And have the potential of biting a 17-term congressman in the butt.

The Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha saga continues. He can’t seem to quit putting his foot in his mouth. The Democratic congressman first got in hot water last week by explaining “There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area.”

Quite understandably, his constituents from Western PA didn’t think much of this description. Rep. Murtha tried to clarify his statement by explaining that the older folks weren’t really racist, just redneck.

That should have reassured those constituents in question. {{sarcasm button on}} Still, Murtha predicts an Obama win in Pennsylvania.

According to ABC news,

The 17-term Democratic congressman told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in a story posted Wednesday on its Web site: “There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area.”
Murtha said it has taken time for many Pennsylvania voters to come around to embracing a black presidential candidate, but that Obama should still win the state, though not in a runaway.

70 Thoughts to “Racist and Redneck: Divisive Words Surface…”

  1. IVAN

    Open mouth…insert foot.

  2. Elena

    OY VAY!!!! Not quite sure how he thought “redneck” was any better than “racist”!

  3. Concerned Citizen

    No wonder he’s being sued by Marines he referred to as “cold-blooded murderers”, who were later cleared of any wrongdoing. I was listening to Chris Plante this morning, and he made the comment that the term “Racist” is being thrown around so much in the political debate, it diminishes the value of the word when describing true racisim. I think he might be right. Just because someone lives in the country, works with his or her hands, likes Hank Williams Jr. guns and hunting, doesn’t make them a racist. Just because they support John McCain, doesn’t make them a racist.

  4. Not Me, Bubba

    This election may be the cleansing enema the government needs. A lot of the older senators and representatives are stepping down. And that may not be such a bad thing…. Murtha, McCain, et all…. I will always praise wisdom and experience, but there is also a lot to be said for newness and innovation.

  5. Marie

    Geez, why am I continually surprised?

    You know, I think we need term limits in Congress. Aren’t they supposed to be elected serve for a period and move on? Is serving in Congress supposed to be a career? Don’t think that was ever the intention.

  6. Here’s His opponents website, If you are sick of John “The Troops are murderers” Murtha, Donate some money.
    russellbrigade.com

  7. Of course it’s supposed to be a career, Marie…why do you think that they have given themselves such a generous pension plan?! Perhaps the first step would be to take THAT away from them.

  8. Jorge Pollo

    Murtha certainly did put his foot in his mouth. Now, let’s see if his constituents don’t give him a boot in the butt, and run out him of office for such ignorant comments.

  9. Marie

    Good idea AW. I wish I could have voted for my salary and pension plan when I was working.

  10. ShellyB

    To me the video is not as bad as it sounds from the chatter here. How old is this guy anyway? I had only heard of him once before. Somewhere around 2003 or 2004 he criticized the Iraq invasion or something unpatriotic like that. This was at a time when a word against G. W. Bush was tantamount to terrorism and anti-Americanism.

    I bet there are a few GOP strategists who are yearning for yester-year. Their talking heads keep saying “the American people this” and “the American people” that about anti-American, socialist, communist, terrorist Democrats. But the only American people who are listening are the way out there people, not the type of majority you need to win in a democracy.

    And Murtha saying some folks won’t vote for Obama because he’s non-white. Well, the news media is saying that a lot. It’s called the Bradley Effect, they say. Murtha is just too old and confused to say it just right, but he’s saying the same thing as the media.

  11. TWINAD

    I didn’t get to watch this video until just now…don’t like to watch video’s at work…but WILL lurk and read posts…what’s the difference, really, but anyway…

    I do agree with you ShellyB. I am from that area…actually Western NY, but the PA state line is less than 10 miles from where I grew up and I went to college in Pittsburgh. I agree that what Murtha said did come out “wrong”, but his real message is the truth from my perspective…that a LOT of people in that area are not prepared or willing to elect a person of color to be the President. I would be very surprised if Obama wins the County I grew up in, and not because he is perceived as a “communist”, “socialist” or “Muslim”, but for the plain fact that he is not a full blooded white man. I am not saying that people that still feel that way are throwing around the N word or anything or are Klan members, but there are people that don’t know any different than they have always known.

