102 Comments

1. BL:

Chesler, great commentary, but it’s a generational thing! The two ex-models that stopped by my West Village writer’s garret (mid-twenty somethings, over-the-hill by fashion world standards, but still in the game) had me vet their evening attire for the first big party (neither democratic, republican, or independent) night of fashion week in NYC.

While one would cavort in front of my full length mirror, the other would sit beside me and “watch” the speeches, we all agreed that Fred Thompson’s tie was AWESOME, but was he wearing glasses or in need of Botox for those bags under his eyes. He didn’t seem glued to a teleprompter, and the sound man/women was doing a good job. “No way, could they roll back Wade,” if the condom breaks, you run out and get the RD-40 abortion pill the next day,” said one of the ladies.

They’ve spent the Summer being oh so European, going topless in all the right Euro-hotspots, obviously not Dubai, incredulous that a women was wearing a Burka right down the street from me at the Westbeth artist commune. “That would never happen in America, much less in the West Village!” No time to show them a previous blog you wrote about that!

I don’t know which channels you watched but ABC and CNN, cut away from Lieberman (”the turncoat democrat, betrayer of his party”, at least, they were up on that) to focus on the roiting/quelling of such so-called “civil disobedience” and we we’re unable to hear his entire speech. They waxed nostalgic allegiance with the anarchists showing the Republicans the error of their ways (vacuously unaware of Norman Mailer turning over in his grave about the siege of Chicago and Miami (they just love South Beach!)) 40 years ago there where, at least, equal opportunity rioting ensued!

They left saying that if they knew anything about history, perhaps it would repeat itself, but the fact that Obama was HOT! and the republicans were old, their minds were made up! Fortunately, one of them isn’t even registered to vote!

That’s where we are!

Sep 3, 2008 - 12:21 am 2. Pajamas Media » When Obama Vs. McCain is an Agonizing Decision:

[...] Read the entire story here. [...]

Sep 3, 2008 - 2:11 am 3. Tristan Phillips:

Here’s some help on the issue of national defense and abortion rights: If you don’t have the former, you won’t get the latter.

To equate the two priority wise is a special brand of arrogance and how naive the speaker/writer is.

Sep 3, 2008 - 2:58 am 4. RE:

It’s interesting to me how when it comes to issues like ‘A women’s right to choose’, people act as if they are selecting a supreme king who simply wave his hand and make his wish the law of the land.

It’s not he way America works.

I do wish the drama queens would chill.

Sep 3, 2008 - 3:46 am 5. Bill in New York:

Pro-choice? Don’t look for Palin to assuage your liberal feelings… abortion is murder, it should NOT be legal.

Sep 3, 2008 - 4:18 am 6. slavus:

BL:
“and the republicans were old, they’re minds were made up!”

That’s where you are indeed, illiterate and ignorant.

Sep 3, 2008 - 5:19 am 7. slavus:

what’s there to agonize about? Out of burka, you can still struggle for abortion rights or even golf-club memberships (I am really not sure whats more important for official feminists). Once the burka is on, thats it.

Sep 3, 2008 - 5:21 am 8. George Jochnowitz:

Extremes meet. The far left and the far right agree on many issues. Buchanan is the equivalent of Ayers.

Anti-Zionists, typically, are leftists. Leftists were openly anti-Semitic and not simply anti-Zionist during the New York teachers’ strike of 1968. Obama, however, has openly separated himself from Reverend Wright and Ayers. Will Palin mention Buchanan at all during her speech? We will soon find out.

Sep 3, 2008 - 5:35 am 9. Scott Somerville:

If you really mean what you say above, then consider this. It should tip the scales.

Reversing Roe v. Wade doesn’t mean banning abortion in all 50 states. If McCain picks judges who reverse Roe, I don’t see New York or California outlawing abortion. Instead, we might see something like Europe has… restrictions on late-term abortions with little to no interference on the first trimester. (Of course, if increasingly vocal Muslims put Europe under Sharia law, that could change.)

I’m pro-life, but I could live with a red/blue America where abortion is legal in New York and illegal in Alabama. I can’t live with an America that is afraid to publish cartoons that criticize Mohammed.

Sep 3, 2008 - 5:43 am 10. steve albert:

Phyllis,

I am a Canadian. I am hesitant to write because I don’t share your dilemma. However, here are a few thoughts,

I am sure that if McCain wins, the Democrats will control Congress and probably increase their majority . I don’t think that either McCain or Palin would be able to appoint Supreme Court justices who would reverse Roe v Wade in these circumstances.

Of course, I cannot tell you with certainty that I’m sure about this. However, it is hardly an accident that despite years of Republican presidents, two states have voted to legalize gay marriage and abortion rights have not been abrogated. I think the changes that have occurred in American society in the last half century are not going to be reversed.

If I were in your situation(and I’m not) I’d split my vote, if the Democrat running in my Congressional district took a strong position on national security.

I also think that some of the attacks on Palin have crossed a line. The questions about whether she can be a mother and also run for/or become Vice-President are insulting.

To my mind, the criteria for whether such questions are justified is whether one would ask the same question of someone on one’s own side of the political fence. Politics has become so partisan ,and not only in the the U.S.,that few people can answer that question honestly.

Sep 3, 2008 - 6:13 am 11. George Clarke:

Every legislature in the land can preserve Roe v. Wade easily enough by just doing what legislatures do. Pass a law decriminalizing abortion. It is the legislatures who are supposed to legislate and debate laws openly, not unelected judges who deliberate on the appeals of discrete disputes behind closed doors. So losing Roe is not the same as losing abortion rights, which are too engrained to be lost entirely anyway, and the President cannot repeal Roe either. Nor can the Vice President. Appointing an acceptable judge that will pass muster with the opposition does not guarantee a repeal of Roe either, and if Roe is appealed what about the loopholes, which lawyers and judges love. So to me its a no-brainer. A right wing president is no guarantee that the abortion debate will be moved back to the legislature where it belongs, and no one now wants to criminalize abortion just because the rights of infants in the womb have to be legally protected too. This complex issue will not be resolved 100% in either party’s favor and we, as compromising adults, should simply wake up to that fact.

Sep 3, 2008 - 6:51 am 12. Alan Rockman:

I would have preferred Joe Lieberman as Vice President. BUT…unfortunately anti-semitism does still exist in this country, and unfortunately too in both parties. Rush Limbaugh warned that the Republican Party would have split itself apart if McCain had chosen him, which despite a very honorable pro-Israel record, unlike the MoveOn.Org-Obama Democrats, still has a fringe of extremist wackos.

BUT…it would have been the Democrats, as cowardly, bigoted, racist and anti-semitic as their two nominees are – yes, Joe Biden isn’t exactly the “Zionist” he claims to be (and even if he was, Barack Hussein has surrounded himself with a foreign policy advisory team that is 100% ANTI-ISRAEL, and in many ways, ANTI-AMERICA too) who would have gone after Lieberman full tilt. I’ve seen the comments on the CBS News site about him, and they are not pretty. They mirror what is being said about him in the cowardly non-serving (Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Dean, KKK Byrd) Democratic Left on the Daily Kos and Puff Ho sites. As principled and honorable Lieberman is, he would have been meat for the Jew-haters, and the majority of them, despite the overt lies of a Bobby Wexler, are in the Democratic Party.

Why Jews still support Democrats after they chose a guy who loves anti-Semites as his friends and advisers (if he isn’t one himself) is beyond me. Voting for Obama would be voting for Hitler to some degree.

Now, having said all this about Lieberman, Sarah Palin is charismatic, has guts and character, is NO anti-semite despite some of the smears coming out now, and for the most part can do the job, in many ways better than Joe Biden. I still have a few doubts about that 3 a.m. call if McCain, God Forbid takes ill or worse, but the vicious attacks on her family have only increased my resolve to support her.

