Showing posts with label John McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John McCain. Show all posts
Friday, May 14, 2010
Day 134- One of us
Dear Mr. President,
John McCain really changed my mind about things, once I saw his new ad. If we build a wall along our entire border, we'll never have problems with drug trafficking or home invasions ever again. Build the wall, higher, stronger, and more formidable than any wall ever seen on this planet, and it will keep out all of those miscreants who risk their lives to sneak across our borders just to cause mischief. I was going to oppose the wall, me being a bleeding heart who thinks that all human life, regardless of geographic location, is equal, but John McCain set me straight.
My one concern with the wall is that it doesn't really stop the people in boats. I mean, people in boats sneak into this country all the time, so maybe we could wall off the coastlines, too? It might hurt tourism, but think of all the environmental benefits if humans were no longer allowed on any American beaches! And then there's Canada. Did I ever tell you how I crossed into the US from Canada illegally? It was on the Pacific Crest Trail, and I was 15. Let me tell you, it was way too easy. We should probably build a wall through there, too. It might hurt a few trees, upset a few migratory animals, but in the long run, it's what we have to do to keep the terrorists out.
One last concern; airplanes. I know, closing the airports to international flights seems like an easy fix, but what about parachutes? I don't want Mexicans HALO dropping into this country at night; they might make it past all of those lame desert states in the south and start taking our jobs here in the north. I'd imagine the Star Wars missile defense technology could help us here, but I'm not sure it's fully operational yet, so maybe we could make due with some giant trampolines? Or those spikes we put on window ledges to keep off the birds? My roommates want me to point out that electrifying the fence is an important step, but if Jurassic Park teaches us anything, it should be that we need a much more effective back-up system in the event of any power failures.
Once we've been effectively locked down, we'll have to go after the illegals already among us. (Especially once our import/export abilities are cut off by the coastal wall.) Maybe we could set up roadside stations, check every one's papers before we let them through? It might get kind of overwhelming for local law enforcement to do this alone, so we should probably staff these checkpoints with soldiers. (Actually, checkpoints is kind of an ugly, contentious word with all sorts of bad connotations, so let's call them "Citizenship defense stations.")
Anyway, what do you think? Are these the kind of comprehensive immigration solutions that will keep us safe from the dangerous onslaught of non-English-speaking killers flooding across into Arizona? Do you think that John McCain will let us be part of his club, now?
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, April 23, 2010
Day 113- Ghosts of 2008
Dear Mr. President,
I'm glad that you've publicly addressed the injustice of the racist immigration law recently passed by the state of Arizona. I'm at a complete loss; I can't fathom how in this day and age such legislation could be seriously discussed, let alone signed into law. We need comprehensive national reform, and in the meantime the Arizona legislation ought to be fought by the courts and by the voters. My roommate, a member of the Hidatsa-Mandan tribe, joined in our outrage at this legislation, despite having, better than any of us, a historical claim to this land. We're a nation of immigrants, outside of the reservations. Where are the small-government conservatives now? Where's the libertarian outrage at this massive infringement on individual liberty? How does John McCain, who supports this bill, even look at himself in the mirror?
You've already spoken forcefully about your objections to this legislation, so I'll waste no further time preaching to the choir. As I read through the day's news, another story raised my blood pressure. Try as I might, I cannot seem to effectively ignore Sarah Palin. Pretending she doesn't exist in the hopes that she'll stop talking and go back to Alaska doesn't seem to be effective, so I thought I'd point out yet another example of her glaring hypocrisy. Today, in response to the news that Franklin Graham was uninvited from the national day of prayer ceremony, Palin said, "Are we really so hyper-politically correct that we can’t abide a Christian minister who expresses his views on matters of faith? What a shame. " This, from the same woman who thought that the controversial views of Rev. Jeremiah Wright should have been reason for voters to mistrust you in 2008. While I may not have been as offended by Reverend Wright's remarks as I was by Graham's, I'm sure that I many were. Mrs. Palin needs to decide; either political correctness extends past the church doors or it doesn't. I think the real disconnect between the two situations in Palin's mind is that one condemnation was of America (actually, the American government, but I'm not sure that she makes that distinction unless there's a Democrat in the White House), the other was the entire Islamic faith. Palin believes that one of these is acceptable to criticize, condemn and even insult; the other is not. I think that a certain level of respect in public discourse, especially from religious leaders who claim to be men of God, is not too much to ask. However, I think that expressing the outrage of centuries of racial oppression and government abuse in melodramatic anti-American rhetoric is far less troublesome than calling an entire religion "wicked" or "evil."