  12. Racists believe their “people” (identified by color of skin, by language, or by another cultural aspect) are better than others.

    So…..were these people actually racist?

    The “redneck” thing was REALLY dumb. But WHY was he saying that part of PA was racist? Did he have good reason for saying it? Proof? (I didn’t see the vid yet, so pardon me if I’m asking questions the vid would have answered….I’m in my family room and vids are subjected to censorship.)

  13. Michael

    One of the reasons people who have not self-reflected on thier own ignorance of humanity and individual self worth still see themselves defined by race, gender, ethnic groups and religious groups and the MAIN reason we still have people who can’t see themselves any other way, still making comments like this is because:

    1. The laws were changed to apply ALL laws the same to individuals, but those laws were not ENFORCED the same on all individuals due to the bias of the jury and the bias of the judge that still exists in some communities.

    2. This “self-directed diversification” happened because young kids of different races, religious, ethnic groups and gender were and STILL ARE self-segregated (especially socially) by each parent and community leader of racial, gender, ethnic and religious groups to think they should identify themselves NOT AS INDIVIDUALS of like attributes, BUT AS A PROUD MEMBER OF A SPECIFIC RACE, GENDER, RELIGION or ETHNIC group of diffwerent attrubutes and culture. This perspective makes adults and kids see themselves and others as different than they are (especially socially) and in some cases linguistically different, and encourages people to think in inferiorities and superiorities, based on these different self esteems and community self description values. Because of this continued divided and diverse, multicultural way of thinking, people cannot see themselves as equals, the same and of the same culture (American).

    3. Such self divisiveness and self-delineations intended to create “pride” in your culture, race, ethnic group and religious group, actually works against establishing a common humanity, a common viewpoint as individual human beings. leads to seeing others as “racists and rednecks” and works against any sense of equality and equal attributes as human beings. It undermines any perception that people of different races, religions, gender and ethnic cultures csan become one culture whose single set of characteristics is “individuality” and “individual ability” grounded in common humanity.

    4. The only way you are ever going to see people “ready” for any person of any race, gender, ethnic group or religion to become President, is to start seeing everyone as the same, with no differences, i.e. no cultural or individual differences (especially political, but keeping recreational and entertainment differences interesting and enjoyable)

    5. Until such viewpoints become “politically incorrect” and illegal to advocate for such political differences, political advocacy groups, political laws to support groups and political boundaries and self esteem defined along racial, gender, ethnic and religious lines, no one will ever be able or “ready” to accept a President “different” than they are, and “different” than the label and group attributes they place on themselves. That is the core problem with racism.

  14. Moon-howler

    No one is really saying Murtha is wrong in his assessment. His language really isn’t very politically wise. Many folks in that area are rather stubborn about change.

    I don’t think ‘redneck’ was any dumber than ‘racist.’ Neither are flattering.

  15. Michael

    I highy commend Obama (and why he is getting my vote as a Republican) for taking a clear stand against such self-description, self-identification, and self-segregation along racial, religious, and ethnic political lines, admonishing those who do (like Jessie Jackson and Rev. White) and defining such viewpoints and behavior as “destructive” and “not what he represents”.

    Everyone else should be so wise as to be able to look at themselves and look at others and be able to do the same.

  16. Michael

    Many folks in all races, genders, religions and ethnic groups are stubborn about changing such language and political viewpoints.

    When that change does occur however, we can start bringing the rest of the world in line with a common humanity belief system. Until that change happens, we will continue to have conflict, mistrust, and hatred between humans.

  17. ShellyB

    Michael, I agree with your praising Obama from rising above racial division. He could have tried to be one or the other race (mother was white, father black) but he decided to be neither one and reach out to everyone.