She would make an outstanding Vice President and provide real change, not the plagarizing hot air of Obama’s fellow coward Biden. I do disagree with Phyllis on many social issues, but are supportive of most – but the bottom line is as Lieberman emphasized, these are not “ordinary” times. We need leaders who aren’t going to treat guys like Ahmedinejedad and Putin as buddy-buddies, sing “Kumbaya” with them as they prepare to nuke us, or betray America.

Country does come first, not two ideological knuckleheads who would put us last – and appease Islamohitlerism.

Sep 3, 2008 - 6:58 am 13. elixelx:

“Where there is certainty, there is no choice; where there is choice, there is only pain and suffering.” Confucias

I advise you to check your certainties, Phyllis. If you have none, all you will ever have is the aforementioned pain and suffering.

Sep 3, 2008 - 7:10 am 14. Ellis Gee:

I’m not too concerned about conservative judges overturning Roe v. Wade–after all, it was the very conservative Harry Blackmun who wrote it. But I am concerned about the stealth sharia that some people would like to impose in this country. If that happens, abortion rights, free-speech rights, and a whole host of others will be out the proverbial window. Never mind the right to bear arms–under sharia feminists will need to fight for the right to bare arms!

Sep 3, 2008 - 7:50 am 15. Fat Man:

“Leiberman was tactically brilliant in suggesting that Americans, including his fellow Democrats, should care more about their country than their Party; being a Republican or a Democrat is nowhere near as important as being an American.”

Yes, but the left-wing base of the Democrat party hates and fears America. They will not be appealed to in this way. They think it is much more important for them to be hommes du gauche than Americans.

Sep 3, 2008 - 7:57 am 16. Fallon:

I was torn early on in this presidential campaign. I have always considered myself forward thinking and, yeah, I’ll say it, kinda cool. I was cool in high school, I was cool in college and I am considered kind of a cool mom. Image was at least as important as accomplishment. Sad, but true.

I have always embraced and treasured my contradictory nature. I took advantage of my looks but wanted to be respected for my brains. I was an early Helen Reddy feminist, who stayed home with my children. An atheist, who married a big “C” Catholic. An athlete who was an artist. An artist who enjoyed math and science. A bleeding heart liberal who secretly coveted fiscal conservative budgets.

What to do this year? I was an early Obama supporter. Hey, he’s cool. Voting for him would make me feel good. I would still be cool, cool on the issues, anti-establishment, connected to a historic moment a historic movement. Then I started to try to find out more information about him and that’s when I began to question whether “cool” was enough.

I thought he was a squeaky clean politician. (I like contradictions.) I got enamored with the struggle between the Clinton machine and the outsider. I got sucked in. Then, I started to get that uneasy feeling in my stomach when I saw why he was portrayed as squeaky clean, he had years erased from his resume. And, I saw why he was doing so well against the Clinton’s, George Soros. I saw how easily he denied his associations, relationships and family. Cool started to feel kind of cold. If something appears too good to be true, it usually is.

I started to see that he was more style than substance and I was in a quandary. “More image than accomplishment” Hmmm… How old am I? I started to feel foolish as if I fell for the need to belong. I was back in high school swooning over the quarterback even though he wasn’t necessary the most accomplished or principled guy out there.

But, back on the Republican side, I didn’t really “like” McCain. Again, just a gut feeling, image based. From my viewpoint, as a newly realized image whore (how embarrassing), his days of cool had long passed. He was a grisled old guy. A man I respected for his service to country but a man who I believed was a little prickly, but in his favor he was a contrarian, hmmm. I thought Romney “looked” more presidential (but that Mormon thing did give me pause) and he didn’t win the nomination. Wow, I really sound superficial writing this out, but it is mildly cathartic to admit most of this.

Yes, I am embarrassed to say, I was a middle aged woman who was still chasing “cool” as if it connected me to my youth, my inner rebel, my inner conformist, my sense of belonging. I allowed my immature nature to drive me even though by now I should consider myself mature and worldly. As far as the abortion issue, I have never felt particularly invested in the issue. I do not agonize over abortion one way or another. I think it is a necessary evil that won’t go away no matter what happens in the courts. If it becomes a state issue, it will still be available.

I do feel that national security is most important. We have entered into a time when the nature of warfare has dramatically changed. There are no rules, no borders, no defined countries for the most part. Fighting a religion driven ideology whose followers don’t value their own lives and value others even less. Not only a religious, but a barbaric and subjugating ideology that is taking advantage of modern weaponry and modern technology. It is a threat to Western Civilization.

So… Then McCain picked Sarah Palin. Reading about her, I immediately connected to her history. A title IX athlete. A mother. A person driven by what is right not what is popular or expected. I started to respect her accomplishment and not just her image. She swayed me to vote Republican for the second time in my long presidential voting history. (Maybe third, if you count John Anderson’s third party run as neo-Republican.)

I have been so incensed at the media attack on her and her family that I think I will be reaching into my purse to send money to the Republican Party for the first time ever. I am not swayed and in fact I am energized by the MSM’s frenzied attacks on her. She looks to be a real threat to their sense of cool, lol. She is a real person with real quirks and family issues and she doesn’t deny any of it. It will still be a historic campaign, just a different slant than I had embraced before. (I will be sending more money to the McCain camp than I sent to the Obama campaign early on. My indecision and change of mind has proven to an expensive folly this year, lol.)

To sum up a long and rambling post, I have been struggling with this decision, too, but I will be voting for Governor Sarah Palin via Senator McCain because I feel she is a strong and accomplished leader who I respect. I cherish the thought that she will be a mere heatbeat away from the presidency. I will never agree with any candidate 100%, never have, but I now believe that character and personal integrity trumps image, and security trumps domestic issues.

Now that I have made my decision, I feel at peace for the first time since the campaigns began.

Sep 3, 2008 - 7:58 am 17. John Corn:

Good writing; weak thinking. Somerville’s comments nail the abortion issue. He also nails the absurdity of the moral/political equivalence of that versus preserving our freedom, including the economy, which Obama, and his distributional socialism will destroy.

Sep 3, 2008 - 7:59 am 18. Rock_Rega:

Ches, this is a no brainer. It is obvious to me that you have made up your mind already to go with (b’ezrat hashem) JM/SP and are just going through the motions in your so called “contemplation” of possibly going with BHO/JB. those who are not blinded by the hype, white guilt and Madison Avenue see that BHO is an inexperienced and DANGEROUS phoney baloney. Your stand on abortion is apparently the only issue bothering you and it can be dealt with as the other commenters wrote above. by the way, raising a family of 5 kids while starting her public career in the PTA to city council to Mayor to governor of THE LARGEST STATE OF THE UNION – does that get “feminism points”?

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:00 am 19. Judy, NYC:

the virulent anti-semitism and hatred of isreal by the left is all over the web. it is daily fare on huffington post. and, it is most chilling because it has been ignored, not just by the mainstream press and cable news, but the democratic party itself, even going so far as to invite an islamic fascist to speak at their convention. not one shard of interest was shown in this bizarre invitation. america’s enemies are intent on the destruction of our society. supported by the left, they have insinuated themselves into our press, and our schools, and this presidential campaign. as a life long democrat i am voting for mccain. in my view, he has the appropriate response to this threat. i don’t want obama in office, i find him vacant, and he is still a hidden,secret entity the press refuses to investigate or even question. there is too much unanswered about his background, his ideology, his associations with wright and farrakhan, and especially ayers, a rabid america hater. mccain’s choice of sarah palin has brought us back to where we should be, and somehow lost our way, thinking about what is complex and requires open and ongoing debate, both in congress and in our own homes, in our families and amongst our friends, and most importantly in our own private moments. the role of women, the responsibilities of our society, the aspects of character that we value, and most important, the question of what america is, why we are special, and why we must bear the burden of eternal vigilance.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:12 am 20. BMoon:

It is indeed a conundrum, but perhaps not the way most of the egalitarian individualists (ie. libertarians) with an understanding of the geopolitical situation, would see it. The real problem with Roe v. Wade, was not just the utter degradation of human life, or the unprecedented “freedom” to destroy human life in the womb, rather the complete mangling of the Constituion, specifically, the destruction of the delicate balance or power the Founders meticulously crafted to ensure that democratic government would prevail amidst a conglomeration of varying competitive worldviews and faiths. What is the real danger you miss is the leftist judical activism that Roe v Wade characterizes and has aggravated. Support of Roe v Wade, apart from the fundamental issues of human life and personhood, which it bowled over thoughtlessly, is support for that kind of anti-democratic and anti-Constitutional impostion of the cultural elite upon the rest of the population. National Security is meant at its root to defend the Constitution, yet leftist judical activism undermines the same from the other end.