I think if Arizona has taught us anything today it is that hatred, bigotry, and hypocrisy may never go out of style in this country, they don't look good on any one.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I'm glad that you've publicly addressed the injustice of the racist immigration law recently passed by the state of Arizona. I'm at a complete loss; I can't fathom how in this day and age such legislation could be seriously discussed, let alone signed into law. We need comprehensive national reform, and in the meantime the Arizona legislation ought to be fought by the courts and by the voters. My roommate, a member of the Hidatsa-Mandan tribe, joined in our outrage at this legislation, despite having, better than any of us, a historical claim to this land. We're a nation of immigrants, outside of the reservations. Where are the small-government conservatives now? Where's the libertarian outrage at this massive infringement on individual liberty? How does John McCain, who supports this bill, even look at himself in the mirror?
You've already spoken forcefully about your objections to this legislation, so I'll waste no further time preaching to the choir. As I read through the day's news, another story raised my blood pressure. Try as I might, I cannot seem to effectively ignore Sarah Palin. Pretending she doesn't exist in the hopes that she'll stop talking and go back to Alaska doesn't seem to be effective, so I thought I'd point out yet another example of her glaring hypocrisy. Today, in response to the news that Franklin Graham was uninvited from the national day of prayer ceremony, Palin said, "Are we really so hyper-politically correct that we can’t abide a Christian minister who expresses his views on matters of faith? What a shame. " This, from the same woman who thought that the controversial views of Rev. Jeremiah Wright should have been reason for voters to mistrust you in 2008. While I may not have been as offended by Reverend Wright's remarks as I was by Graham's, I'm sure that I many were. Mrs. Palin needs to decide; either political correctness extends past the church doors or it doesn't. I think the real disconnect between the two situations in Palin's mind is that one condemnation was of America (actually, the American government, but I'm not sure that she makes that distinction unless there's a Democrat in the White House), the other was the entire Islamic faith. Palin believes that one of these is acceptable to criticize, condemn and even insult; the other is not. I think that a certain level of respect in public discourse, especially from religious leaders who claim to be men of God, is not too much to ask. However, I think that expressing the outrage of centuries of racial oppression and government abuse in melodramatic anti-American rhetoric is far less troublesome than calling an entire religion "wicked" or "evil."
I think if Arizona has taught us anything today it is that hatred, bigotry, and hypocrisy may never go out of style in this country, they don't look good on any one.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Day 97- Haiku
This inspired me
for today's letter. Go on,
count the syllables.
A Haiku Letter:
Dear President Obama,
It's a slow news day.
Coup in Kyrgyzstan.
Diplomats smoking on planes.
Flooding in Brazil.
Threats on the Speaker,
economy still struggling,
internal unrest.
Never a slow day,
in the situation room,
it's always morning.
Glenn Beck's Tea Party,
Limbaugh's expatriation,
McCain's heels dug in.
How do you manage?
When do you get time to breathe?
Keep your famous cool?
Between enemies;
both foreign and domestic,
constant apathy,
innate corruption,
systematic inertia,
year-round campaigning;
you must get tired.
Even as we elected
Hope, not energy.
Me, so far removed,
just worrying my way from
paycheck to paycheck,
can't begin to say
what, exactly, is best for
me, or our country.
I write you each day,
to question and to complain
express hope, or faith.
I'm not sure that I
ever say what I try to;
that I still have hope
hope that we can change
hope in more than the campaign,
in our government.
for all the danger,
of our troubled world today
I rest easily.
knowing that you will
answer the 3 a.m. calls
while I am sleeping.
For you, there is no
such thing as a slow news day.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
for today's letter. Go on,
count the syllables.
A Haiku Letter:
Dear President Obama,
It's a slow news day.
Coup in Kyrgyzstan.
Diplomats smoking on planes.
Flooding in Brazil.
Threats on the Speaker,
economy still struggling,
internal unrest.
Never a slow day,
in the situation room,
it's always morning.
Glenn Beck's Tea Party,
Limbaugh's expatriation,
McCain's heels dug in.
How do you manage?
When do you get time to breathe?
Keep your famous cool?
Between enemies;
both foreign and domestic,
constant apathy,
innate corruption,
systematic inertia,
year-round campaigning;
you must get tired.
Even as we elected
Hope, not energy.