  18. ShellyB

    I wonder if one reason why there is so much presumption about McCain voters is that it’s hard to find a reason to support McCain (at least in my mind). So, this fact might impact the way I see those videos of McCain supporters yelling “kill him,” “terrorist,” “communist,” carrying around monkey effigies and food stamps with watermelon and fried chicken on it. I see them as nutty prejudiced people who support McCain because they are nutty and prejudiced.

    This is 70 percent unfair to McCain, but 30 percent fair, because it is obvious to me that the candidates, their spokespeople, and their surrogates are all trying to foment this kind of hatred as part of their campaign strategy.

    However, I don’t think that the majority of McCain supporters are nutty and prejudiced. It seems that way because the nutty and prejudiced people are the loudest and most outrageous, and, the fact that the McCain/Palin campaign is deliberately trying to maximize the vote from this crowd, however small it may be.

    So I have a request:

    Can someone, a McCain supporter or not, I don’t care, but can SOMEONE explain to me why anyone would still be supporting McCain at this point? It should go without saying, but I would very much prefer if the answer did not include the words “terrorist,” “socialist,” “communist,” “real America,” “real Virginia,” “anti-American,” “Muslim,” “Arab,” “welfare,” or “redistribution of wealth.”

  19. Shelly, I honestly can’t figure out why anybody would be supporting EITHER of them…or how either of them got their respective party nomination in the first place.

  20. Moon-howler

    I think it is different to support someone and to vote for someone. Am I off-base here?

  21. hello

    Shelly, I’m voting for McCain but not for the reasons most think. I don’t really care for either candidate but there are two reasons I will vote for McCain. The main reason is that during a really bad recession (maybe on the verge of a depression) you don’t raise taxes! Not only do you not raise taxes in a time like this but you don’t roll back tax cuts, the combination of the two will only cost more jobs to be lost (not to mention small businesses being fined for not providing health care).

    The second reason is because we are on the verge of a democratic super majority, if McCain was elected I doubt any of his wacky policies would pass. However, all of Obama’s wacky polices would breeze right on thru.

  22. hello

    Shelly, I’m voting for McCain but not for the reasons most think. I don’t really care for either candidate but there are two reasons I will vote for McCain. The main reason is that during a really bad recession (maybe on the verge of a depression) you don’t raise taxes! Not only do you not raise taxes in a time like this but you don’t roll back tax cuts, the combination of the two will only cost more jobs to be lost (not to mention small businesses being fined for not providing health care).

    The second reason is because we are on the verge of a democratic super majority, if McCain was elected I doubt any of his wacky policies would pass. However, all of Obama’s wacky polices would breeze right on thru.

  23. hello

    didn’t mean to double post…

  24. DiversityGal

    Moon-howler, you are right. There is a difference.

    I think that more people should be focusing on who their vote is going to, rather than thinking they have to agree 100% with either major party candidate. In the 5 elections I’ve participated in since turning 18, the overwhelming majority of people I meet say, “I don’t like either candidate. Both of these guys are bums. I have to vote for the lesser of two evils,” or something to that effect. It is, at this point in American election history, one of the most cliche things you can say about a politician.

    What is it about us that we feel all our ideals must so completely match with a presidential candidate’s, or we are just going to take our ball and go home (metaphorically speaking, of course)? To some extent, I think it represents the fact that, as a politician who has any chance of winning a national office, you are never going to please everybody all of the time.

    Perhaps that is why image ends up being so important in these races. We spend so much time expecting politicians to address our individual needs and align with all of our individual opinions…an impossible task, that they focus on the race they CAN win with people – image.

    I also think that, in other people, such statements reflect indecisiveness or not even wanting to make a choice. I think it is just easier for some people to say, “I don’t like either candidate.” When they have political discussions, they may feel that such a statement will give them neutrality, and this may reduce their anxiety about such discussions. How can people get into a heated debate with you if you negate both candidates, right? Problem solved…or at least, that’s the very inner dialogue I think is going on for some.