Yep, we got a problem here, but it is not the pro-lifers.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:32 am 21. Sharon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOIYkLWY4Fc&feature=related

Just look at the above video and you will know that you have to vote McCain. Your right to abortion will mean nothing in the face of Islamic governance, and you risk this if you vote Obama. When you see this clip you will see that the first duty of a Muslim is to kill one who gives up his Islam. We know Obama was born to a Muslim father which makes him a Muslim. However, he says he is not a Muslim, in other words, in the eyes of Islam, he has renounced his religion. So as President he is at great risk of being killed by one of the 1% who enact the Koran. Then your President will be Biden – a man who couldn’t make it as a candidate in his own right. So please don’t base your decision on internal issues. America like Israel has to make decisions based on foreign policy alone whether Americans like it or not as they are the keeper of the West. The only candidate who knows anything about foreign policy is McCain. And it is no good saying Biden is Obama’s brain in this sphere – second hand knowledge is not good enough. The main man must be the person with the knowledge and experience as he is the one with his finger on the button. And then I hear you say that Palin has no experience in these matters. In fact she has more than Obama and she isn’t running for President. She runs a state that is bordered by two foreign countries – Canada and Russia, closer than Obama ever got to a foreign country as a short term senator apart from his show stopping vacuous speech to the Germans. She also said in her speech the other night in Dayton that she and McCain would never countenance a nuclear Iran – do you need any more when Obama’s only view of evil is crime on the streets? Send Obama to Hollywood and McCain to Washington.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:36 am 22. Concerned Citizen:

My wife has the same issue many women have — reconciling fiscal conservatism, low taxes and small government with a women’s right to control her body. Assume for a moment McCain and Palin are elected and they appoint a couple of new, more conservative Supreme Court justices.

Is the Supreme Court really going to strike down a relatively recent precedent (Roe v. Wade)? It’s more likely to become a states rights issue. Blue states can have abortion up to 3 months, red states can ban it. If you live in a red state, you can travel to a blue one to have the procedure.

There are many other options for women to have control over their bodies with birth control, the morning after pill, etc., many of which were not as available or convenient at the time of Roe v. Wade. Medical technology has significantly improved — if you don’t believe me, go to any drug store in the country and you will see over the counter pregnancy tests and plan B pills, which are available without a prescription. Any responsible woman HAS control over her body with these means.

Abortion is NOT the issue it once was, where the choice was only baby or abortion. Women have many other choices that would not go away, even in the event Roe v. Wade is overturned. In this context, abortion should not be 1% of the issue it once was.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:41 am 23. Bruce:

I find it near impossible to believe that a first term McCain presidency will nominate anything close to right wing extremists to the high court. It’s not his style or his substance (and, by the way, would not help him (or the republicans, if it’s not him) get re-elected). Since it seems several vacancies are most likely (or ought) to happen within the next four years, I don’t think concerns about possible changes in abortion laws are as well founded (or should be given as much weight) as some of the other considerations.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:43 am 24. Self-hating boomer:

For crying out loud, don’t you understand that a reversal of Roe v Wade would NOT outlaw abortion? This is such a stale and stupid argument.

Outlawing of abortion coast-to-coast isn’t going to happen under any circumstances. Period. Please, let’s stop with this old, tired, and utterly false talking point.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:55 am 25. Self-hating boomer:

And btw – Islam isn’t exactly abortion-friendly. Make the wrong choice, and in the long run, abortion will end up illegal in all 57 states.

Sep 3, 2008 - 9:01 am 26. Sandy Salt:

There is no agonizing over this choice. It isn’t about national security verses abortion. It is about people who love America over people that do not. John McCain has given his life to making this country better, while Obama has done little in service to this country. Obama has only looked to better his lot and when he tried to do for others he failed because it was poorly managed. As for Palin, she saw a need and worked to solve problems. The difference between her and Obama was that she succeeded in her quests. Biden is a total zero and adds nothing to the contest. Agonize all you want, but the clear choice is for McCain/Palin who have spent their lives in service to their country and communities. You can go with reformers or hot air, but as for me it is the reformers.

Sep 3, 2008 - 9:14 am 27. radical_moderate:

“I would need to be assured that voting for abortion does not mean that I end up voting against Israel, against the Jews–and against Muslims who are under Islamic seige.”
==================
Oh for god’ssake, ANOTHER “Israel Firster” Like old Joe LIEberman. Well I’m an America Firster myself who wants to disentangle our country from the fate of another Sovereign Nation.

When did we start wiping Israel’s ass? Actually when I think of Israel’s poor showing in Lebanon a few years ago, it seems to me that Israel has gotten too soft with confidence that it will be American Blood that will spilt protecting their country during a major attack.

No worries Ms Chesler, Obama has promised to give Israel the tools to defend themselves, and Obama has plenty of Jewish backers confident in his pro-Israel bona-fides, and gave a tough speech at AIPAC. In fact, I’m disappointed in Obama’s continued allegience to the tyranny of the American-Israel lobby. Anti-Semitic? Not at all, just, as I said, I’m an American Firster, but go ahead and call me an “anti-semite,” which is the first offense of the intellectually lazy.
—————-
“Also, since anti-Semitism, disguised as anti-Zionism has arisen today on the Left, not the Right”
—————–
To quote Conservative thinker, teacher, and author, Andrew Bacevich:

“(The Bush administration) Completed the shift of US strategic priorities away from Europe and toward the Greater Middle East, the defense of Israel having now supplanted the defense of Berlin as the cause to which presidents and would-be presidents ritually declare their fealty….Andrew Bacevich”

Sep 3, 2008 - 9:16 am 28. WJ:

This is a false choice. Whether you believe that abortion should be legal up to infanticide, banned outright, or somewhere in between, it is NOT an issue for judges to decide. Roe v Wade was an absurd decision in the fact that the Supremes even took the case.

Believe it or not, there are some areas where the Constitution is silent and therefore the matter is left up to the States via the 10th amendment.

As Sommerville noted, the overturning Roe v Wade will properly put the abortion question back to the State legislatures where it should have remained.

Sep 3, 2008 - 9:27 am 29. Joshua:

Women get to CHOOSE whether they have a life of faith and believe in a creator. Women get to CHOOSE who they have intimate sexual contact with. Women get to CHOOSE when and who they take their clothes off with. Women get to CHOOSE whether to use birth control or not. Women get to CHOOSE to understand where babies come from. Women get to CHOOSE to have sexual relations when they are not ovulating. Women get to CHOOSE if they are mentally and financially stable in a sexual relathionship. Women get to CHOOSE when and how they are going to get pregnant.

CHOICE, as outlined above applies to 97-98% of all women of child bearing age. I know there are exceptions in the case of rape and incest but the percent to total pregnancies is very small. The point is millions and millions of babies are killed because of poor CHOICES.

What is the real problem? Women fully capable of making good decisions don’t exercise their CHOICE to do so. They make not one, but a series of poor choices that lead to pregnancy. Because abortion is such a big business women are “sold” on the fact that they need another “choice,” death for their unborn child.

Remember, we’re not talking about poor choices leading up to a shoplifting charge or having your car break down or getting fired from your job, we’re talking about a baby, a life, a person, a soul. You can CHOOSE not to believe this but it doesn’t change the facts. So it has become the clarion call to women making poor choices – “IT’S NOT A BABY!” If it’s not a baby, why do they call it birth control?

