Let’s not even talk about the abortion issue, ok? I have so many thoughts on it, but I’m pretty sure none of them can possibly be original. Instead, let’s focus on the ability to have a position on a topic and not waffle. Or, how not to be a smarmy politician (sorry, that’s redundant, isn’t it?). Or, how not to be the worst possible example of a sorry human being ever.
Rudy and Mitt. Mitt and Rudy. Jane is a Mormon who lived in NYC from 1999-2002. I was in Manhattan on 9/11. I go to church at the same church as Mitt; at least, I think I do. I’m beginning to wonder which church he goes to.
Rudy, apparently is, and always has been pro-choice (no semantic argument!; remember, we’re not discussing abortion, but position). Rudy has somewhat suppressed this view in his campaign for the nomination. However, he is planning to come out and watch the fallout.
Mitt apparently was “effectively” (does “effectively” mean “politically-expediently”?) pro-choice until two years ago. Now, because of the stem cell debate (huh?) he is pro-life (no, no, no semantics).
I have to say I like Rudy for being willing to fall on his sword, however I might feel about his sword. Unless I realize that this is just a cunning (if it’s successful) ploy to appeal to the other side in the actual election, and forget the primaries. In which case, I was right all along:
There are no good politicians. And the ones you thought might have some promise are the worst.
Subscribe by email
Why I don’t vote. I get a lot of heat over being a political abstainer, but people don’t seem to realize that to abstain is a vote in and of itself. Our political system is a joke.
i agree that it is a joke. but it is the best joke i’ve ever seen or read about or heard about. we have, after all, the freedom to say whatever we want about it.
i didn’t vote last november because i had a 2-week-old baby. i still felt guilty, though, esp. since i kinda caused my mom not to vote also, because she flew out that tuesday to come help me.
when i voted in the last presidential election, i took Avery and Callie with me and explained what i was doing while we waited in line at the booths. i couldn’t explain it without crying.
the french are so odd. but they had like, what? 85% turnout. that says something.
the abstaining vote reminds me of the short story Bartleby the Scrivener by Melville. He chooses to withdraw from life, and his famous line is “I would prefer not to.” he kills me!
Oh, Bartleby! In a way, I think the story is about how valid of a choice that is (to withdraw and choose “not to” do whatever). Nobody is ever w/o options.
As far as voting, I am pretty passionate that I get out there. I remember how in 2000 I was so grouchy that I wouldn’t turn 18 until after the election. Marie, while I do understand how choosing to not participate is a way of dissenting about the system, I’m sure it’s frustrating when your choice is mistaken for apathy, because there are so many who truly don’t care.
Karin, studying for AP History (exam is today) asked me about those bums in big oil and their obscene profits (my words, not hers). It was a not-to-be-missed opportunity for me to polemicize. I think the real culprits are politicians, esp in congress, who have bowed to green lobbys, and prevented the opening of ANY new refining capacity in the last 27yrs, during which time the US’s demand for oil has gone up 25%+
So here is how this ties in with politicians, their positions, and the duty to elect good ones. Who is really at fault for congress’s failings? As Pogo used to say (way too much before your time) “We have met the enemy, and he is …US”. We already have term limits: throw out the bums! We already have line-item veto: veto everything objectionable! We already have a democratic republic. We already have all that we need, but unfortunately, we are getting just what we deserve. Really, how could we expect politicians to be better or more moral or more honest or more statesmanly than the average US voter. Don’t get me started. I really think we are getting what we collectively deserve.
shannon
Sorry , but I am going to talk about abortion to prove my point. You brought it up.
I don’t see the big deal about Mitt changing his opinion, even in public. I have many strong opinions and I change them very often. It doesn’t make me some terrible human being to learn and change how I see things. sometimes people get more information or see other aspects of an issue, even abortion.
I have a couple of very good friends who are now active members of the church. during most of their life, one was not a member and one was inactive. Both of them had abortions during the non member part of their life. I admire and love both of these women and I don’t think any less of them for their past. They are very loving and caring mothers. They are my favorite women in my ward. One day on a temple trip we were discussing abortion and I realized that many good women have abortions not because of convenience, like the pro-lifers like to shout. Women often do it out of fear or because they are very deperate. The women I know that had abortions were living with drug addicts or drunks and had several children and were very abused. they did not want to bring another child into that situation. Now they both regret their choice , but at the time they felt like it was a lesser of two evils.
The reason why I bring this up is because life is very hard and complicated for many people. I am not a pro choice person, but I would also not rally with the pro lifers. Once i went to the manti pagent with my small children. there was a pro life rally there and there were very gross anti abortion posters that my small children saw. it was worse than something R rated. Ever since then I vowed not to allign myslef with the pro life people because they should not have such rallies where there are small children at a temple. It put a very distubing image in their minds and we had a hard time enjoying the temple.