    The long and short of it…voting means making a choice, a decision. It is not an easy thing to do. The candidate you choose may not win. If he/she does, he/she is likely to make some mistakes or decisions you don’t agree with during time in office. You are probably NEVER going to fully agree with any candidate’s views, unless you are the candidate yourself. Come down off the fence and take a stand…at least by election day:)

  25. DiversityGal

    I should have clarified 5 presidential elections:)

  26. There are only two reasons left for me (to support McCain).

    One. Party sympathy that once was party loyalty.

    Two. Abortion.

    The former is, as I have said in the past, akin to rooting for your favorite sports franchise, though not with all your heart, because they moved to another city and all your favorite players retired and you don’t recognize the folks wearing the old uniform you used to love.

    The latter, I am beginning to realize, is perhaps not as important as national security and economic issues that, in this election cycle, favor the Democrat.

  27. Moon-howler

    Probably one of the most important things a president does is make Supreme Court appointments. Many folks don’t think about that when voting for president. It is particularly important now. Our current Supreme Court generally hands down decisions of the 5-4 variety. Everything is close, along idealogical lines.

    Since Sandra Day O’Connell retired, Justice Kennedy, heretofore considered a conservative, is now thought to be the swing vote on the Court. The court has moved further to the right.

    Justice Stevens is 88 years old. It is reasonable to think he might be retiring in the next 4 years. He might be trying to out-wait George Bush. Although Stevens is considered to be one of the liberal justices, it might serve us well to remember that he was also appointed by Gerald Ford.

    So you have Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts as a conservative block. (last 2 appointed by Bush). Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter are considered the liberal pack. Kennedy is the swing. Scary, ain’t it.

    Age-wise: one born in the 20’s, 5 born in the 30’s, 2 born in the 40’s, 2 born in the 50’s. Bush snuck those youngun’s in. The next president might have several appointments considering at least 6 of them are very close to being 70 years old or more.

    Supreme Court appointments are for life.

  28. Moon-howler

    WHWN, Do you feel the government should be making deeply personal decisions for women? I think I am capable of making my very own decisions based on my faith and sense of morality. Being pro-choice does not mean pro abortion.

    I would have a hard time voting for a president who didn’t think I was capable of making my own morally appropriate decisions, but I sure did consider McCain for a good long time, mainly because I felt there were issues out there far more time vital than abortion. The economy, the war in Iraq, healthcare, foreclosures, energy, global warming, and Supreme Court appointments come to mind as issues I consider far more important.

  29. Moon-howler

    AWCheney, 22. October 2008, 15:12 said:

    Of course it’s supposed to be a career, Marie…why do you think that they have given themselves such a generous pension plan?! Perhaps the first step would be to take THAT away from them.

    According to WTOP, Rep. Miller gets $122k approximately in government pension. that’s a pretty healthy retirement check. That’s before his 401(k) type plan kicks in.

    The federal pension is also backed by the treasury, unlike most pension plans. Only 13% of workers even have pension plans. Check out this story. It certainly backs up what AWC is talking about.

    http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=116&sid=1502226

  30. Robb Pearson

    Michael, you stated:

    The only way you are ever going to see people “ready” for any person of any race, gender, ethnic group or religion to become President, is to start seeing everyone as the same, with no differences, i.e. no cultural or individual differences.

    I disagree. Differences exist, and that is a good thing. It is evidence of the wonderful variety in Creation.

    Contrary to your view, what we need to do in order to advance our common humanity is embrace those differences, celebrate the “feast” of human variety, and take on the joyful task of creating harmony with and within our diversities, not in spite of them.

  31. Robb Pearson

    Poor Jack Murtha.

    The funny thing is, while people will balk at the specific words he used, few people who understand the culture of western PA are going to argue with the general accuracy of his assessment.

    An example: several friends, including my closest friend, happen to have been born and raised in western PA (Johnstown area). Their reaction to Murtha’s comments has been to chuckle, shrug, and say, “well, he’s not wrong.”

    I personally wouldn’t paint with such a broad brush. But I think Democratic strategist James Carville said it best: “Pennsylvania is Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between.”

    Finally, my feeling is that Murtha’s fellow western PA residents will ultimately be quite forgiving of him.