Abortion advocates like Planned Parenthood perpetrate the message Barack Obama so eloquently communicated “I don’t want my daughters PUNISHED with a child.” So now, a child is punishment. O.K., maybe a teenage mom (like Bristol Palin) will have to grow up a little faster than she would have liked. Maybe a young mom with 1 kid already and a missing father may have to get extra help from friends, family or get support from church. The support can ALWAYS be found in America if you CHOOSE to find it. The message is: Kill the fetus (not a child) and life will be better!

Every reasonable person knows that life is full of challenges and it is these challenges that shape our character and ultimately make us better people for it. Out of all the children killed by abortions how many would have been an absolute blessing and joy to the mother even if it was a challenge? Choice? Choose life. Death is a slippery slope with no positive long term outcome.

Sep 3, 2008 - 9:35 am 30. Marion L:

Here are my bottom lines:

Bush/Cheney did not know how to protect this country.
Lying to start a war with a country that did not attack us (Iraq, while ignoring Bin Laden’s cave in Pakistan, is not an effective defensive strategy. McCain promises more of the same. How sad that this heroic torture survivor (McCain) is oblivious to human rights violations at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and via extraordinary rendition. Some of the Guantanamo inmates have been imprisoned for as long as McCain was; without due process, without seeing the charges proferred against them, and with very limited access to counsel. These are precisely the conditions that prevail in the criminal “justice” systems of Middle Eastern countries that are the enemies of Israel.

McCain chose Sarah Palin to pander to the Christian right – many of whom (despite their professed Christian “Zionism”) are theological anti-Semites who think that Jews will go to hell if they don’t convert after Armageddon destroys the world – including Israel. It is therefore disingenuous – and dangerous – for American Jews to assume that anti-Semitism is exclusively a problem of the political left.

The lesson that the current Republican Party has yet to learn is that we will not defeat the extremists by emulating their worst tactics. I say this because I love the Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and I’m appalled when any government (including the Bush/Cheney government) violates it.

Finally, while Sarah Palin is an accomplished politican, I do not believe that she has the breadth of experience needed to step in as Commander in Chief should the need arise. That McCain chose her as Vice President does not speak well of his judgment.

Sep 3, 2008 - 9:49 am 31. Eric:

Abortion is a stupid reason to support or oppose a candidate if it is used as the sole deciding factor.

Even intellectually honest Liberal legal scholars have the courage to admit that Roe was a bad decision because the “right” to an abortion simply does not exist in the Constitution. Neither does the supposed “right” to privacy from which the aboriton “right” is supposed to have ‘emanated’.

Abortion is not addressed at all by the Constitution so properly it is a matter for the states to address per the 10th Amendment.

All intellectually honest persons regardless of political persuasion should also acknowledge that abortion is currently legal and that overturning Roe will NOT make abortion illegal. That will require an act of Congress. And since there is no way a majority members of Congress will ever be garnered to outlaw aborion it will always remain legal.

The best case Conservatives have is to overturn Roe and then work at the state level to outlaw it so at best a stalemate will exist in that abortion would be legal in some states and illegal in others.

It is absurd that this issue so defines our politics to the exclusion of so many more important issues that affect ALL Americans like energy, defense, size and scope of government, health care ,etc.

Sep 3, 2008 - 9:56 am 32. colagirl:

When I was younger, I was unthinkingly pro-choice. As I’ve gotten older, I’ve done a great deal of rethinking of some of my prior positions, including abortion. Today, I remain pro-choice, albeit with a number of reservations; however, I no longer believe (as I did when I was younger) that all pro-lifers are misogynists and religious fanatics who just want to control women’s bodies. Nor do I believe that abortion is a simple matter; instead I see it as an incredibly complex issue with a number of ramifications, that (like all complex issues) is ill-handled by our current sound-bite culture.

Despite the fact that I am pro-choice, I was always voting for McCain, even before Palin, Wright, and any one of a number of Obama’s issues came out. I’m not thrilled about him, but I do think he is more likely to stand firm on issues of national security than Obama. I also deeply distrust the place on the political landscape where Obama has situated himself: he seems to have a fairly deep history with the rabid left, and hasn’t done enough to distance himself from them. (Throwing Rev. Wright “under the bus” when he got caught doesn’t count–too little, too late for me.)

In a worst-case scenario, if McCain is elected president, does appoint extremely conservative Supreme Court justices (managing somehow to get them past Congress), and they do succeed in overturning Roe, then as Somerville pointed out, abortion will simply go back to the states to decide individually. (There is a case to be made that that is the way it should have been done in the first place, and that a great deal of the acrimony over the issue today could have been prevented if it *had* been handled that way.) Bottom line: with the variety and availability of contraceptives today, it’s just not that critical an issue for me. I view national defense as more important.

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:02 am 33. Javelin:

(as opposed to viewing America as the worst country in the world and making speeches abroad to please America’s enemies).
Who was making those speeches? Please spare me the national defense mantra. The US is in no great danger. North Korea, Iran are small fry. Venezuela is even smaller. I am sick of all this warmongering paranoia. And as far as the anti-abortionists go, if you support pre-emptive, optional wars then you are NOT pro life. Palin seems designed to appeal to a right winger whose idea of feminiitiy is Ann Coulter or tammy Bruce. Oh yeah, lets gut sex ed and teach creationism in schools, that should make our kids really informed.

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:07 am 34. Javelin:

Self-hating boomer,
you must really be full of hate. Yes overturning R v W would not immediately make it illegal but it is the first step. Do you think it would stop there? People who support unnecessary optional wars and gloat over the military and guns are hardly pro life. The War in Iraq was unnecessary and done under false pretences. It was an act of self centered bullying cowardice where we are supposed to attack regimes that may be a threat. Even John Wayne wited for the bad guy to draw first. Don’t any of you fascist militarists lecture us on morals if you support Iraq.

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:12 am 35. “JOE LIEBERMAN: Fmr. Democrat Addresses GOP Convention” « Rosettasister’s Weblog:

[...] http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2008/09/02/republicans-vs-democrats-wrenching-decisions-and-o... [...]

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:16 am 36. Joseph Somsel:

I have to agree with a number of the above commenters – this election is NOT a referendum on abortion!

A minority hope to preserve Roe v Wade since it handed them a free victory over established public opinion. Yet, it was a bad decision without constitutional basis.

I too want abortion to remain legal but certainly understand legitimate constraints on its practice that opponents have surfaced. Those limitations should be resolved on a state by state basis. Here in California, the resultant laws will be very lax while other states will probably have a more narrow view and might even exclude it altogether but the representatives of the states’ people will decide or it will come up as an initiative/referendum.

The current situation is clearly a distortion of the US political system.

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:33 am 37. goy:

Phyllis, I have to agree with Bill Whittle on this one:

“There are two nuclear issues in American politics, and they are The Right to Bear Arms and Abortion rights. They are the only two issues that cause one side, or the other, to actually go out and riot in the streets. You can twiddle with them a little (partial birth bans, assault rifle bans) but there is no way that Conservatives will EVER be able to make abortion illegal, and no way for the Liberals to EVER confiscate a private citizen’s guns.”

With that agreement, it’s clear to me that any hand-wringing over the potential loss of abortion rights is wasted energy – in this election or any other.

What’s not clear to me – even ignoring the encroachment of Islamist Fanatacism for the moment – is how anyone could be so conflicted over this choice that they’d be willing to trade away what’s left of our Democratic Constitutional Republic for a so-called “right” that is expressed nowhere in our Constitution.

Unless and until an actual Constitutional Amendment is passed (and I dearly wish they’d do it and get it over with), the so-called “right” to an abortion is a State issue, as mentioned above and like so MANY other issues over which politicians of Obama’s leftist, nanny-state ilk have managed to impose federal control.

