Monday, October 25, 2004
Ninth street pre-election diary, part 2*
Thanks for the link, Insta-Ann.
I will do my best to stay true to my convictions which are as follows: my pen in the election booth will not cross over into the red arena. It will remain with the blue candidates.
Now, on to the torrent of email in response to the link. Let me just post a few answers:
To the reader who asked if I understood how someone might vote for Bush without being a morally corrupt person. The reader tells me, timidly almost, that unlike many fellow Republicans, he, himself tries to understand the Kerry side of the issue even as he is voting for Bush.
My answer? Yes, as a matter of fact, I think I do understand. I can understand how fear of change in leadership now, in the middle of this Iraq mess, may freeze a voter completely, leading them to stay at GWB's side. I can understand that. I, myself, however, don't buy it.
Listen, ye who are drawn to Bush based on his terrorism-Iraq platform: I am offering my sympathies. It must be tough to live in fear that a Kerry-type might be an even less effective leader in the battle to contain international terrorism than Bush is.
And imagine the quandary I'd be in if, say, the Republican candidate was espousing a platform of anti-terrorist measures, similar to that advanced by Kerry, while the Democratic candidate was the Iraq-obsessed-wont-say-he's-wrong-or-that-he-deceived-the-public politician. Whom would I vote for? Would global concerns trump a domestic agenda?
Here's my honest answer to that dilemma: initially I would be one of those unfortunate undecided's, harassed by every one and their mother (and especially my mother, who tends toward the "passionately convinced" side of every issue) in the course of each waking hour before the election.
But eventually I WOULD decide and it would be in favor of the person who could advance a reasoned position, rather than an emotional, irrational conviction.
This year I have it easy because for me, Kerry trumps Bush on the international-terrorism front, in his domestic policies (not far-reaching enough at times, but it's a start) and perhaps most importantly, in his ability to rely on knowledge and reason in the search for an optimal outcome. I do whole-heartedlybelieve that Kerry is better able than Bush to process vast amounts of information, and to listen to opinions from other nations and from an informed staff who understands the complexities and challenges ahead, rather than questioning their gut and God for the right course of action. Would anyone dispute this??
Staying with Bush now is like staying with a quack who has managed to plug the needle into your vein but has yet to send the right medication into your bloodstream. "It's working! It's working! I can do it! I can do it!" he shouts, as the world grows increasingly doubtful and the patient slowly fades into nothingness.
Okay, other emails: To the reader who asks how I could possibly be Polish, with a first-hand knowledge of socialism and not be a conservative:
Well now, yes, exactly so. The logic is entirely on my side.
To the reader who asks if I was offended by Kerry's disrespect toward my homeland during the debate:
I felt no such disrespect. And much as I love my homeland, I question its motives in initially joining with this Administration's decision to invade Iraq, in the same way that I am now questioning its motives in deciding to pull back. If, indeed, it has decided, because it seems to me that someone on the other side of the Ocean is punting until further word comes on who will be the next leader in America.
To the reader who remarked on my champagne-liberalism (see post below) -- yes, yes, you are correct! It is a wonderful label and I will drink a toast to it come Tuesday. I hope. [You know what killed me, though, during my NY brunch? One of the Columbus Ave. eateries had a sign saying: wear a button, any button -- Kerry or Bush -- and promise you'll vote, and you'll get 15% off your bill. I don't wear buttons, but I live in Wisconsin where my vote will count more and I promise to vote! Shouldn't that buy me at least another 5% off?? Still, in the end I passed on their mimosa brunch because the lines, full of Kerry-ites, those unfearful New Yorkers who are not frozen into believing that Bush is as good as it gets, were too long.]
(*see “forty-second street pre-election diary” post, September 22, for explanation of post title)
I will do my best to stay true to my convictions which are as follows: my pen in the election booth will not cross over into the red arena. It will remain with the blue candidates.
Now, on to the torrent of email in response to the link. Let me just post a few answers:
To the reader who asked if I understood how someone might vote for Bush without being a morally corrupt person. The reader tells me, timidly almost, that unlike many fellow Republicans, he, himself tries to understand the Kerry side of the issue even as he is voting for Bush.
My answer? Yes, as a matter of fact, I think I do understand. I can understand how fear of change in leadership now, in the middle of this Iraq mess, may freeze a voter completely, leading them to stay at GWB's side. I can understand that. I, myself, however, don't buy it.
Listen, ye who are drawn to Bush based on his terrorism-Iraq platform: I am offering my sympathies. It must be tough to live in fear that a Kerry-type might be an even less effective leader in the battle to contain international terrorism than Bush is.
And imagine the quandary I'd be in if, say, the Republican candidate was espousing a platform of anti-terrorist measures, similar to that advanced by Kerry, while the Democratic candidate was the Iraq-obsessed-wont-say-he's-wrong-or-that-he-deceived-the-public politician. Whom would I vote for? Would global concerns trump a domestic agenda?
Here's my honest answer to that dilemma: initially I would be one of those unfortunate undecided's, harassed by every one and their mother (and especially my mother, who tends toward the "passionately convinced" side of every issue) in the course of each waking hour before the election.
But eventually I WOULD decide and it would be in favor of the person who could advance a reasoned position, rather than an emotional, irrational conviction.
This year I have it easy because for me, Kerry trumps Bush on the international-terrorism front, in his domestic policies (not far-reaching enough at times, but it's a start) and perhaps most importantly, in his ability to rely on knowledge and reason in the search for an optimal outcome. I do whole-heartedlybelieve that Kerry is better able than Bush to process vast amounts of information, and to listen to opinions from other nations and from an informed staff who understands the complexities and challenges ahead, rather than questioning their gut and God for the right course of action. Would anyone dispute this??
Staying with Bush now is like staying with a quack who has managed to plug the needle into your vein but has yet to send the right medication into your bloodstream. "It's working! It's working! I can do it! I can do it!" he shouts, as the world grows increasingly doubtful and the patient slowly fades into nothingness.
Okay, other emails: To the reader who asks how I could possibly be Polish, with a first-hand knowledge of socialism and not be a conservative:
Well now, yes, exactly so. The logic is entirely on my side.
To the reader who asks if I was offended by Kerry's disrespect toward my homeland during the debate:
I felt no such disrespect. And much as I love my homeland, I question its motives in initially joining with this Administration's decision to invade Iraq, in the same way that I am now questioning its motives in deciding to pull back. If, indeed, it has decided, because it seems to me that someone on the other side of the Ocean is punting until further word comes on who will be the next leader in America.
To the reader who remarked on my champagne-liberalism (see post below) -- yes, yes, you are correct! It is a wonderful label and I will drink a toast to it come Tuesday. I hope. [You know what killed me, though, during my NY brunch? One of the Columbus Ave. eateries had a sign saying: wear a button, any button -- Kerry or Bush -- and promise you'll vote, and you'll get 15% off your bill. I don't wear buttons, but I live in Wisconsin where my vote will count more and I promise to vote! Shouldn't that buy me at least another 5% off?? Still, in the end I passed on their mimosa brunch because the lines, full of Kerry-ites, those unfearful New Yorkers who are not frozen into believing that Bush is as good as it gets, were too long.]
(*see “forty-second street pre-election diary” post, September 22, for explanation of post title)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.