Blogs home At Random
Political Peeves: Cleaning Out Your Closet
With the Obama train hoping to get back on track with this evenings "right side of history," acceptance speech by Engineer Obama, conductor Biden's knowledge and support, and party unity/stability coming from the caboose, - see Hillary and Bill smiling and waving - it is time to clean out your political closet.
We all have political peeves; now is the time to air them.
Personal political peeves:
Obama supporters who have their undies bunched so tightly over the thought of Hillary supporters taking their vote elsewhere that they can hardly breath. Maybe its time for die hard supporters of both parties to stop thinking as though they're wearing depends and realize the politics of today are capable of moving past party lines drawn in the sand by previous policy makers.
People who think they'll change my mind through debates. Debating only cements my reasons for thinking as I do.
Labeling: Some people need to see someone as a PUMA, a racist, or a sexist to better understand, or not, why someone thinks and votes differently.
People who don't respect each of us as uniquely different with our own set of values/reasons, as valid as any of their own, to vote - as we choose.
What are your personal political peeves? They may be from either party of your choice; even your own!
Which do you most enjoy: the politics of the Olympics, or the Olympic feats of our politicians?
Thank heavens I don't own any pantsuits!
Top ads RSS
Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment · Bars · Theatres · Restaurants · Coffeehouses · Libraries · Antiques · Services
- Blog: Your Favorite Side November 20, 2008 · 39 comments
- Al-Qaida No. 2 insults Obama in new message November 20, 2008 · 74 comments
- Civic illiteracy is alarming November 21, 2008 · 55 comments
- A threat to all November 21, 2008 · 63 comments
- Blog: Backyard Fence Blog 4: Cozy Up October 17, 2008 · 440 comments
- Center stage: New LAC director takes helm November 21, 2008 · 29 comments
- October jobless rate relatively low; worsening economy expected to be reflected soon November 21, 2008 · 8 comments
- On the street: Have lower gas prices changed your holiday travel plans? November 21, 2008 · 17 comments
- Sunflower Electric sues state leaders November 19, 2008 · 97 comments
- Blog: A Dog, By Any Other Name, Would Still Smell Like A Dog! November 18, 2008 · 140 comments
- Garden City resident gives $200,000 to Marching Jayhawks November 20, 2008
- Bargain hunters bid farewell as Arensberg shoe store prepares to shut its doors after 50 years November 20, 2008
- Author to discuss grief and the holidays November 21, 2008
- Turnpike ramps to reopen Monday at West Lawrence interchange November 21, 2008
- Johnson County funds to help improve K-10 Connector service between Lawrence and Overland Park November 20, 2008
- Two banks in Lawrence call off merger talks November 21, 2008
- Eudora business sweet on scrub February 13, 2003
- Long-awaited Basehor market under construction November 14, 2008
- Seabury basketball to stage scrimmage November 21, 2008
- The brink of history November 21, 2008
28 August 2008
at 11:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ReadingSports (Anonymous) says…
The term taliban being applied to American Christians being involved in the political process…
And the overuse of the words nazi and fascist…
28 August 2008
at 12:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tvc (Anonymous) says…
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Convent…
People that can not or refuse to see shades of grey.
28 August 2008
at 12:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
RETICENT_IRREVERENT (Anonymous) says…
Your frozen margarita melting before someone is through speaking their bit at a party convention. They should only speak as long as it takes someone to suck one down.
Also politicos saying things as: Dad told me “Champ, when you get knocked down, get up. Get up.” Mom told me: “When I got knocked down by guys bigger than me, she sent me back out and demanded that I bloody their nose so I could walk down that street the next day.”
Then in the next section of their speech saying “Like millions of Americans, they're asking questions as profound as they are ordinary.”: “Now, we owe more on the house than it's worth. How are we going to send the kids to college?”
Talking about taking personal responsibility one moment, then next saying it's not an individuals fault they borrowed too much on a house they couldn't really afford.
So now I'm confused. Should I take personal responsibility or should I rely on the government?
28 August 2008
at 12:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
liggyon (David Lignell) says…
My PP's:
(1) Republicans labeling Democrats as liberal
(2) Democrats labeling Republicans as conservative
(3) Independents labeling both as evil.
NOTE: There are aspects of each in my value system, though only a touch of the evil.
