They are terrorists. Diplomacy only works when there is rational thinking involved, and no matter to whom you speak, terrorists have already crossed the border into crazy town. Go ahead and discuss nuclear aspirations with Kim Jong Il over a nice round of 18 “hole-in-one” golf and see how far it gets you.

7.) Like it or not, we are committed to Iraq. I don’t care if you were for it or against it, but we are there, and to withdraw without a stable infrastructure would put everyone in danger.

8.) I am infuriated over big-oil. Any corporation which makes over $1000.00 a minute while people suffer needs to be regulated. No CEO will ever convince me otherwise.

9.) I believe in the death penalty for certain crimes if only convicted through DNA evidence.

10.) I believe in stem cell research.

11.) I am wary of allowing cloning.

12.) I believe we should be pumping as much money into the space program as we possibly can without sacrificing social programs.

13.) The government should have no bearing over what happens in our bedrooms.

14.) The government should, however, fight for any citizen to have equal rights if they are a productive member of society and pay taxes, regardless of race, gender, or sexual preference.

15.) We should take care of our veterans and their families. Conditions in VA homes and hospitals and even barracks are deplorable.

16.) As I don’t believe in paying for something that doesn’t complete a job, Congress and the House must set reasonable goals each term. Seriously, had this been a corporation and I the CEO, I would have fired everyone of those lazy bastards for taking vacation while nothing was done.

I am VERY middle of the road here. The McCain/Palin ticket work for my stances on gun control, !terrorist negotiations, !tax increases, and the death penalty.

The Obama/Biden ticket works for equal rights, stem-cell research, tighter control on big corporations, and social programs.

No one has really given me an answer on Iraq, the space program, environmental issues and cloning that I really care for, so hence my hesitation.

I hope this demonstrates why I’m sitting on the fence, here. I don’t really want to debate my stances, because frankly, I really want to get to my kids and play with them tonight. I’d be happy to discuss it further over e-mail or on my site for where I will be posting this reply to stimulate further crucifixion discussion.

Did I mention I hate politics yet?

15 thoughts on “Not a Liberal Nor Conservative…

  1. Kate, you may yet dethrone Jim as ranter-in-chief.

    That was excellently put – and plus, made way too much sense. I can see why politics turns you off. You’re rational. Practical. Sensible.

    Thank you for sharing your views!

  2. I went and read that thread, just to put your need to rant in context.

    I’m a puckerer too!! I like discussing, but so many people online can’t have a good discussion where one can agree to disagree, understand the other’s viewpoint but not share it, etc. I hate it when everything dissolves into ad hominem attacks.

    I’m becoming more and more of a fan of the parliamentary system.

  3. Kate – clicked over from Scalzi’s blog. A few thoughts (full disclosure – I’m an Obama guy).

    1) I don’t think Kim Jong Il is crazy. If he was, the first indication he had a bomb would be a mushroom cloud over the city of his choice. He wants a bomb for blackmail and deterence – rational (if evil) reasons. Ditto Iran.

    2) Obama’s tax plan lowers taxes on folks making under $250K a year. It raises taxes on (among others) Big Oil.

    3) I’m a gun-owning member of the NRA. Obama’s gun control plan doesn’t bother me, for the simple reason that he’s not looking to do much with guns. He knows (or appears to know) that the gun control debate is over.

    Food for thought (I hope). Please ignore / delete if I’ve crossed over a line.

  4. Jim says:

    Quote:

    9.) I believe in the death penalty for certain crimes if only convicted through DNA evidence.

    I understand the implied perspective here, but do you know that DNA evidence is not remotely infallible?

    There are numerous opportunities during the DNA processing for things to be screwed up, sometimes very subtly; moreso if the processing is rushed for some reason. DNA testing is never 100% accurate; it would require a perfect pristine sample to start with and a flawless analysis which is nearly impossible with current technology (it’s better than it used to be). This is why no judge/jury — today or in the near future — would sentence/condemn someone to death based solely on DNA evidence. (In the U.S., anyway.)

    In reality, no self-respecting district attorney is likely even to go to trial if DNA is absolutely the only evidence they can find… unless the suspect has already been convicted/imprisoned for another crime, during the investigation of this hypothetical homicide, and the authorities have their DNA on file. This has happened a few times in California.