The Republic we’re trying to preserve is based upon individual liberty and individual responsibility, not the collectivist socialism Obama and his like-minded associates like Bill Ayers have been actively working to impose for years.

This choice is thus as far from an “Agonizing Decision” as one might possibly imagine.

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:43 am 38. Javelin:

Mr. Somsel
I will concede that Roe V Wade was a bad decision. But the people who want to overturn it are not doing it for legalistic reasons either.

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:45 am 39. Joshua:

Javelin – You cannot communicate in “bumper sticker” slogans and be taken seriously. I’m sure it makes you feel better to rant and rave a little on PJM but the complexity of world affairs is not effected in the least.

The new President and Vice President of the United States will be taking command of a country at war. Like it or not, Osama bin Laden openly declared war on Israel and the West. The fact is that all terrorists are not in Afghanistan. The fact is that Iraq is moving away from civil war and not toward it and there is a lot of hard work left to do in Iraq. The fact is that the majority of Americans, when given the choice, to support the policies of Iran, North Korea, China, Venezuela, Russia, Syria etc. will reject these authoritarian and totalitarian regimes. These are the difficult times we live.

On Nov. 4th 2008 you will not have to ask yourself: 1) Who is John McCain? 2) Can I trust him to safegaurd America?

Barack Obama? Maybe is not good enough!

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:53 am 40. Dee:

I’m a Californian so the pro-choice issue is moot. No matter what happens to Roe vs Wade, California allows abortion.

However, true pro-choice means choosing to have the baby as well as abortion.

Sep 3, 2008 - 10:55 am 41. goy:

- But the people who want to overturn it are not doing it for legalistic reasons either.

Javelina, this is nothing more than a sweeping, erroneous, generalization. And your concession that Roe was a bad decision carries with it the necessary implication that it should – must – be corrected so as to STOP the issue from being such a divisive one.

Sep 3, 2008 - 11:08 am 42. Sandy Salt:

I know that I am crazy for jumping into this debate on abortion, but I have to ask. When and where is it stated that the federal government is responsible for deciding this issue? I would think that it should be left up to the states and their voters to decide on. I think the federal government has enough to deal with without sticking its nose into a personal decision. I thought the federal government was for the collective defense, to regulate interstate issues, and foreign affairs. The fact that the courts have forced some many issues onto the federal government is crazy. The people of a given city or state should decide things that effect the city or state not the federal government. That is why many states are no longer taking federal money for abstince only sex ed and why some states are thinking of lowering the drinking age to 18. These are things that the federal gevernment has no place in, but have forced states to their will with money blackmail. This needs to stop.

Sep 3, 2008 - 11:33 am 43. Rob:

Yes, Joshua we are a nation at war. Like the war on drugs, it will never be won, it will cost the lives of many Americns, and result in many more Americans living in fear of their own government. Radical Islamists can never ake away any of our rights. It is impossible. Only our elected gorvenment can do that.

And nations of terrorists? Yes we know that Afgan was not the only nation of terrorists and training grounds out there. We did know, before we invaded, that several sovereign nations, oh lets just throw Saudi and Pakistan out there, were much greater sponsors of terror than Iraq ever hoped to become. Oh but these are our allies! Condeming them would cost us to much!

Sep 3, 2008 - 11:44 am 44. Carol:

Mrs. Chesler, I am pro-life. Abortion is just plain wrong, although I get rubber legs when it’s an issue of life-of-the-mother vs. life-of-the-baby, when the mother really ought to be the one to decide. However, the decision in Roe v Wade made things up out of whole cloth, which the Supreme Court ought not be doing, but getting rid of that decision would simply devolve the decision to the states; it would not just make abortion illegal, and you should quit pretending it would. I know that some states have the right to kill unborn children written into their state constitutions. Women for whom the option to have an abortion is the sine qua non of their existence can move to those states to live, just in case, and the rest of us can value life all that much more.

Sep 3, 2008 - 12:17 pm 45. Wayne:

Don’t worry about conservative judges being confirmed – if Obama loses, then Joe Biden will be back in the Senate where he can continue his highly partisan savaging of any judicial appointee who comes before the Judiciary Committee. He is one of the names that belongs on the list of people who caused politics to be ‘broken’ (as Obama likes to tell us that it is). Biden is fiercely partisan and has used abortion as a litmus test consistently in confirmation proceedings.

Sep 3, 2008 - 1:18 pm 46. DWG:

This is a false choice you are promoting. Voting Democrat will not open the gates of America to islamofascists, and I’d like you to follow up to explain your evidence for that.

The chief criterion for chosing a president should be the assessment as to whether they will be effective in running the country well and logically. It is inevitable that the wedge issue of abortion would be used in this election (gay marriage and flag burning will soon follow) because the republicans have proven that they cannot run this country, and that they will squander the treasure and sons and daughters of our country in wars in the name of combating islamofascism – but there are appropriate and inappropriate wars. Whether you care to admit it a significant segment of the population understands that the Iraq war (but not the Afghanistan war) was a neoconservative blunder that has put us precisely where we are today. This country can’t withstand 4 more years of this nonsense. If you’re pro life think of the lives of men and women lost in Mr. Bush’s war and vote accordingly.

Sep 3, 2008 - 1:33 pm 47. radical_moderate:

“I’m a Californian so the pro-choice issue is moot. No matter what happens to Roe vs Wade, California allows abortion.

However, true pro-choice means choosing to have the baby as well as abortion”
================
Don’t fool yourself there is a plank in the Republican platform to protect the fetus under the 14th amendment which de facto will take the matter out of the hands of both the Federal Government, and the States. This is why McCain should not be allowed to appoint any more radical right judges. I have no personal stake in the abortion fight, but as a social Libertarian, I’d like to see young women retain the right to make decisions about their own bodies, and to decide their own future, and not become brood mares for more affluent couples having fertility problems.

Sep 3, 2008 - 1:52 pm 48. Chip:

You might want to consider the effect selective abortion of females has on freedom for women. There are a number of countries with so-called “missing women” which are capable of testing for gender and then performing abortions. In nations which value sons much more than women, I think there is a quiet gendercide going on.

Sep 3, 2008 - 1:56 pm 49. Jeremayakovka:

Thanks again for your reflections, Phyllis.

I continue to be impressed by Gov. Palin’s presence on the national stage and her determination to help the GOP win the White House. Stern words for her critics: accept her candidacy and go toe-to-toe with her on issues.

I’m voting for McCain, but I’ve made a good faith effort to appreciate Obama’s candidacy: reading his books, listening to his enthusiasts. A similar good faith effort is what Obama supporters need to do.

Yesterday Newt Gingrich referred to her as John McCain’s “soulmate,” adding that she is poised to be a national figure for the next two generations. Newt was not exaggerating.

Sep 3, 2008 - 1:58 pm 50. Kris:

Phyllis,

With respect to the choice issue, I think it’s important to keep things in perspective.

(1) If McCain were to win the presidency, he might, or might not, have the opportunity to nominate an individual to fill a Supreme Court seat vacated by a moderate or left-of-center justice (it would not matter at all if he was nominating someone to replace, say, Scalia, who is now 72 years old).

(2) If McCain had an opportunity to nominate someone, he might, or might not, nominate someone more likely to overturn Roe v. Wade than the individual the nominee replaced (keep in mind that a President McCain would require the approval of a Senate that would, in all likelihood, be Democratic, so President McCain almost certainly wouldn’t be able to get in a hard-right nominee).

(3) Even if McCain successfully placed an individual on the Supreme Court that he believed would be more likely than her/his predecessor to overturn Roe v. Wade, and even if the Court granted certiorari in a case in which Roe v. Wade would be considered, it is far from certain that the nominee would actually vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, because (a) the vast majority of jurists have a healthy respect for legal precedent and (b) judges don’t always vote the way they’re “supposed” to, surprising the political figures who nominated them by producing jurisprudence that is more liberal–or more conservative–than expected. (For examples, you don’t need to look any further than current Justices Stevens and Souter, nominated by Presidents Ford and George H.W. Bush, respectively.)