Maybe, just maybe Mitt feels the same way. He would not never encourage anyone to have an abortion. He may feel that it is wrong and that it is not a good choice. But maybe at the same time he understands that there are many desperate women who feel a lot of fear about bringing a child into a drughouse. And maybe he does not like the agenda of the pro life people.
Of course I do not know any of Mitt’s opinoins. They are just my opinions. but if I ran for office and someone would ask me if I am pro life or pro choice I would not know what to say. but i would have to say something. In one context I would say one thing and in another I would say another. and maybe a couple years later I would even change my mind. Would that make me a terrible candidate?
sylwia
(thanks for your comments, everyone!)
Gladis,
it’s been a long time since i read bartleby (12 years?), but i thought it ended with him young and alone and dying, repeating his mantra. so, maybe that is a great affirmation for abstaining, but it didn’t seem like it to me.
Dad,
I expect doctors to know more about (and be able to fix) my body than I do. I expect mechanics to know more about (and be able to fix) my car than I do. I expect my politicians to be more statesmanly (for one) than I am. Maybe that is unfair (certainly unrealistic), but why else would we wish to elect them? I certainly expect my ecclesiastical leaders to be more honest and moral than I am.
Sylwia,
those are good points. i’ve had a draft post in to-do list for a long time, titled, “once you know the twist.” kind of like paul harvey’s “rest of the story.” once we have personal experience of anything, or become empathetic with someone who has, our opinions, previously theoretical, often change.
i think, however, that you missed my main point. i don’t fault anyone for changing his mind. that would be hypocritical in the extreme. i do however, think it is the utmost in dishonest pandering to “change” one’s POSITION on a subject solely to appeal to voters.
but shannon how do you know that he changed his opinion to appeal to voters? you only assume that.
Also in order to win in politics, you have to play the game. you have to have a talent to be able to answer questions in such a way that will not be grossly twisted. I do not think I would be impressed with a candidate who fell on his own sword. that would just mean that he does not know how to play the game to win.
in an earlier post you were distraught that Mitt said that the Bible is his favorite book. i suppose you wanted him to say that it was a book of Mormon. that would have not been wise. that would make him fall on his own sword.
I was very impressed with his answer. I wondered if I would have been that wise if I ran for office. when asked the question which is my favorite book, i would like to have let people know that I love the scriptures without opening a can of worms and start a useless debate. answering the book of Mormon would not have been a wise choice. It would not impress anyone. It would start criticisms, bring up joseph smith and polygamy, ect. IT would accomplish nothing other than invite a lot of negative comments.
when making a good impression on non members it is very important to build on common values. And that’s what Mitt did. He talked of something familiar and he still made his point that he loves the scriptures. that takes skill and he has it and that’s why he has a chance at the presidency. most Mormons don’t have that skill. rahter they have the “skill” to start debates, questions, contentions.
to me pres Hinckely could have ran for president. he knew how to talk to the media without starting a debate. he knew how to talk their language. and if asked something controversial he would simply not anwser and change the subject. once he was asked to talk about garments and he said he did not want to talk about that. He did not fall on his own sword either, and he was not running for office. he was only representing the church.
think about that next time you want Mitt to fall on his sword. Maybe he shouldnt’. maybe we all should follow pres Hinckley example. Especially if we run for office, but even if we are just trying to make a good impression to our neighbors.
sylwia
How to run for office:
1. Be rich.
2. Be good looking.
3. Hire publicists, stylists, and damage control people to make you look good.
The politician is a pretty face and a wallet who does what he / she is told. Getting into office and keeping that office is the objective, the end game; as opposed to actually using that office to change the world. So this rich pretty face sits down with his / her brain trust and looks at the US demographic.
“Okay, we need votes. Where are we going to get them?”
“Well sir, we think the best demographic here is women. Some people like to go for the Hispanics, but women are easier because there are women of every color, and they’re saps. All they want to hear from you is that you’ll support their rights, uphold family values, and look good doing it.”
“So how do I uphold family values?”
“That depends on your definition of ‘family values.’”
“How do you mean?”
“Define ‘family.’ Define ‘values.’ It’s different for every person. All they want to hear is these words from your mouth: ‘I support family values!’”
“Okay, so how do I sell myself to people in the South as opposed to people in New England? Is there a difference?”
“Well, you can do what Hilary does, affect the local accent wherever you go. It seems to work for her, I could see if there’s a speech therapist available….”
“But what would I actually say?”
“Huh? Oh, whatever you want, just use a lot of big words. Most people won’t know what you’re saying but they’ll be impressed by your intelligence. And don’t make strange squealy sounds, we all saw what happened to Howard Dean.”
“What if someone asks me a specific question?”
“Say your opponent would screw it up, allude to a bad track record without being specific, then crack a joke. I have a book of one-liners right here for you, you can read it on your flight.”