(4) People who strive to interject politics — or clearly bias political humor — into every social context possible during an election year. Their intent may be a good discussion, but their impact is usually offensive or disruptive. (During a work meeting, for example, or when out in a social setting with a diverse group of people.)
28 August 2008
at 1:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
Wow, these are some serious pet peeves you've managed to list already.
I love reading things such as this from reader base because all of you have such varied responses. I always presume to think that there will be so many ones listed that are similar to my own, that is my mistake!
This is an eye opener for me - and as I mentioned they are quite interesting.
David and Reticent, great reasons to avoid social settings that may be, or may become, political in nature. Very difficult to avoid these days as the topic comes up much like the weather. Is it safe anywhere? :)
Reticent, feel free to drink the margarita - let them think what they may!
tvc, I couldn't agree more. There are so many shades of grey in our politcal arena. Great point. And what one may see as a grey shade, another may see in total black or white.
reading sports, I have certainly heard the words you mentioned overused. Buzz words that become popular and make the one using them feel more self important perhaps? Not to be judging them of course……
28 August 2008
at 1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
“Obama supporters who have their undies bunched so tightly over the thought of Hillary supporters taking their vote elsewhere that they can hardly breath.”
––––––—
It's not that Obama supporters “have their undies bunched”, it's that they don't understand why someone who was originally going to vote for Clinton would then change their vote to McCain.
As an Obama supporter, I can understand not voting for Obama if you don't want to. It's your vote and your right to use it how you see fit. But what I don't understand is this: if you support Clinton for her leadership and policy positions, then it would make the most sense to me that you move your vote to someone who is essentially “the next best thing”.
Now I'm not saying that has to be Obama. It may be some 3rd party candidate, which is fine. What doesn't make sense is the idea that McCain is the “next best thing” to Clinton. They agree on very few, if any, issues. I'm not a Democrat, but an Independent who supports Obama, so you can't dismiss my point as just towing the party line. I could care less what that little letter is next to the President's name.
As far as my pet peeves go, there are few things that annoy me more than seemingly contradictory points of view.
28 August 2008
at 2:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kansascrone (Virginia Rigney) says…
ronda - i hope i didn't offend you by asking if you were a puma. someone told me it meant Party Unity My A**. i thought it was quite humorous. as i said in my post - some like their women well-behaved. personally, i find the others much more interesting (like the puma's and hillary and michelle obama, etc.) and would never tell anyone how to vote.
following are my pet peeves: candidates who don't stick to the issues but rather resort to character assasination and fear tactics; being talked down to by those who assume i don't understand the issues; those who have an either/or, black/white approach to the issues. there are more but i'll stop there for now.
peace- ginny
28 August 2008
at 2:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kansascrone (Virginia Rigney) says…
those who think because they were able to “pull themselves up by the bootstraps,” everyone who didn't must be lazy.
talking points
those who think that anything will be solved without having the conversation (in a respectful, intellectual manner.)
28 August 2008
at 2:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…
How about when you disagree with a democrat, then all of a sudden you must be a conservative. Or, when you disagree with a republican then you are a bleeding heart liberal.
“Obama supporters who have their undies bunched so tightly over the thought of Hillary supporters taking their vote elsewhere that they can hardly breath” Rondo
Very nice. Yes. Perfectly well put. These Obamaniacs used to be perfectly cool supporters, but now they sound like Hillary supporters did near the end of her run this summer.
28 August 2008
at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
pdecell (Paul Decelles) says…
One of my peeves is simply the destructive rhetoric that develops in the political season and you see it with these anti Obama attach books including one by the same people who swift boated John Kerry. From the other side is a site that is demanding that John McCain should get tested for Alzheimer 's, sorry the link has escaped me.
Another peeve is similar to Dave's in that I don't like people attributing certain beliefs to me just because I am a liberal. George Will did this the other day in his column where he implied that all liberals are against nuclear power. Earth to George it aint so. That is as silly as the tendency to paint conservatives with a broad brush.
Can't we talk about issues without labeling and tearing down some we disagree with?
28 August 2008
at 2:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…
This week's pet peeve is how people think I'm some sort of anarchist because I'm not watching the Dems Pep Rally. A co-worker thinks I'm the devil because I didn't watch Slick Willy's rah rah speech. Those conventions are not designed to be anything but a rah rah slap yourself on the back rally for their own party. Same with the other party. Gimme some debates and I'll try to waddle through all the spin and make an informed decision.
