So tomorrow's Election Day. Much of the country has already been voting for weeks now, but here in California, there's little early voting, which is no big deal, since lines haven't been long for any of the elections since we've been round these parts.
Of course, a lot of the regular Left of the Dialians—is there any such creature as a regular Left of the Dialian, really?—live in swing states and themselves swing rather heavily to the right, and you know I love each and every one of you like the long-lost annoying little sibling I fortunately never had. And before you go vote, I'd like you to just take a few seconds and look at the following charts.
Even a quick glance tells you that if you're voting on economic reasons, Barack Obama is the only reasonable choice, as Mitt Romney has surrounded himself with former George W. Bush advisors and the very few plans he's admitted to having have all been to commit to returning to Bush's policies. Care about the deficit? Well, cast your mind back to early 2000 and you'll recall we didn't have one. We had a surplus. Until Bush's tax cuts—followed by two unfunded wars and the Medicare Part D giveway to Big Pharma—blew it up and sunk us into an ocean of red ink. It's not the bailouts and it's not TARP: it was Bush's tax cuts for millionaires that screwed us. Those are the same tax cuts Mitt Romney wants to expand—the guy who's hidden his money away in the Caymans and is the first presidential candidate in 44 years not to release his tax returns, something his own father said was shady.
And if you vote for pro-life reasons, as so many of you do, as the father of nearly twenty-nine kids, I'd like to remind you that for almost the first six years of the Bush administration, Republicans controlled the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives. And they didn't introduce one serious pro-life bill. No personhood amendment, even though they controlled all three branches. In other words, if you're pro-life, there's absolutely no reason to vote Republican, as all they ever do is play you as patsies, giving nothing but sweet talkin' lip service in a battle they clearly have no intention of winning but which exists merely to win elections and enrich lobbyists, and why on earth would you reward that kind of behavior?
Finally, as many of you may know, the first decade of the wondrous new century was not a great one for me, for a variety of reasons. But perhaps the biggest was the funk into which I was cast by the stunning appointment of George W. Bush as president, and then perhaps his reelection in 2004. Things were, I will say for the first time publicly, more than a little difficult at home at times, in no small part, due to the daily horrors I believed were being inflected upon my beloved country. The criminal negligence that led to 9/11 is the most obvious, but the unimaginable incompetence in the way the Iraq War was run, as well as the immoral disregard for Katrina and its victims...well, y'all know the drill.
So I'm just saying that if you love me and/or Top Management and you live in a swing state and you cast a vote for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, you may as well be voting for us to get divorced. And here's the really bad news: in the split, she gets the kids and the books, and you get me.
I live where the President likes to come and chat (with The Boss), so, a certified ImportantSwingState and, um, I voted to keep y’all married.
**sigh**
I sure hope I have enough chocolate to make it through this night ....
Posted by: Ellie | Tuesday, November 06, 2012 at 04:16 PM
For better or for worse, for red or for blue...
<3
Posted by: Lissa | Tuesday, November 06, 2012 at 05:18 PM
I enjoy your blog and respect your view point. But...What about religious freedom and the statement of the US Bishops? I agree that Republicans often play lip service to pro-life agenda but the President has a lot of power that he uses to further his beliefs. Why did Planned Parenthood hate George W.? Why do they love Barack O.? I hate politics but I will always vote as pro-life as I can. Here in the U.S. and in many parts of the world (because of Executive Order and administration policies), the unborn are the big losers today. :(
Posted by: Lynn N. | Wednesday, November 07, 2012 at 08:30 PM
Lynn—
A good question. I'm going to outsource my answer to Father Peter Daly, who wrote recently:
I can't possibly say it better than Father Daly, although I would add that in the Supreme Court case Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), Justice Antonin Scalia ruled that even though the use of peyote was part of a Native American religious ceremony, the state still had the right to take punitive action against peyote users using peyote in a religious ceremony. Blood transfusions contradict the teachings of Christian Scientists, and yet the courts and legislatures have dictated that Christian Scientists must allow medical personnel to give their children transfusions if doctors deem it medially necessary. Pope John Paul II said the Iraq War was unjust and illegal, and yet as a practicing Catholic my tax dollars went to support this unjust and illegal war.
It's the price we pay for living in this great nation in which we live. It's not perfect, it never has been and it never will be, but we can and will keep striving to make it a more perfect union.
Posted by: scott | Saturday, November 10, 2012 at 07:41 AM
Disappointing response. The National Catholic Reporter and Peter Daly will always be there for a dissenting opinion. What about obedience? What about unborn, innocent life? Life is not a matter of personal opinion. Murder is happening every day. If a politician said they were personally against any other type of murder but wanted you to be free to choose, no one would have tolerance for that. Instead of defending the President's position, I wish someone would say that they are trying to get the regulation changed while still thinking this is the right president overall. But all I ever read is justification for the position. I do appreciate your taking the time to respond. Thank you.
Posted by: Lynn N. | Saturday, November 10, 2012 at 10:35 AM
I'm sorry you were disappointed by my response. For what it's worth, the feeling is very mutual. Rather than addressing the arguments put forth, you dismiss them out of hand because you don't like the newspaper and have such little respect for the priest that you can't even bring yourself to use his honorific.
As Albert Einstein is reported to have said, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The pro-life movement has been trying to eradicate abortion using the same tactics for 30 years and is no closer to achieving its goals. So by all means, continue doing exactly the same thing and vilify anyone who would dare suggest that the evidence indicates the pro-life leaders don't really have the interests of the pro-life movement at heart, and that the desired end might actually be accomplished some other way. You're doing ever so much good.
Posted by: scott | Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 09:52 AM