(4) Even assuming that all of the foregoing unlikely scenarios came to pass and McCain’s nominee voted, along with a majority of the Court, to overturn Roe v. Wade, all that would mean would be that abortion would no longer be entitled to constitutional protection. Legal protection in the form of laws legalizing the termination of pregnancies and the immunization of the parties involved from lawsuits would likely be put in place in the majority of states. As for those states that did not immediately pass such laws, they would soon come around. As others have pointed out, public polling showed steady growth in support of women’s reproductive rights in the years prior to 1973, and there is no reason to think that this trend would not continue.

Sep 3, 2008 - 2:28 pm 51. Tony DeCarlo:

Maybe I’m a dissdent voice but I consider people like Sarah Palin as a representative of the American Taliban. She opposes the right to choose, she is a fundamentalist believer in the literal bible, she says that the war in Iraq is part of G-d’s plan, she is essentially anti-science, she does not accept global warming even though her own state is seeing climate change before their eyes, etc. I could not and would not vote for a party or ticket that includes people like her.

Sep 3, 2008 - 2:29 pm 52. Undecided = Uninformed | Ocean Guy:

[...] can understand some, like Phyllis Chesler, who see reasons to support either candidate and have taken their time to weigh the options, but I [...]

Sep 3, 2008 - 3:06 pm 53. Night Owl:

Good for you for raising the issue and being open minded enough to solicit feedback. We need civilized discussion on this topic w/o demonizing each other. Some good comments. Permit me to weigh in.

Currently I’m pro-choice for early term abortions, absolutely against third trimester and partial birth abortions, except in cases where there is a real risk to the mother’s life. I say currently because I have straddled the fence on this issue my whole adult life. I can see valid arguments on both sides and therefore, as the quote from Confucius stated earlier in the comments, I do suffer from lack of certainty on this issue.

But I’m in the camp that believes it is a false argument to say that voting Republican risks bringing us back to the dark ages of back-alley abortions. It ain’t gonna happen for reasons already mentioned in previous comments.

And as for the “woman’s rights” claim – another false argument IMHO. As a woman, heck as a person, there are many things I cannot legally do to or with my body. To name a few – I cannot legally become a prostitute; I cannot legally ingest or inject certain banned substances into my body; I cannot legally ask a doctor to remove a healthy limb (well, I can ask but the doctor can’t legally remove it); I cannot legally walk topless down main street; I cannot legally kill myself, no matter how much pain I am in.

I do however have the God given (or biologically given if you prefer) right to choose to become pregnant. A right men do not have. With that right comes additional responsibility, like it or not.

If there is a law that says I cannot kill an unborn being in my body that has a heartbeat and an active nervous system, so be it. Laws are the price I pay to live in a civilized society. And as a member of said society I can work within the system to change laws I don’t agree with.

Bottom line: I do not lose sleep worrying about whether Roe v. Wade gets overturned. Neither the supreme court nor the President should decide this issue. We, the people, should.

Sep 3, 2008 - 3:08 pm 54. sydney jane:

Finally, while Sarah Palin is an accomplished politican, I do not believe that she has the breadth of experience needed to step in as Commander in Chief should the need arise. That McCain chose her as Vice President does not speak well of his judgment.
=====================

I think that’s yet to be determined. Many people, including me, believe Barack Obama doesn’t have the breadth of experience to be THE Commander in Chief. What does that say about the Democratic party, and the 18 million people who voted for him, that they picked a flashy “empty suit” to lead their party?

I saw Barack yesterday comparing his experience running his campaign to Palin’s experience running a small town. First, let’s be real; I doubt Barack Obama is actually running his campaign. Second, that he would think that running his presidential campaign is comparable to running a small town…or a state…shows that he doesn’t know what it means to run a GOVERNMENT. He has not had to face a fraction of the decisions that the governor of a town or state has to face on a daily basis. He was the change person, but, all of a sudden, next to Palin, he seems more like just another Washington insider.

Few of us knew anything about Barack Obama when this process started, but we listened to him and at least gave him a chance to prove himself. I plan to do the same with Palin; listen to her and make my own judgment and not be swayed by the way the media and Obama supporters want us to see her. And, it’s pretty clear they’re doing all they can to define her for us.

At this point, it seems we’re faced with voting for a party with the inexperienced person in the top position, or the inexperienced person on the bottom of the ticket.

Sep 3, 2008 - 3:17 pm 55. J.J. Sefton:

Phyllis, I feel your pain (to coin a phrase). My girlfriend is a distinguished professor, feminist, multiculturalist and author at a very prestigious east coast university. Suffice it to say, that despite being brought up in a Democratic household, I am no longer a member of that party. Mostly because the party as I knew it no longer exists. It has become a bastion of left wing virtual Marxist ideology. It is now what I call the DEMOGRAPHIC party.

At any rate, I used to believe in abortion any time, any where and on demand for all women. Then I came to realize that an abortion is not like getting a tooth pulled as most liberals seem to think. There are a litany of complex ethical, legal and moral issues that surround this. Do I think that abortion as a medical procedure should remain legal? Absolutely. Should there be some circumstances or conditions that would prohibit an abortion. Yes.

That said, do you want to choose between a man whose greatest influences in his life are an American traitor and the black Father Coughlin, or a man who has experience and the wisdom to defend America and move us forward, issues that I disagree with notwithstanding.

It is a no-brainer.

Sep 3, 2008 - 3:22 pm 56. towelhead:

Do not vote for McCain or Obama.

McCain and Pallin are dinosaurs. They do not understand Islam and could not care less about our environment.

Obama has ties to the Nation of Islam. Biden is a dhimmi.

Neither McCain nor Obama will stop Muslim invasion of America.

“Every country has the government it deserves.” – Joseph Marie de Maistre (French
Diplomat, Writer, Philosopher and Politician, 1753-1821)

Sep 3, 2008 - 3:41 pm 57. Andy:

I find it hard to believe anyone is that lacking in reason to actually think an Obama presidency would mean that the jihadists would be able to take over America and force women into the situation mentioned. If John McCain loses, it will be becuase the country will reject such utter nonsense. This type of commentary does not help McCain at all.

Sep 3, 2008 - 4:16 pm 58. Nastaran:

I can’t believe you wrote this article Ms. Chesler!

Sep 3, 2008 - 6:40 pm 59. Amidut:

I’m a Jewish liberal male inclined to vote for Obama/Biden. They have a serious energy policy needed to free America from Islamic petro-imperialism. McCain/Palin do not. Obama/Biden would reform our health insurance system. McCain/Palin would not. Obama/Biden would put some moderate jurists on the Supreme Court. McCain/Palin would not. Insofar as Israel and Jews are concerned, there are also plenty of bigots on the Right: Patrick Buchanan, Grover Norquist, columnist Robert Novak, James Bamford, etc. Evangelicals see Jews as headed for hell. Obama and Biden have serious supporters from the Zionist left: Rep. Mel Levine and publisher Martin Peretz. McCain/Palin would further erode separation between church and state in America. Money to “faith-based” entities and religious schools can just as easily flow to Islamic institutions.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:03 pm 60. ic:

No right to choose if you are dead.

Sep 3, 2008 - 8:14 pm 61. Ed Wallis:

Ms. Chesler, the subtitlet to your article (I don’t know if you added it or not) was, “It’s a tough call for those who feel strongly about both national security and a woman’s right to choose.”

Here’s a thought on that matter, which I hope makes your decision to VOTE FOR MCCAIN/PALIN IN NOVEMBER:

If your body is decimated from a terrorist attack, you won’t have to worry about abortions anymore, anyway.

Sep 4, 2008 - 5:23 am 62. Ed Wallis:

Amidut,

You seem to think being “a Jewish liberal male” matters. I’l take you seriously on that.

So why does it not matter to you that Obama has support from Farrakhan, Hamas and other middle-east terrorists, mister “Jewish liberal male”?