28 August 2008
at 3:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
Well this time around there are several comments and peeves that I do share with you! It is funny how many news one I thought about over the past hour or so.
logic,”it's that they don't understand why someone who was originally going to vote for Clinton would then change their vote to McCain.” If I can accept why you would want to vote for Obama, why can't you accept that a Hillary supporter may end up voting for McCain?
There are so many reasons that a person votes for another person - many of them go beyond a simple idea or thought (not saying that is what you think). Just accept it and don't let it eat you up. There is nothing you can do about how and why someone else chooses to vote as they do. What your mind may not fathom or be able to wrap itself around, another understands perfectly.
I learned a long time ago just to accept people and their decisions. We can't change it or control it. I personally will “most likely” write Hillary in, but I sure accept that a large number of Hillary's supporters will vote for McCain. It doesn't bother me in the least. It's only politics.
28 August 2008
at 3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
kansascrone, good heavens no you didn't offend me. I don't know enough about the pumas to determine if I would characterize myself as one or not. I am never offended by questions. I thought your post was wonderful!
I agree with several of your other talking point peeves. I can remember to this day listening to relatives as they “heatedly” discussed politics. Some things don't change! :) Seems like anytime you want a good discussion just mention parenting issues or politics. Well, I guess there is also sex. :)
It is a peeve of mine if people get irrational when discussing politics (or anything) and get so mad they resort to name calling, etc. I have done this so I get peeved at myself for it. I love hearing the differences in people. Much more interesting than what we have in common.
28 August 2008
at 3:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
o-bob, I agree. Any simple statement throws you over the top in someone else's mind if you disagree over the slightest thing. Did you really just call me Rondo? I just love that! :) Someone used to call me that many, many years ago so it has been awhile.
Paul, agreed. I think for a person to state they are a democrat or a republican they have several key issues that are agreed upon, but it certainly doesn't mean you are, or should be, one hundred percent the same. That would be quite strange. And as we know even political families of the same party have different ways of thinking about the same issue. Tis a good thing.
28 August 2008
at 3:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…
“Did you really just call me Rondo? ”
Sorry about that.
28 August 2008
at 4:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cait48 (Anonymous) says…
One of my pet peeves is that so many people bring the personal lives of the candidates into the fray.
Edwards had an affair and it's ruined his political career. Why? What does this have to do with his ability to be a leader?
Clinton had Lewinsky.
Ted Kennedy had Chappaquiddick
John Kennedy had prostitutes brought into the White House.
Robert Kennedy had Marilyn Monroe (who also had an affair with JFK but it was primarily Bobby).
Let's not concentrate just on the Democrats.
Regan, that icon of the right, was forced into marriage to both of his wives due to pregnancy. He was unfaithful to Jane Wyman long before their divorce.
John McCain divorced his crippled first wife to marry his present wife whom he had been having an affair with long before the divorce. (Shades of Edwards!)
Let's go back even further in history.
Jefferson and Sally Hemmings. (Unproven but it has been determined that Jeffersons DNA is in Hemmings' descendants).
Warren G. Harding (“Ma! Ma! Where's my pa? Gone to the White House Hah Hah Hah!”)
The list goes on and on and on.
This peeve will probably tick off some people who feel it is their right to invade the bedroom and be a bystander to the sex life of every political candidate who walked down the road. But the truth is who a man (or woman) sleeps with has no bearing on their effectiveness as a leader. It's time people got their hypocritical noses out of the crotches of our candidates.
28 August 2008
at 4:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
eileenroddy (Eileen Roddy) says…
Ronda, why do debates cement your reasons for thinking as you do? Did you mean people who argue with you and try to make you change your mind about an issue?
I'm interested because I have tried to listen to most of the debates in order to get more information and make a decision about how the next President might possibly operate.
I like to try and “listen” to what is not being said as well as what is being said. It can be relatively easy to pick out “pat” or insincere answers from ones that people really believe in.
28 August 2008
at 5:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
sdinges (Anonymous) says…
I hate how every single simple thing becomes politicized and polarized. For example: How does recycling in Lawrence, KS become a vicious liberal-conservative issue? Perhaps it's an offshoot of the fact that somehow climate change became political? Give me a break - you can have a discussion about some things without ever mentioning political leanings.
The idea that anyone is “crazy” to vote for a certain candidate. Everyone has their reasons - and generally they're quite rational reasons, at their base. Even if someone is a one-issue voter, if that is the issue most important to them, then their decision is rational. Voting is a personal choice. I don't have to agree with you. And if I don't agree with you, it doesn't make me insane - we are different people, with different points of view. If you can stop from getting emotional and insulting, maybe we can have a discussion and try to understand each other - even if we don't agree. (General “you,” of course, not Ronda you).
28 August 2008
at 5:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
o_bob, I liked the Rondo! :)
cait48, I am one of those people who probably peeves you then. For me faithfulness and honesty with your most intimate of life partners is important. If you can't be trusted with your wife or husband, I personally am not going to trust you with my interests. I think there is also the real fear that the President may be, “Sleeping with the enemy” and giving out top secret information or endangering their own life. They sure are endangering their political careers these days by having an affair. I do, however, respect your views on this topic.
eileen! Hey you! The reason it cements my views is because after I list all the reasons why I feel the way I do about an issue or a person I understand it even better for myself than I did before. It is kind of like teaching someone something - you end up learning it yourself from different angle(s). I am one of those people who love watching the debates, but I agree I also watch for human nature giveaways about character - expressions, body language, etc. I used to love Bill Clinton, but now I think he and his actions are rather snake like. He is so smooth, so slick (yeah, I know, Slick Willy), so cunning and keenly shrewd and intelligent. Some/most of those characteristics are desireable, but he is a bit over the top!
sdbinges, I see what you are saying. And I see this happening a lot with the T, coal plants, etc., and by the way, “The idea that anyone is “crazy” to vote for a certain candidate. Everyone has their reasons - and generally they're quite rational reasons, at their base. Even if someone is a one-issue voter, if that is the issue most important to them, then their decision is rational”. May I please steal this from you? I love the way you phrase this; I couldn't agree more!
28 August 2008
at 5:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…
How about anyone against Obama is racist. Against Hillary is sexist. Against McCain is ageist. When I see people saying these things in a post or in conversation, I just tune out. Usually, if they are at this point, they have no arguement or legitimate point.
28 August 2008
at 5:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
Right you are. It makes me tune out also, o_bob_o (sorry, couldn't resist). If they start talking about race, sex, age, I fear what else will come out of their mouth and I run like the wind! And I hate to say this, but some of my closest friends make comments like this. Who knew!
28 August 2008
at 5:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
sdinges (Anonymous) says…
Now, pertaining to the secondary discussion: How could someone who supported Hillary turn around and vote for McCain. I'd like to try to explain one point of view.
I consider myself a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. I liked many of Hillary Clinton's ideas, and her husband's administration had a reputation for being fiscally responsible. Thus, I can see that Hillary would probably try to implement her ideas in a financially sound way, and she might even clean up some of our deficit problems.
But she lost. And here we sit with Obama and McCain. Unlike Hillary, Obama doesn't sound financially reasonable at all. He does not sound like a man who balances ideals with budget, and has flat out stated he plans on raising taxes - a lot. When Obama talks, I start feeling a lot less socially liberal and a lot more fiscally conservative.
Then there's McCain - continued war in Iraq, but at least his history shows he doesn't always tow the party line. I don't know if he's going to fix our current budgetary problems, but at least I can count on him to try to cut pork, corruption and waste. If I cross my fingers and close my eyes, I can see us maybe being better off after four years.
So I'm faced with two disasters (in my opinion) - ongoing war in Iraq, or a significant increase in taxes (to the point of reducing my quality of life). Well, the truth is, I can stomach the war, but I can't stomach a 35% capital gains tax.
So that's why I could vote for Hillary, but I'll vote for McCain over Obama. You might think it's shallow, but I am trying to plan for my financial future.