    Now… all that said, I’m not trying to convince you to have a different stance. For all I know, you already know all of this and maintain your view nonetheless. I’m merely providing (I hope) a little more information than you already had so your perspective is a better-informed one. 🙂

  5. Ellen says:

    I think your fence sitting is okay.. for now. the debates will clear a lot of things up for us all..
    1 umm gun control….handguns and assault weapons? any useful purpose? maybe the 2 year in Jewett City last week, that blew his head off with a 44 cal handgun that his parents kept under their pillow for “protection” would be playing and laughing today..
    2 Reproductive jurisdiction.Ms Palin is pro life. She chose to carry to term her baby. The operative word is CHOSE.
    3 Big government. What is bigger than the machine in power now.?
    4 taxes. Obamas plan calls for cuts of all Americans earning less than 250K per year.and taxing the top 5%
    I know that I am not even Approaching 250K a year. You?
    5 end of days hysteria? please expound
    6 Negotiate with terrorists? Aren’t they kinda outside governments? Okay Korea is an exception..
    and maybe the Taliban . but, really, a DIALOGUE, should be kinda a first step on the road to war…. really
    7 Commited to Iraq. It is safe now to go and buy dates and camel milk in the marketplace, but the government cannot seem to form itself. .How long are we gonna spend all of those young men and MONEY to get a lid this box of crackers?
    8 I completely agree.
    9 I agree with qualifications, you know the Jodi foster role in Silence. Maybe it is good to study how such monsters are formed.
    10 Ditto
    11 ditto… becoming a Dittohead now
    12 ditto…I’m faaaallllinngg!
    13 Ditto, it might be fatal..
    14 ooops I am saved.. just in time. Productive members? taxpaying members? problem with that..How about the sick, the elderly, those with ” learning disabilities”, the ones who are having trouble finding a job with a 6% unemployment rate?
    15 Double-ditto with a lot of anger….
    16 If a Democrat wins this election, there is CHANCE that effective change to the status quo could actually occur.. the ral coice is… do you want change? I I do.

  6. Nathan says:

    It’s kind of hard to articulate a political position in a blog comment, but:

    I think government should exist to do for us what we can’t do as individuals, cities and states. Defense, clearly, is in the national interest. Infrastructure is in the national interest. Exploration (on Earth and in Space) is in the national interest. Foreign relations and trade are in the national interest. And while I think that Health Care could be handled better at a state level, some states wouldn’t have the resources of others. Since we are a United States of America, I don’t have a problem with the concept of New York and California having to kick in their share to see that Infant Mortality is brought down in Mississippi.

    I’ve fired a gun exactly one time in my life (an Uzi on full automatic while living on a kibbutz in 1978). I can imagine the circumstances that would make me decide I should own a weapon, but the chances of a Zombie attack really happening are kinda slim. Gun violence is not a problem brought about by by the fact that Americans can legally own firearms. For the most part it’s associated with illegal weapons purchases and by weapons dealers who flout the rules that are already in place. And yeah to what Kate said about dumbasses who are criminally…dumb.

    Things government does not need to do, because I’m perfectly capable of doing it myself, are:
    -decide who I should sleep with, marry or choose to love.
    -protect me from “the terrorists” to the point of annulling the Constitution in order to do it.
    -tax capital gains to the point where you’re forced to spend your income quickly or have to give it up to the Feds. (that last one just pisses me off even though it might not fit the category.)

    Kate, It’s fine to be on the fence, especially if you’re talking about the parties and not just the candidates. Regardless of the fact that I’ve decided on Obama, I have no doubt that the party will force concessions from him. We’ve all seen evidence of that already. The problem as I see it, is that the parties lie about who they claim to be. The Democratic Party is not the warm, loving, paternal, entity it claims to be. The Republicans are not about providing opportunity to everyone to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Both parties are about power and about alternative means of gaining it.

    Oooh. Now I’m sounding mighty cynical.

    I’ll stop now.

  7. I don’t remember ever seeing a 16-point political manifesto which I would agree with on 14.5 points. Moreso, in this day and age, I rarely come across a person who does not allow to be drawn left or right by a single obsessive political concept. You have my admiration for being thoughtful and reasonable, Kate! And my sympathy in having an unenviable task of choosing this year.

  8. Jeri Tania and Ilya: Thanks!

    Chris,

    Thanks for crossing over to post your thoughts! I’ll have to scrutinize both tax plans carefully and then add that to my ever-growing list as to why I’m still fence sitting!

    As far as the gun control issue, Obama did support an Illinois gun ban, and while he suggests he supports the second amendment to the Constituation, he believes it’s okay to ban guns on a local level.

    It’s that sort of flip-flop that makes me queasy. You can’t support something as large as the second Amendment when you are president, only to turn around and say, ‘Well, if CT decides they don’t want guns anymore, I guess that’s okay’ — effectively leaving all those people unable to defend themselves while criminals run free and rob at will.