Me, so far removed,
just worrying my way from
paycheck to paycheck,
can't begin to say
what, exactly, is best for
me, or our country.
I write you each day,
to question and to complain
express hope, or faith.
I'm not sure that I
ever say what I try to;
that I still have hope
hope that we can change
hope in more than the campaign,
in our government.
for all the danger,
of our troubled world today
I rest easily.
knowing that you will
answer the 3 a.m. calls
while I am sleeping.
For you, there is no
such thing as a slow news day.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Day 37 Demon Sheep
Dear Mr. President,
Do you think Carly Fiorina's Demon Sheep ad was only approved for the attention it would generate? I truly hope it does not succeed in actually electing her. This reminds me of the ads Senator McCain ran against you in 2008- the Paris Hilton ad, and, (my personal favorite,) the "Barack Obama is the Anti-Christ" ad that featured your campaign's winged logo rising from the red sea.
Television has taken political sensationalism to a whole new level. In my own state of Washington, groups opposing Christine Gregoire ran an ad featuring a man with a can of gasoline igniting a pile of money. This ad continued to run, even after an employee at my college, the University of Washington, doused himself in gasoline and lit himself on fire in front of hundreds of students in the middle of campus.
What is the acceptable threshold? I understand that political ads are the unfortunate by-product of the first amendment, and that the people running the ads have every right to be as distasteful as they wish. Neither John McCain nor Governor Gregoire's opponent, Dino Rossi, were successful in their campaigns. Their ads may or may not have been a factor in their defeat, but I doubt very much that architects of political ads to come will see these failures as a reason for caution or even dignity. Fiorina's campaign certainly didn't. Maybe Television isn't the place to look for an increase in the level of political discourse in this country, but, as it is where most campaign money is spent and, supposedly, most voters are reached, maybe it isn't an unreasonable place to start.
I hope that, in the midterms this fall and in campaigns to come, Democrats air ads that are reasonable, measured, and respectful in tone. I hope that, as the leader of the Democratic Party, you encourage them to follow your campaign's example. This isn't to say I think all campaigns should be exclusively positive, or that attack ads don't have their place, but insulting the intelligence of one's audience with frightening music or demon sheep is probably something both parties should be above. (I'll probably need to be reminded of this if Sarah Palin succeeds in securing the GOP nomination.)
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Do you think Carly Fiorina's Demon Sheep ad was only approved for the attention it would generate? I truly hope it does not succeed in actually electing her. This reminds me of the ads Senator McCain ran against you in 2008- the Paris Hilton ad, and, (my personal favorite,) the "Barack Obama is the Anti-Christ" ad that featured your campaign's winged logo rising from the red sea.
Television has taken political sensationalism to a whole new level. In my own state of Washington, groups opposing Christine Gregoire ran an ad featuring a man with a can of gasoline igniting a pile of money. This ad continued to run, even after an employee at my college, the University of Washington, doused himself in gasoline and lit himself on fire in front of hundreds of students in the middle of campus.
What is the acceptable threshold? I understand that political ads are the unfortunate by-product of the first amendment, and that the people running the ads have every right to be as distasteful as they wish. Neither John McCain nor Governor Gregoire's opponent, Dino Rossi, were successful in their campaigns. Their ads may or may not have been a factor in their defeat, but I doubt very much that architects of political ads to come will see these failures as a reason for caution or even dignity. Fiorina's campaign certainly didn't. Maybe Television isn't the place to look for an increase in the level of political discourse in this country, but, as it is where most campaign money is spent and, supposedly, most voters are reached, maybe it isn't an unreasonable place to start.
I hope that, in the midterms this fall and in campaigns to come, Democrats air ads that are reasonable, measured, and respectful in tone. I hope that, as the leader of the Democratic Party, you encourage them to follow your campaign's example. This isn't to say I think all campaigns should be exclusively positive, or that attack ads don't have their place, but insulting the intelligence of one's audience with frightening music or demon sheep is probably something both parties should be above. (I'll probably need to be reminded of this if Sarah Palin succeeds in securing the GOP nomination.)
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Day 23- 37 years
Today we recognize the 37th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which affirms every woman’s fundamental constitutional right to choose whether to have an abortion, as well as each American’s right to privacy from government intrusion. I have, and continue to, support these constitutional rights.
I also remain committed to working with people of good will to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant women and families, and strengthen the adoption system.
Today and every day, we must strive to ensure that all women have limitless opportunities to fulfill their dreams.