28 August 2008
at 5:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…
Ronda -
On the flip side of the race/sex/age thing, is the conspiracy folks. Obama is muslim. Obama is marxist. Obama's middle name. Hillary had a bunch of people killed when Bill was president. It is quite silly to listen to these folks. The guy that cut my hair last claimed to be a democrat without a candidate to vote for. He listed all the above nonsense I just typed. I chuckled when he said it was Hillary who had all those people killed. Everyone knows it was Bill who had them killed. ;)
28 August 2008
at 6:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
femail (Linda Hanney) says…
I was at a function recently where the before dinner prayer stopped just short of endorsing a candidate.
28 August 2008
at 6:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
RETICENT_IRREVERENT (Anonymous) says…
“I'm some sort of anarchist” - T_O_B
Nothing wrong with that.
Unless you misspelled that and really meant “I'm some sort of anti-Christ”…
Now that's Big Trouble in Little China.
28 August 2008
at 7:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…
tvc: “People that can not or refuse to see shades of grey.”
Ronda: “tvc… There are so many shades of grey in our politcal arena… And what one may see as a grey shade, another may see in total black or white.”
My pet peeve: people so focused on shades of grey that that miss the rainbow.
[ interlude ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAspt_…
28 August 2008
at 10:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tvc (Anonymous) says…
Shades of grey are our life experiences. My life experiences are my truths, and my truths shape my views on the world. We are all wearing shades that change our view of the world.
Some people will see a rainbow and remember God's promise not to flood the earth.
Some people will see a rainbow and remember the struggle for Gay rights.
Some people will see a rainbow and remember the science of a rainbow.
And when I see a rainbow, I will remember my silly friend taking pictures in the rain. All of her struggles seem to lift for just a moment and let her enjoy life again.
28 August 2008
at 10:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…
tvc: “And when I see a rainbow, I will remember my silly friend taking pictures in the rain. All of her struggles seem to lift for just a moment and let her enjoy life again.”
… and now, when I see a rainbow, I too will remember your silly friend taking pictures in the rain… on a day, less grey.
29 August 2008
at 12:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bearded_gnome (Anonymous) says…
just a note Paul,
using “swift boat” as a pejoritive is common among the left.
the truth is, they forced John Kerry to “update” his biography several times, highlighting several “inaccuracies” in his telling of his personal history. Further, all of them had put in time, that is the vets, on the same boats, working alongside Kerry. they deserved more respect than they got.
their primary motivation was the statements Kerry made after returning, exaggerating dramatically the frequency of war atrocities committed by our fine troops in Vietnam. In their hearts they feel a very strong reaction to Kerry, they weren't just political pawns.
I do question the “Obama nation” book now released by one of them. this is obviously a step away from personal experience, and has some inaccuracies in it.
***
reply to:
Democrats are assumed to be liberals [forget who had this peeve].
from our perspective, we know that not all democrats are liberal. however, all of the candidates in the democrat primary went to the Dailykos convention. That, among other indications, show that the democrat party is quite completely ruled by the michael moore/moveon.org/dailykos fringe crazies.
why does Joe Lieberman now sit in the Senate as an independent?
29 August 2008
at 9:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
“Then there's McCain - continued war in Iraq, but at least his history shows he doesn't always tow the party line.”
–––––––
That history is ancient. The days of “the maverick” are long gone, and he has voted with President Bush (the same supposedly “fiscally conservative” Bush that has handed us a record deficit) 90% of the time.
If we were talking about the McCain from 10 years ago, I would have a hell of a dilemma myself to resolve between he and Obama. Unfortunately, it seems like that McCain is a thing of the past. If he is elected, I can only hope that his more recent public persona is a result of a desire to achieve office, and that he will revert to his old, rebellious ways.
“Well, the truth is, I can stomach the war, but I can't stomach a 35% capital gains tax.”
And that is a very clear and concise explanation for why you feel the way you do that really has no counter unless I think I can change your fundamental hierarchy of values. I can't say I agree with it—which you may have guessed :-) but I can at least understand it and think that there is no point in trying to convince you otherwise.
I apologize if my desire to understand comes off as closed-mindedness. In reality, I want to understand because I want to change people's minds, even though I still respect their right to make their own decision at the end of the day.
============================================
Ronda, if we just “accept people and their decisions” without questioning or challenging, then there are a great number of misguided ideas that might still be around. Now I'm not advocating intolerance for differences of opinion, but we can be tolerant and concede a person's right to make their own choices without having to stay silent about it.