    Biden also supports an assault weapons ban, btw and was given an F by the NRA for anti-gun legislation.

    ——

    Jim,

    Well, I should probably take out ‘only’ in the stance. It’s greatly important to make sure anyone who is sentenced to death for the murder of anyone, rape/sexual abuse or murder of a child is entitled to due process and a trial in front of a judge and their peers. However, if it found they are guilty without DNA evidence, I would be for sending them to prison without the possibility of parole. Compound it with DNA evidence and it would be the death penalty.

    —-

    Ellen/Mom:

    Any dumbass who leaves a loaded deadly weapon under a pillow needs to go to jail. My heart goes out to the family of that 2 year old who shot himself under the neglectful eye of his parents, but you know what? Those people need to go to jail for helping to murder their child. Anyone who is a responsible gun owner, never leaves a loaded weapon where just anyone can reach it, especially when there are children in the house. Common sense would dictate otherwise. Usually, the majority who handle guns and use them for protection keep ammo in a completely different place and locked behind a heavy door or a gun safe.

    I for one do not want the government spying on my shoulder making me act responsibly when that is inherently my job.

    I’ll discuss other issues with you, in person. Should be an interesting conversation.

  9. R-nonymous says:

    Exactly who ever suggested negotiations with terrorists? I’d like exact names and dates please. Isn’t this really a GOP talking-point/scare tactic?

  10. AB says:

    If you want somewhere to compare their tax policies, this is a good report put out in June 2008 by the Urban Bookings Tax Policy Center comparing the proposed tax plans by Mccain and Obama from that month.

    http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411693_CandidateTaxPlans.pdf

    I found it originally thanks to factcheck.org but it is probably the current decider on why I’m leaning towards voting Obama since I don’t agree with 50% of Obama’s social issues and definitely not a huge fan of his lack of foreign knowlege as shown by comments involving Russia v. Georgia and various comments about Iraq. His tax plan tilts things back in his favor in my mind even though I am more than a little concern what his effect on businesses will be considering there already is a bad problem with layoffs and hiring rates currently.

  11. Cordelia says:

    You may want to have a look at this: http://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/ – It calculates your Obama tax cut. McCain’s plan keeps taxes low for MUCH RICHER PEOPLE.

    Also, Obama is not going to ban your guns, just leave licensing restrictions in place. Nor will he insist on teaching evolution in schools nor put a book-banning mentality in the person of Sarah Palin into power.

    He’s not my favoritest candidate ever or anything, but I’m just sayin’

  12. GunEthusiast says:

    1 umm gun control….handguns and assault weapons? any useful purpose? maybe the 2 year in Jewett City last week, that blew his head off with a 44 cal handgun that his parents kept under their pillow for “protection” would be playing and laughing today..

    This sounds like a classic case of poor parenting and a failure to secure firearms. The parents should be tried for criminal negligence and manslaughter. A properly secured firearm, in a locked nightstand, safe, or gun cabinet, can be accessed in seconds–even when you are roused from a deep slumber. Responsible gun ownership dictates not just security, but familiarity. Drills should be conducted to make sure that you can adequately obtain your defensive weapon and that the weapon is secure.

    As to firearms having a useful purpose, I find Kate’s unattributed Heinlein quote to be fascinating: “An armed society is a polite society.”

    Imagine a world where a rapist wouldn’t dare contemplate stealing a woman’s virtue…because he knows that there are men and women who possess the will and the means to stop him with deadly force. Imagine a congested freeway, where every man and woman is aware that driving irresponsibly could result in having defend their selfish actions with their lives. There are obvious pros and cons to either scenario, but the bottom line(s) are these:

    1. An armed population is an insurance policy against tyranny.
    2. In a disarmed society, only the criminals have firearms, leaving them free to do as they will in the absence of police.
    3. A armed population reduces the need for police protection, freeing up tax dollars that can be better spent elsewhere.

    One of my favorite sayings is that “Guns don’t kill people.” The reason for this is that a gun, just like a hammer, a butcher knife, or a candlestick (in the library, no less) can be a weapon in the right hands. Would you have us outlaw butcher knives? If so, how will you cut your vegetables and meat? Your immediate argument will be “Guns have no purpose aside from killing.” I would argue that most firearms are not built for the express purpose of killing. Instead, they are built for defense and deterrence.

    I would extend the above phrase a little bit.

    “Guns don’t kill people…liberals who outlaw concealed carry permits kill people.”

  13. Kate, I’m a purple person, too. Neither red nor blue, but a little of both. Is there room on your fence for me? I may not agree 100% with all your points, but I do like the way you think. When asked who I’m for, I reply, “I don’t know, yet.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *