Monday, July 7, 2008


i love barack obama and i will vote for him in november regardless of what stupid things he says to appeal to the middle, more centrist core of independents, but this makes me sad. he was called "the most liberal senator" in 2007 by the national journal, so i seriously doubt he believes these two statements:

"I think we know that abortions rise when unwanted pregnancies rise. So, if we are continuing what has been a promising trend in the reduction of teen pregnancies, through education and abstinence education giving good information to teenagers. That is important—emphasizing the sacredness of sexual behavior to our children. I think that’s something that we can encourage. I think encouraging adoptions in a significant way. I think the proper role of government. So there are ways that we can make a difference, and those are going to be things I focus on when I am president."

"I have repeatedly said that I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that "mental distress" qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions."

fug dat. if you didn't already know, comprehensive sex education is one of the things i feel most strongly about. abstinence-only education DOES.NOT.WORK.

let's think about this: if you teach no sex til marriage, no masturbation, and that contraception doesn't work, what do you think is going to happen? statistics show that people won't use birth control, but they'll still have sex (isn't it something like 70% of abstinence pledges are broken?) and then, when they do get pregnant, we tell them that they made a terrible, terrible mistake (even though everyone on tv is doing it!) and they can't get an abortion. but again, they can't masturbate! even though it's completely safe and normal, the bible has some cryptic quote about a man spilling his seed and how that's bad. so um, let's ignore the idea of separation of church and state and tell teenagers to ignore all of their raging hormones and natural biological processes until bound by marriage. but wait! only straight people can marry. sorry gays. i know our culture surrounds itself with the importance of romance and love, but you should just find some other hopes and desires to occupy yourselves with instead. like the american dream! doesn't money buy happiness? oh wait.

kucinich is my man. he's super liberal, his wife has a tongue ring, AND he believes in aliens. he'd be president in my america, that's for sure.

p.s. sometimes i think i should be less political for the sake of my more conservative readers, but meh. maybe i'll change your mind. come to the left, it's far more fun!

p.p.s. i'm not the biggest fan of babies so this may color my following statement, but why on earth are they regarded as more important than adults? i saw a car with a "baby on board" sticker, and i'm thinking...the fact that there's a baby inside is the only reason for someone to drive respectfully? what about the fact that there are multiple people operating a huge fucking machine that has killed millions and driving recklessly probably isn't the smartest idea in general, regardless of the age of its passengers? ugh. as kathy griffin says, babies are so SELFISH! (ha!)


Dennise said...

I am on the same boat as you are. I will be voting for Obama in November although I can't say I stand behind him 100%. I recently found out that he is an avid supporter of ethanol as an alternative fuel. This means that each time we walk into a grocery store we will be forced into the fetal position because of $3.00 eggs or $4.00 milk! I wish there would someday be a candidate I could truly support with all my heart, but politicians they're all the same.

allison said...

isn't it wretched? elections, for me, are all about the battle between the crappy. the only choice is to vote for the candidate who sucks a little bit less. somehow i don't think that reflects any grandiose political theory on how we should run a civil society....

onomatopoeia. said...

I'm not quite sure how I feel about Obama, I've always been an avid Hillary supporter. I feel like Obama is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But any democrat is better than a republican ;)

In a way it's rather annoying that the rest of the world doesn't get a vote in this matter, especially since we all know that the next president of the USA will have a huge impact on everyone, not just the American citizens.

And I agree, those statements are questionable. I have a hard time comprehending this holier than the pope attitude towards sex in the US. Over here I can't imagine anyone pleeding for abstinence, not even the radical Christians in our parliament. They did, however, manage to change our abortionlaws. And if a government official is against gay marriage he/she is now allowed to actually refuse marrying a gay couple. Fools.

I'm starting to sound like a bitter person, and I'm not even that old yet :p

allison said...

i really liked hillary too. i was split between her and obama. i don't want to vote for someone just because they're a woman (it's much more fair to vote for the best person of the job REGARDLESS of gender), but i also thought she had a lot of great experience for the job. but i don't know if she would have had a chance at winning, because there is SO much sexism/specific hillary hating.

i don't know what it is about her. the fact that she's strong and independent? the only problem i have with her is her view on censorship (she thinks video games can be blamed for causing teen violence and the like. i hate that!)

i love hearing the opinions of people in other countries, especially ones with much more liberal social policies. you all are lucky, even if there's still a long way to go!