  32. Moon-howler

    I have always liked Rep. Murtha. He tells it like it is. I don’t disagree with his assessment at all. I probably would have just said it differently, or….lived to fight another day and not said it at all–just thought it.

    The people I know from that general area would have laughed and agreed with him also, Robb.

  33. Alanna

    hello,
    Add abortion on to your list of reasons and I’m right there with you.

  34. Robb Pearson

    My best friend was born an raised near Shanksville, PA (where flight 93 crashed on 9/11/01). He told me yesterday that if he wanted to kill his father, all he and his sister would have to do is the following: he’d tell his father he’s gay, and his sister would tell him she’s marrying a black man.

    My friend’s point: in mainly white western Pennsylvania there’s a lot of resistence to change or to embrace things different than what you see in the mirror each morning.

    HOWEVER . . . and this is the funniest part . . . my best friend’s father will be voting for Obama. I said, “huh?” And my friend replied: “Well he has voted Democrat all his life and refuses to vote anything Republican.”

    Again, it’s about the general resistance to change.

    There was a story circulating recently about a Democratic canvasser in western Pennsylvania who went to the door of an older white couple. He asked who they were voting for. Their answer (and I am not joking, I swear): “We’re voting for the n****r.”

    I can only shake my head, and shrug.

  35. NotGregLetiecq

    An overturn of Roe v. Wade would be an intrusion on our right to privacy. If abortion were made illegal, we can bet that Corey Stewart and John Stirrup would jam though a local ordinance mandating police officers to check a woman’s reproductive organs for probable cause that they may have had an abortion. I say that tongue-in-cheek, but in all seriousness, what would happen to the law enforcement profession if police officers were suddenly expected to enforce reproductive law.

    Many on this blog had concerns about using county taxpayer money to enforce federal immigration law. Well, if there were a federal or state reproductive law that mandated that all pregnancies were carried to term, what sort of law enforcement agency would conduct the investigations, detentions, and incarcerations?

    Would there be a Federal Reproductive Enforcement Agency?

    Or, would it be left to the local governments to instruct their police officers on what to do if there is probable cause that a woman has had an abortion?

    Look, I’m not pro abortion either. If ever there was a lesser of two evils decision, this is it. We can’t put a stop to all abortions. There would be a black market for abortion if we tried. So, the best thing we can do is try to limit the number of abortions by reducing teenage pregnancy, and reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies by fighting poverty.

    Few people know this, but there were considerably LESS abortions during the Clinton years than during the Bush years.

  36. Hello is voting for McCain because he/she likes vaginas.

    (TOTALLY kidding with you, Hello!)

  37. –If abortion were made illegal, we can bet that Corey Stewart and John Stirrup would jam though a local ordinance mandating police officers to check a woman’s reproductive organs for probable cause that they may have had an abortion.–

    LOL!!!!!!

    –We can’t put a stop to all abortions. There would be a black market for abortion if we tried. So, the best thing we can do is try to limit the number of abortions by reducing teenage pregnancy, and reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies by fighting poverty.–

    Agree, NGL. We have to attack the REASONS for abortions if we want to (almost) end the practice.

  38. –Their answer (and I am not joking, I swear): “We’re voting for the n****r.”–

    Holy shit! And he wasn’t kidding?

    I have an Obama friend who DID say kiddingly, “If it’s not black, send it back!” This is bad, but you have to understand this man makes fun of everything and everyone including himself. (Not something I would recommend saying, however!)

  39. Robb Pearson

    As to abortion (I figured since it was mentioned, I’d just get it out of the way) . . . I am (1) extremely pro-life, and (2) extremely pro-choice. I am absolutely against abortion, under almost any circustances. And I am absolutely against the government creating law that regulates what ought to happen inside a woman’s uterus. A person’s body is inviolable, and the government has no place putting its proverbial hands into a woman’s vagina and exerting control.

    Having said all that . . . what needs to be done is to go after the reasons why many women feel it is necessary to seek abortion. We need to engage the familial, relationship, cultural, and societal stresses that are unfairly placed upon women and which put them in situations of having to make painful decisions.