Dear Mr. President,
The night of the final debate between you and Senator McCain was the night I knew you were a different kind of politician. What struck me was the way you reminded every one, very calmly, that no matter how unapologetic you or any one might be in their support for Roe V. Wade, "no one is pro-abortion." The power of this moment was lost, of course, in Senator McCain's response, which involved air-quotes around "women's health" as though women across the nation were inventing life-threatening prenatal complications in order to score late-term abortions. My appreciation for your words was lost in my disgust at Senator McCain, but your words kept coming back to me, in the days following.
5 years ago, I made a choice. Knowing what I know now, knowing how that choice has haunted me, redefined me, in many ways, broken me, I don't think I would make the same choice, again. I was 18, and I was scared, and I was desperate. I know, for sure, that the law would not have stopped me. I could have gone to a safe, sterile clinic, or I could have gone somewhere else. I wasn't making this choice because I thought it was the right one, I wasn't making it because I thought, at all. I was making it because a person I thought mattered more than all else, told me it was the only way. I'm not blaming him, I'm blaming myself for valuing this man above my own health and safety and survival. For valuing him above all reason or logic.
In the end, of course, he left me. In the end I was alone, as I had always been. And while this decision may haunt me, the question of its morality settled so decidedly in my mind, its legality protected me from truly terrible consequences. The law cannot protect me from regret and self-reproach, but it can, and did, protect my health and safety. It is, once again, about Elizabeth Cady Stanton's solitude of self. The law that protects this decision protects a woman when she is the most alone. When she cannot count on any one, not her family, not her lover, and certainly not the men who govern her, to help.
I know both the desperation of being so young and so scared, and the ache of having surrendered your better judgment to another. So no matter what choice I would make now, I feel physically ill to think of that choice ever again being made for me or for any woman, by men like Senator McCain. This is why your manner in the debate was so inspiring. Not because you agree with me, but because you did not allow the debate to be taken from you and redefined. You did not allow Senator McCain to paint your beliefs as shameful or craven. You did not surrender the dignity of your position and of those that share it. So thank you for that.
37 years ago the courts defined the limits of their jurisdiction to be the boundaries of a person's body. It comforts me to know that you agree.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I also remain committed to working with people of good will to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant women and families, and strengthen the adoption system.
Today and every day, we must strive to ensure that all women have limitless opportunities to fulfill their dreams.
Dear Mr. President,
The night of the final debate between you and Senator McCain was the night I knew you were a different kind of politician. What struck me was the way you reminded every one, very calmly, that no matter how unapologetic you or any one might be in their support for Roe V. Wade, "no one is pro-abortion." The power of this moment was lost, of course, in Senator McCain's response, which involved air-quotes around "women's health" as though women across the nation were inventing life-threatening prenatal complications in order to score late-term abortions. My appreciation for your words was lost in my disgust at Senator McCain, but your words kept coming back to me, in the days following.
5 years ago, I made a choice. Knowing what I know now, knowing how that choice has haunted me, redefined me, in many ways, broken me, I don't think I would make the same choice, again. I was 18, and I was scared, and I was desperate. I know, for sure, that the law would not have stopped me. I could have gone to a safe, sterile clinic, or I could have gone somewhere else. I wasn't making this choice because I thought it was the right one, I wasn't making it because I thought, at all. I was making it because a person I thought mattered more than all else, told me it was the only way. I'm not blaming him, I'm blaming myself for valuing this man above my own health and safety and survival. For valuing him above all reason or logic.
In the end, of course, he left me. In the end I was alone, as I had always been. And while this decision may haunt me, the question of its morality settled so decidedly in my mind, its legality protected me from truly terrible consequences. The law cannot protect me from regret and self-reproach, but it can, and did, protect my health and safety. It is, once again, about Elizabeth Cady Stanton's solitude of self. The law that protects this decision protects a woman when she is the most alone. When she cannot count on any one, not her family, not her lover, and certainly not the men who govern her, to help.
I know both the desperation of being so young and so scared, and the ache of having surrendered your better judgment to another. So no matter what choice I would make now, I feel physically ill to think of that choice ever again being made for me or for any woman, by men like Senator McCain. This is why your manner in the debate was so inspiring. Not because you agree with me, but because you did not allow the debate to be taken from you and redefined. You did not allow Senator McCain to paint your beliefs as shameful or craven. You did not surrender the dignity of your position and of those that share it. So thank you for that.