Marie,
thanks — you made me laugh! you should submit that somewhere. very nice. i wonder if you ever watched the west wing? friends of ours had family who taped it for them and sent it to cairo when we were there. we devoured it (of course, we devoured anything american, but, i really enjoyed many episodes).
Sylwia,
you’re right. i am assuming that he changed position for that reason. i could be wrong. it’d be the first time ever, but…
on the “favorite book” question, you’re wrong, i wasn’t hoping for a BofM answer. i was hoping he’d stick to his first, off-the-cuff response of battlefield earth, or some other choice. saying the bible is your favorite book is like telling an audience of pilots that you dreamed of being an astronaut when you were a kid. maybe you did. but what else did you think of being?
my favorite book is anne of green gables, with the blue castle a close second. these are considered YA books, and they are almost too popular for me to want to prefer them, but they are my favorites. and by favorite, i mean that i re-read them regularly, and i know whole passages by heart. i think of different images or quotes from them on a weekly basis.
maybe that is how mr. romney feels about the bible. maybe he reads it cover to cover every year.
ouch! i think you called me contentious. hmmm. that’s probably true, and i should work on that — in a religious context. in the religious arena of life, our duty is to live the golden rule and to testify of what we know. in the political arena of life, i think it is our solemn duty to debate. of course, it’s better if we can do that in good faith and not-contentiously, but we must debate. we must argue.
i think, incidentally, that there is a difference between “setting a good example” (which could also just be following the golden rule, in my opinion), and “making a good impression” on people. i am not so interested in making a good impression, and i wish all of our politicians could somehow be less interested in that too.
shannon
I never meant to say or imply that you are contentious. Nothing I said was directed personally at you. If I meant to say it, I would say “shannon, you are contentious” . I say things just how I mean them. I don’t imply things.
the truth is I dont know you well enough to assume things about you. I enjoy the friendly debates on your blog. nothing I said was directed at you or at your site. I was just talking about mormons in general. and even that is changing, thanks to pres hinckley always admonishing us to be friendly and main stream.
so keep up the good work. and write about whatever you want.
I disagree that setting a good example and making a good impression are different things. no one would follow any good example if you don’t make a good impression.
sylwia
“I expect doctors to know more about (and be able to fix) my body than I do. I expect mechanics to know more about (and be able to fix) my car than I do. I expect my politicians to be more statesmanly (for one) than I am. Maybe that is unfair (certainly unrealistic), but why else would we wish to elect them? I certainly expect my ecclesiastical leaders to be more honest and moral than I am.”
I was thinking about your words above, Shannon, and I think there’s a difference between how people live their lives and what they know from study. For instance, doctors know better than others how to live healthily, but are all doctors fit and trim and do they stay away from junk food? Lawyers know about laws and consequences of broken laws more than others, but do they always go the speed limit? Politicians know how to be elected–first of all–and then all about doing their job (making laws, etc.) and, I don’t know, telling us how we should be living our lives for the betterment of society, but that doesn’t mean they’ll always follow their own advice, unfortunately. What do you think?
So, politicians are just more SKILLED than us in the political arena (and more inclined to spend their energy in that field), not necessarily more moral than us. Of course, we’re not going to go to a doctor who is grossly overweight and smoking in front of us. We’re not going to seek out a lawyer who has done jail time. We will definitely do our best to elect those officials who practice the high morals they preach.
Sylwia,
you’re probably right about impressions and examples, but what i meant was that i don’t want to be examining everything i do to see what sort of impression it makes on other people; instead, i’d like to (i should) examine everything i do to make sure that it is moral.
hi Marcy,
interesting points. (i wonder if Dad even saw what i responded to him). politicians, more than any other profession, are elected/supported based on their ability to do something for me. they run for office saying, “elect me and i’ll make your life better x y and z.” why would i think that someone who can’t even honor basic vows or tell a straight answer would have other great things to offer me?
i wonder who Dad has in mind as the average US voter–are there statistics on how moral (or not) that voter is? is this a libertarian view of Dad’s that we shouldn’t care about a politician’s personal life because the politician should have no influence on our own personal lives? i’m getting confused. but i still think that i should expect my leaders to lead by example. and i want a good example.
This evening for date night, Josh and I didn’t have a good movie to watch so we watched the republican presidential debate. It was very fun and Mitt answered Shannon’s question about changing his mind on abortion.
I don’t know about the rest of you, but to me none of the other candidates are nearly as handsome as Mitt. And if the best looking and the most popular guy is supposed to win, then no one holds a light to Mitt. I’m going to vote for him because I want to have an excuse to hang his picture in my living room next to the american flag…….:))))
the debate is on MSNBC.com(it’s divided into sections, so you have to click multiple times to get it all) or you can see highlights of the debate on mittromney.com
sylwia