I can accept that a Clinton supporter may vote for McCain, but since it seems contradictory to me, and I don't want McCain to win, I am going to do my best to change people's minds—or at the very least, get them to think about their position again from a perspective that they may not have considered.
Now of course, they may HAVE considered that different perspecitve and remain convinced of their position. That is their right and I will not tear someone down for feeling that way. As I said, at the end of the day, it is the individual's choice to make.
29 August 2008
at 10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
Just curious how many times Obama had the opportunity to vote for or with Bush. As stated by Repubicans last night, there usually is a high percentage of votes that go with the sittiing President from all parties/people involved.
I for one would need to review each individual item and then judge its merits.
logic, you seem so open in your previous comment, and accepting! :) I don't have the time at present, but will answer your questions at a later date. (perhaps this weekend). You raise some good points.
29 August 2008
at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
sdinges (Anonymous) says…
Logicsound - I don't know that I ever believed Bush was a fiscal conservative. I certainly didn't consider it eight years ago - I was voting for the Liberal party of Canada back then. And four years ago, by all rights he should have lost, and maybe would have if Kerry hadn't been a weak candidate in the end. But I wash my hands of that too - I was not yet a citizen.
And I agree that most of McCain's strengths are “ancient” history, but I too hope that once he's in office, the maverick will come back out. In the last ten years, he has been involved in several bipartisan endeavors, at least.
I hope we've seen the last of the abuses of the Bush administration and they won't become a hallmark of the Republican party. I think it would be extremely sad if our government remains warped in a lasting way.
Unfortunately there's no party that encompasses all of the things I care about. So I'm stuck with pro vs con charts on both candidates, but to make a point I brought it down to my two most important issues - I despise the war and I despise taxes. Too bad there's no serious candidate to suit both! I generally feel pretty disheartened about it. For the first time in my life, I understand why people don't vote.
P.S. Ronda, of course you can quote me. Love your blogs - always such great discussions.
29 August 2008
at 8:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
sdinges, what do you feel about the ole maverick in McCain with this decision? Do you feel that is what this is more about, bucking the standard politics and showing the Democrats the Republicans can be just as progressive in their thinking, is it about stealing women from the Democratic party, taking back conservative Republicans? What do you think was the main objective here?
Linda, I would love to know where you had dinner, but I won't ask. I just won't do it. Okay, would you send me a private email. :)
tvc, tange - I too like a rainbow. May we begin to see all things in rainbows. “She comes in color everywhere - she's like a rainbow.”
29 August 2008
at 8:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Satirical (Anonymous) says…
My political peeve is people blogging about politics (note: please do no check my message history)
Vote Red!
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgur…
29 August 2008
at 10:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
okay, satirical, I know better than to check your message history - been seeing you around a bit these last few days.
How are you doing?
29 August 2008
at 10:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…
( Hmm… what IS this running “closet” theme in Ronda's articles, of late…
and will it affect her vote later this year… WILL she write-in “Hillary”… and then follow with the flowery artillery? )
30 August 2008
at 8:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Satirical (Anonymous) says…
Rhonda…
“How are you doing?”
I am doing great. I am excited about McCain's VP pick, Palin. I think she will be a big inspiration to a lot of women including working mothers.
I thought your “labeling” political peeve was the best one. I think some people don't take the time to understand different points of view, so they assume anyone who doesn't share their paradigm is ignorant or has some evil ulterior motive.
To add to the list: People who don't understand politics is just a game. While it is a game with serious consequences as far as allocation of scarce resources, many people confuse pandering and politics with governing and leadership.
30 August 2008
at 11:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…
sdinges - then I will be using your comment - I have it committed to memory. Perhaps you can be my ghost writer for any speeches I may give someday. :)
tange, Is there an ongoing closet theme? Suppose there is, coming out of closet, cleaning out the closet. Perhaps my closets are telling me winter is coming and I better get to work on them! :) I'll keep everyone posted as I move through the process of who I decide to vote for - but it has to work both directions. If you have not made a solid decision then please let us know how the ongoing debates change your attitude about any candidate.
Sat, glad you are a happy satirical! New political pet peeves: McCain calls everyone, “My friends.” (Okay, that is really one he has been doing for a while. People judging our new VP candidate before they have a clue what type of person she is or what she has done in her life.