Why does creating more American sources of energy – including nuclear and ANWR oil – not matter as much as checking tire pressure to fend off “Islamic petro-imperialism”?

Either your thinking is muddled, your priorities a mess, or you are a fraud.

Sep 4, 2008 - 5:28 am 63. ZEITGEIST:

[...] CHESLER agonizes over Obama, McCain and abortion rights. I’d worry about that, except that we’re certain to have a two-house Democratic majority anyway, [...]

Sep 4, 2008 - 6:08 am 64. JeanE:

Let’s just say that a McCain-Palin administration nominates several conservative justices to the Supreme Court, an abortion case comes before the court and they overturn Roe v. Wade. Would that make abortion illegal? NO NO NO NO NO.

Overturning Roe v. Wade would make it possible for state legislatures to pass laws limiting or even outlawing abortion, but even in conservative South Dakota, the VOTERS rejected abortion legislation that they believed was too restrictive.

Surely pro-choice supporters have the confidence that after 30 plus years of safe and legal abortions, they can make their case to the public, but they should also recognize that many women are as concerned with the rights of babies as they are with their own rights. When people elevate the rights of others as equal to their own, it is a profound testimony to the ideals of equality, and feminists should not fear this debate.

State laws protecting the rights of women and unborn children, passed with voter support rather than by judicial decree, will do more to protect women’s rights than Roe v. Wade.

Sep 4, 2008 - 6:21 am 65. Paul A'Barge:

Chesler,
Where did you get the idea that if Roe V Wade were overturned then abortion would not be legal? Surely you understand that if Roe V Wader were overturned the decision about legalization or criminalization of abortion would be left to each individual state.

Putting strict constructionist judges on the Supreme Court and finding no right to abortion in the U.S. Constitution simply does not lead directly to criminalization of abortion. I would grant you that in some states anti-abortion laws would then be passed. I certainly hope that in my State of Texas such a law would be passed. But surely you agree that such a law would never be passed in California. Or New York. Women who want abortions on demand can simply move to one of those states. Vote with your feet.

Why would you hold everything else that you hold dear, including your country and its Constitution hostage to unreasonable fears regarding abortion on demand?

Sep 4, 2008 - 7:03 am 66. Dave:

You are saying that if Obama is elected and not McCain that our country is going to be taken over by Jihadis.

Have a little faith in your fellow Americans if not our politicians. Its _not going to happen_.

Over 40,000 people are killed in car wrecks each year. Be afraid of that, not some pretentious clown with a rag on his head. Vote your best interests.

Sep 4, 2008 - 7:05 am 67. barry y:

Here’s a relevant point I haven’t read elsewhere so far: Palin waited until her seventh month to announce her pregnancy. I would guess that she and her family were struggling with the idea of bearing a Downs baby to term. I.e., when it comes to her own life, she’s not a brainless ideologue.

From the little we’ve seen so far, I would guess that she would become more open to different views as President (that’s what we’re really talking about; VPs generally have little power). During the campaign, Obama seems to jettison key positions day by day as they get in the way. I don’t get the sense that Palin is more “rigid” or more “principled” than he is.

In any case, ever since South Dakota defeated its anti-abortion referendum (South Dakota!), I’m more convinced than ever that if abortion is turned back to the states, not much will change.

Sep 4, 2008 - 7:44 am 68. Norm Roth:

Your worst nightmare seems to be a conservative court would overthrow Roe V. Wade. If that happened abortions would NOT be outlawed, all that would happen is that each state would be allowed to decide if and under what circumstances an abortion would be legal. So, in fact it would be the people deciding the issue not 8 old men and one old woman.

Sep 4, 2008 - 7:46 am 69. nick:

we dont need a lying creationist book burner as VP

Sep 4, 2008 - 7:53 am 70. I feel your pain:

I know what you mean. I am facing exactly the same dilemma. I don’t like Obama, but am not too excited about McCain’s VP pick. If he had picked a pro-choice woman, he’d be getting my vote no questions about it. Now, I am not so sure. Palin’s ideas about science, sex ed (hmmm…), global warming, etc. represents everything I hate about the so-called “conservatives”. I think that a right to an abortion represents a basic human right for women, and without it, no country can call itself free. I have two kids, and my views on abortion became even more pro-choice over time. I just came imagine somebody going through pregnancy, childbirth and child-rearing against their will (and can’t imagine the negative impact that this will have on a child). And don’t up bring adoption – young stupid girls shouldn’t become a baby factory for wealthy couples who forgot to reproduce on time (as somebody above mentioned). Whether a woman decides to have the kid, put it up for adoption or abort the pregnancy, the government has no say in this decision.

Sep 4, 2008 - 7:55 am 71. Self-hating boomer:

You are saying that if Obama is elected and not McCain that our country is going to be taken over by Jihadis.

Have a little faith in your fellow Americans if not our politicians. Its _not going to happen_.

If Obama can’t tell the difference between an unrepentant terrorist and a “guy in the neighborhood”, there’s very good reason to believe that he he can’t tell a terrorist, period. We don’t need a commander-in-chief who can work on a project with an unrepentant terrorist, and not see a problem.

Give me one good reason why anyone should have any confidence in the good judgment of such a person. What in his past conduct gives us any reason at all to believe that he won’t appoint subversive terrorists to powerful positions, when he refuses to even admit that his friends and political associates, who are self-confessed terrorists, are what they themselves admit to being?

Sep 4, 2008 - 8:55 am 72. Paul B:

“If the jihadists triumph, American women will be forced to convert to Islam, to wear veils or burqas (body bags), and risk being stoned to death, hung, or honor murdered if they want to choose their own husbands, attend college, dress like modern American girls do, or convert to another non-Islamic religion.”

That’s a very big, very irrational “if” which gives the jihadists way more power than they could ever dream of having.

Even with the lost focus on Afghanistan, the strengthening of Iran as a result of the poorly planned invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the damage Bush has done to US credibility, the jihadists are still very far from being able to impose their death cult ideology on a free people.
We will be stronger still with a smarter approach to the war on terror which Obama offers and McCain does not.

Sep 4, 2008 - 9:04 am 73. Jonathan:

The Republican Party was help founded by a first term congressman from Illinois with NO EXECUTIVE experience during wartime when the country was divided; If Honest Abe Lincoln could do such a great job I think I can give Obama my vote too. McCain/Palin, the only nation of whiners is the right-wing nation.

Sep 4, 2008 - 9:09 am 74. submandave:

Alan Rockman, cone off it. Any split within the Republicans that may have come from selecting Lieberman as VP would have very little to do with his being Jewish and tons to do with him being, except for the war, practically a party-line Democrat. Anti-semitism is real, just as racism is real, but just as some decry any negative comment about Sen. Obama as blatant racism, I think there are some who perceive anti-semitism in any disagreement with a jewish person or typically jewish positions.

Sep 4, 2008 - 9:53 am 75. Marion L:

As if Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and extraordinary renditions were not enough to deter me from voting for McCain/Palin, here is yet another bottom line:

When she was the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Sarah Palin asked the city librarian how to ban books [!].
When the librarian did not go along with this request, then Mayor Palin tried to have her fired.
Need I say that this attempt at censorship is not the American way? It is something I would expect from the dictatorships that are enemies of the U.S. and Israel, but not from an American vice presidential candidate. (Full disclosure: I earn my living as a reference librarian and I am very proud of how librarians uphold the freedom to read.)

Sep 4, 2008 - 9:55 am 76. Diane:

I grew up as a feminist (which I abandoned as it became mired in the 70s, I mean, I gave up Ms Magazine so long ago) and still favor some access to legal abortion, but I just don’t get the obsession with abortion.

I certainly would not vote for a candidate who I disagreed with on so many things as I do with Obama, merely on the basis of some theoretical threat to abortion. But I guess it’s truly become a sacrament to the left.

And trotting out Gloria Steinem to oppose Sarah Palin: good grief, no. I do respect Steinem for what she and those like her did back in the day, but that day is long over. And I’m older than Palin.