    It means healing the brokenness in family, personal, and social relationships that leads to decisions to abort human life. It means creating new humane alternatives and responsible avenues (for all of us), and creating a “culture of life” where we seek to achieve relational harmony, not simply pontificate over the political issue of pro-life/pro-choice, or their relative rightness and/or wrongness.

    Otherwise we’ll simply engage in the ever-perpetual exercise of constantly missing the point.

  40. Moon-howler

    People can easily be personally opposed to abortion and politically support the foundations of Roe v Wade. I believe many people here are too young to recall the way things were before Roe v Wade (1973). and before Roe’s forebearer, Griswold v Connecticut (1965).

    http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/griswold.html

    Griswold basically allowed women access to contraception. No kidding. Connecticut wasn’t the only place where you couldn’t buy contraception, even if prescribed by a doctor.

    2 house sessions ago, Bob Marshall tried to pass a bill through the House of Delegates declaring life began at fertilization. Why fertilization? Because most modern birth control prevents implantation (conception) after fertilization. If that bill had passed, if Roe were overturned, many forms of contraception would no longer be legal. And who can forget Marshall standing before the House of Delegates trumpetting against the morning after pill….talking about frat boys and their love canals. Oh horrors! What an ass! In case you have forgotten:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6k4RrKNk7s

    Cuidado! Abortion is such a political issue, you have no idea what you might uncover were it to become illegal. I have so sick of hearing it should become a state issue. Another patchwork of laws? Safe Medical services should not be determined by where you live any more than should buying contraception. Women will only be equal when they can control their own reproduction. Those who are so opposed to abortion should make certain that contraception is inexpensive and available.

    I will sign off saying that my mother used to have to come from New Jersey to Virginia to stock up on contraception. Now that is just dead wrong.

  41. As someone who has maintained a stance against abortion all my life, I have gone through a tremendous amount of soul-searching during the past 2 years when events, policies, and personalities have pushed me out of the Republican party.

    Of course it is perfectly viable to position yourself against abortion as an independent. But I have known since before I was eligible to vote that long-term Republican dominance in the White House was the only way to overturn Roe v. Wade. This is why so many true conservatives accepted the unholy alliance between “family values” and corporate welfare/neoconservatism/economic colonialism/militarism.

    I think at times in my life, I have been opposed to abortion first, and only secondarily in favor of corporate welfare, because the two things seemed to go hand-in-hand. Today, I no longer see the necessary connection. I don’t see why my opposition to abortion should connect me to trickle down economics, neoconservatism, economic colonialism (the Iraq War), and lobbyists paid for by the military industrial complex taking over our federal government.

    I no longer want to buy the whole package anymore. You see, while I might suspect (though I don’t know for certain) that stronger abortion restrictions would be good for America, I do know for certain that a continuation of tax shelters for big corporations and neoconservative military policy would be bad for America.

    As someone who has toiled and agonized over the abortion issue for nearly a lifetime, I’m beginning to feel like a workhorse, a beast of burden, weighted down with the full load of the Republican party … all those corporate, big oil, and war industry aristocrats reclining on my back … as I’m trudging across a desert toward a mirage they have painted for me … while they ride along eating grapes and marveling at how far I’ve carried them.

    For years I’ve looked forward to the 2008 election. McCain would be the centrist candidate, who, like me, refused to buy the whole package, and refused to carry all that weight. I thought the mirage was finally within reach. But my legs are getting tired. My legs are bending under the weight of the waste, the corruption, the wars for profit, and the failure to keep us safe and maintain our infrastructure.

    And now, could it be true, that my candidate since the year 2000 has changed his stance, and climbed on my back, and into bed with the same oil barons, wall street swindlers, and war industry moguls?