37 years ago the courts defined the limits of their jurisdiction to be the boundaries of a person's body. It comforts me to know that you agree.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Day 6
Dear Mr. President,
Today the clashes at the Egyptian border have me thinking about Gaza. It's been more than a year since Operation Cast Lead. It has been one year, and still the reconstruction has not been allowed to move forward. One year and still the 1.5 million Gazans are kept near-starving by blockade. One year and still the people have not turned against Hamas. You, of course, already know all this. You know how much the people of Gaza suffer, you know the atrocities detailed in the Goldstone report, you know the role the US played in the conflict between Hamas and Fatah that led to the blockade in the first place. You know the punishment America and the rest of the international community were so swift to deal out when the Palestinian people held elections in 2006 & the results were not to our liking.
Not long ago you accepted the Nobel Peace Prize. You were awarded this honor due largely to your return to a diplomacy-based foreign policy, your belief in the power of non-violent solutions. You have reached out to the Muslim world in many ways, the most prominent of which being your speech in Cairo, in which you said "The situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. And America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own."
But, of course, you know all that, too.
Why, then, am I writing you a letter about things that I know you already know? Why am I writing you a letter about a situation that must weekly, if not daily, require your attention? Because it has been more than a year, sir, and nothing is better. So much, in fact, is only getting worse. On your watch.
Not long ago, I sat in the living room of a Palestinian family in a small town outside of Nablus called Awarta. It was during the end of your primary race with Hillary Clinton, and already clear to us that the general election would be between you and Senator McCain. The father of the family, upon learning that I was an American, advised that I should vote for you. "Both would be bad for us," he said, sadly, "But at least Obama will give you health care."
I understand the political reality that makes supporting Palestine so difficult for you as a president. But that reality is not greater than one year of the needlessly prolonged suffering of civilians, of children, all because Israel may punish without fear of reproach from its allies. How are we acting in Israel's best interest by turning a blind eye to its transgressions? How are we serving peace when we undermine Abbas's authority by pressuring him to defer action on the Goldstone report? What does this accomplish, besides weakening the moderates and perpetuating the bleak reality that radical elements thrive upon?
You know the answer, sir. It has been more than a year. It is time to make your words in Cairo, the spirit of your Nobel Prize, and the promise of your presidency a reality. Do not let another year go by with no hope for Gaza.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Today the clashes at the Egyptian border have me thinking about Gaza. It's been more than a year since Operation Cast Lead. It has been one year, and still the reconstruction has not been allowed to move forward. One year and still the 1.5 million Gazans are kept near-starving by blockade. One year and still the people have not turned against Hamas. You, of course, already know all this. You know how much the people of Gaza suffer, you know the atrocities detailed in the Goldstone report, you know the role the US played in the conflict between Hamas and Fatah that led to the blockade in the first place. You know the punishment America and the rest of the international community were so swift to deal out when the Palestinian people held elections in 2006 & the results were not to our liking.
Not long ago you accepted the Nobel Peace Prize. You were awarded this honor due largely to your return to a diplomacy-based foreign policy, your belief in the power of non-violent solutions. You have reached out to the Muslim world in many ways, the most prominent of which being your speech in Cairo, in which you said "The situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. And America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own."
But, of course, you know all that, too.
Why, then, am I writing you a letter about things that I know you already know? Why am I writing you a letter about a situation that must weekly, if not daily, require your attention? Because it has been more than a year, sir, and nothing is better. So much, in fact, is only getting worse. On your watch.
Not long ago, I sat in the living room of a Palestinian family in a small town outside of Nablus called Awarta. It was during the end of your primary race with Hillary Clinton, and already clear to us that the general election would be between you and Senator McCain. The father of the family, upon learning that I was an American, advised that I should vote for you. "Both would be bad for us," he said, sadly, "But at least Obama will give you health care."
I understand the political reality that makes supporting Palestine so difficult for you as a president. But that reality is not greater than one year of the needlessly prolonged suffering of civilians, of children, all because Israel may punish without fear of reproach from its allies. How are we acting in Israel's best interest by turning a blind eye to its transgressions? How are we serving peace when we undermine Abbas's authority by pressuring him to defer action on the Goldstone report? What does this accomplish, besides weakening the moderates and perpetuating the bleak reality that radical elements thrive upon?
You know the answer, sir. It has been more than a year. It is time to make your words in Cairo, the spirit of your Nobel Prize, and the promise of your presidency a reality. Do not let another year go by with no hope for Gaza.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