    If I could just wipe the mirage from my eyes, I could see how I differ with them on so many issues. Yes, I differ with these neoconservative war hawks, wall street swindlers, and oil baron aristocrats. And I’m beginning to realize they take me for granted. They view me as beneath them. They care little for “a culture of life;” look at all the death they’ve created. As the culture of life mirage before me disappears yet again, and reappears on the horizon … on the other side of the vast desert … I ask myself why should I not use my last remaining strength to buck these liars off my back?

  42. Since we’re talking about how much we all love the major party candidates, did any of you hear about the debate tonight between the Independent candidates on the ballot? I understand that it’s happening in DC tonight at 9 P.M. and is supposed to be broadcast on C-SPAN. I also understand that McCain and Obama have been invited, but are not expected to show up.

  43. Censored bybvbl

    As a person who has voted for third party candidates for President, I’d like to see some moderates emerge from the other two parties because underfunded or extremist candidates at either end don’t stand a chance at this point. A newly formed Moderate party with an appealing platform and with some defectors from the two major parties might be able to pull off a win. Whoever wants to try should start early and not wait until the beginning of the election cycle.

  44. Moon-howler

    WHWN, You are aware that women of means (middle class) will always be able to obtain abortions if that is what they choose to do? The women who will not be able to obtain them will be the poor and the young. If you are comfortable with this kind of disparity, then by all means vote Republican.

  45. Moon-howler

    Censored, I would love to see a newly formed moderate party. I believe most people are a mixture of both liberal and conservative.

  46. ShellyB

    So I gather that at least on this blog, abortion is the only remaining reason to support McCain/Palin. I am in M-H’s camp on this one. But it certainly is a more valid and more honest issue than “vote for me because the other guy is a communist, terrorist, socialist, or whatever scares you most.”

    An intelligent discussion of the abortion issue would have been valuable during this campaign, rather than asking ourselves “is X group ignorant and prejudiced enough to believe X?” We learn very little from such discussions.

  47. DB

    Abortion is a topic that is not always as black and white as people sometimes see. Like Robb I am both pro-life and pro-choice. I know many, many pro-life individuals who see not only abortion as a sin, but the use of birth control as a sin as well. Any good Catholic married couple who uses any birth control method other than the natural planning method is a sinning couple. Many Catholic pro-lifers see birth control as another form of abortion. The Catholic church is against the use of birth control, including condoms, vasectomies, tubal ligations, the morning after pill etc. The only “good” form of birth control for single people is abstinence, and the only “good” form of birth control for married couples is the natural planning method. I absolutely adhere to the belief that if a woman wants to use a birth control method, she should be allowed to. If a couple decides they are done having children and want to receive a form of surgical sterilization, then that should be their choice.

  48. ShellyB

    Let’s hope we don’t end up having those choices made for us by a “Reproductive Enforcement Agency” OR by Prince William County’s finest.

    I have the feeling it won’t ever come to that in a nation with a Constitution such as ours, even if McCain did win.

  49. TWINAD

    Moon-howler, 23. October 2008, 8:33
    I don’t disagree with his assessment at all. I probably would have just said it differently, or….lived to fight another day and not said it at all–just thought it.

    I agree exactly with this! Murtha’s main problem is, that when you think about it, there is no way to say what he said without coming across as offensive…even if it’s the truth.

    The first time my husband and I drove to my parent’s house in Western NY, we stopped at a Burger King near Altoona. While we were eating, he looked a little confused. I asked him what was wrong. He said, “there’s only white people working here! I’ve never been to a fast food restaurant where there are only white workers…they are usually only the manager.” Keep in mind he has only lived in LA and Northern VA…both very diverse populations.

  50. Moon-howler

    Twinad, I had the same feeling as Mr. Twinad in a McDonalds in Standardsville, VA. It’s confusing. You are right. There is no nice way to say what Rep. Murtha said. He tired. And painted himself back in the same corner.

    I am still laughing over the stories Robb told us. I am one of those who doesn’t really get angry at people if they don’t know any better. One of my g-grandmothers was born in 1890. She did some things that post 1960…you just don’t say or do. You just have to evaluate it in terms of HER time and place rather than mine.

Comments are closed.