Sep 4, 2008 - 10:06 am 77. elHombre:

Scott Somerville says it all.

Sep 4, 2008 - 10:06 am 78. Ed Wallis:

“Marion L.” 9:55am

OFFER EVIDENCE FOR THIS CLAIM.

Based on your post, I suspect you are another Daily Caustic flaming fraud.

Sep 4, 2008 - 10:36 am 79. Scott:

With all due respect, the author is posing a false choice – although I am convinced she believes it is a true choice. The overturning of Roe v. Wade would not result in the outlawing of abortion. It is not even a slippery slope. The Original Roe v. Wade decision was the most Constitutionally dubious major decision the Court has ever made. Even Dredd Scott had more Constiutional backing than Roe.

Abortion would have become legal in the USA without Roe. What Roe did was circumvent the legislative process and create a hostile backlash. Two things are true about what Americans believe about abortion. 1) The vast majority of Americans believe it should be legal in at least some cases, and 2) the vast majority of Americans do not believe it should be available in all cases. This just means that most Americans are not absolutists.

If the author’s attachment to abortion is absolutist, then I understand her argument. But if, like most Americans, she thinks that there are some cases in which abortion is an abuse of discretion and tantamount to infanicide, then she need not fear that the absolutists who would outright ban all abortion would ever prevail. Those same Americans also believe that in some cases, to ban abortion would be horrendous.

Just to be explicit, here is a list of items that most Americans oppose about abortion legality. Using abortion for:

- gender selection
- as a lazy form of birth control, such as when some women have multiple abortions because they can’t figure out how to use a condom.
- to terminate pregnancies of viable babies
- to terminate pregnancies because the fetus has a POSSIBILITY of defects

And here is an explicit list of cases where most Americans support abortion:

- Rape
- Incest
- when carrying the child to term endangers the life of the mother
- when the fetus is grossly deformed and has no viable chance of surviving outside the whom for any length of time, or if the newborn baby would be in extreme pain.

Unfortunately, while sex is a very private matter for all of us, it is not really a private subject. Sex and the interplay of power in relationships that are impacted by sex has a profound societal impact. From prostitution undermining the natural power a woman holds over her husband in a marital relationship, to the spread of STD’s caused by casual fornication, to the impact that births, i.e. actual reproduction, has on families and communities, Sex plays a huge role in society. The idea that it is strictly a private matter will never triumph. But just as sex, as a subject, is never a private matter, sex, as an act, is always private. Therein lies the conflict.

Most of us understand that being absolutist on one side or the other is willful blindness, and is counterproductive. We are content to let the absolutists fight it out as long as neither side wins. What Roe did was take the issue out of the hands of the people. That was wrong on its face. My suggestion is that if you are an absolutists abortion proponent, come down off the fence. Trust that your fellow citizens a little on this issue. We’re not barbarians. We understand the struggle and can look at both sides.

Sep 4, 2008 - 10:52 am 80. DeeG:

Regarding Roe v. Wade, overturning it would simply mean that individual legislatures finally have the freedom to resume their proper role of balancing a woman’s interests with the unborn child’s (rather than having the Supreme Court act as an unexlected super-legislature, which they do now). “Red” states will likely prioritize the unborn child’s right to live. “Blue” states will give women more discretion to abort their baby. Anecdotal horrors under both approaches (back-alley abortion leads to infection and woman dies, baby born alive during abortion and tossed no the utility closet to die) will continue to be tossed around on both sides. But the world will not end.

Under Islamic rule, of course, you can be buried alive just for deciding you’d like a say in who you want to marry.

If you see the choice as between abortion rights and survival of the nation against Islamic jihadists, I don’t even see how it could be a close call.

Sep 4, 2008 - 11:12 am 81. Fred:

If the Dems had nominated Hillary you wouldn’t be having this problem.

Which seems to mean that Hillary would beat McCain better than Obama.

Ask this: If you’re Putin or Ayatollah Khamani, who would you rather face down, Obama or McCain?

Sep 4, 2008 - 11:51 am 82. Bracha:

I am not torn at all!
It is inconceivable that Barak Hussein Obama is even considered eligible as candidate for the highest office of the American presidency. That he would be entrusted with foreign policy and domestic decision making, cabinet appointees, and set the standard for our country. Such an irresponsible pick for presidential candidacy is the effect of contorted values, dismissal of accountability of politicians and public figures, and infiltration impact of alien interests set to have their stealth, Manchurian candidate at the helm of America.

No Phyllis – I have no conflict on this one.

As for concerns over abortion?
As a Shoah survivor, I consider the destruction of over 1 million Jewish children, the destruction of the Jews in the Shoah for purpose that they would never have children inconsistent with the advocacy for abortion without restriction as the Liberals/Leftist Marxist/Islamic cadres and their conduits in our country would have it. Too much else has gone wrong in our country to make the issue of abortion rights as one at peril. For me, the influence extant among Democrats by community agitators and race baiters, such interests for whom life is irrelevant evinced in either the silence or cohort activism with Islam demonstrates true peril. Certainly given converts to Islam/affinity/support for America and Israel haters, anti-Semitism as politics, as a galvanizing pulpit, the choice by the Dems for the upper most politicy determinant of our country is beyond an outrage. It is a demonstration of what is wrong with our country – not what is right.

Sep 4, 2008 - 11:56 am 83. Bracha:

Re Barak H. Obama

It is said you know a person by their friends and associates, what they have contributed to the common good – indeed independent of influences from questionable contacts, associatiates, ministers of choice, and friends.

Why is this irrelevant in the minds of the Demos who have made Obama whose very birth certificate has been arguable forged – as well – kept from public scrutiny – its candidate of choice?

And whose outright dismissal of its beloved Hillary Clinton – not demonstrable of perhaps chauvinism?

Sep 4, 2008 - 12:07 pm 84. Battlecat:

Phyllis, I am grappling with the same issue. I have voted Democrat all my life, but I don’t think I will this time around. (How’s that for “change”?)

My greatest reservation about voting Republican is preserving a woman’s right to choose. But…

I’m tired of being told to fall in line because the DNC elites have chosen Obama for me (when I wanted Hillary). I’m tired of the media calling me racist. I’m tired of anti-Semitic leftists and their anti-Israel hysteria. I’m tired of media-whore moonbats showing up at every public event to call me a fascist and America a terrorist. I’m tired of the toxic left.

Though I disagree with the Republican platform on most social issues, I share a deep respect for America and its freedoms. Only America can defeat Islamo-fascism, and the Democrats don’t seem too interested in doing so. Maybe losing this election will change their minds.

McCain/Palin 2008, Clinton 2012.

Sep 4, 2008 - 12:14 pm 85. nick:

Dems will get both houses – so having Mccain will not acheive banning abortion or attacking Iraq or Iran and starting WW3.

But go ahead vote for a lying book burning creationist

you deserve it!

Sep 4, 2008 - 1:33 pm 86. duglmac:

Why does this always get portrayed as a ‘choice’ vs. ‘no choice’ choice? Right now, abortion falls under the ‘womans right to chose’. If you overturn Roe vs. Wade, it doesn’t ban abortions, it simply no longer prevents states from doing so if they wish. It shifts the debate back to where it should be.

Sep 4, 2008 - 1:46 pm 87. Kerry:

I choose life.

If the nest of an eagle is federally protected, why shouldn’t a growing fetus also be protected?

Abortion kills. Weak national security also kills.

Democrats are for death. Republicans are for life. I am for life.

Sep 4, 2008 - 4:21 pm 88. Pat:

To Goy: because the full panoply of individual rights are fundamental and essential to a moral society, all rights, including the right to determine what shall be done with one’s body (as in abortion) – must inhere at the federal level. Abraham Lincoln was perhaps the first to fully grasp this: barbarism and civilization cannot long coexist within the various governing bodies in a single nation.

Nor can reason and faith coexist in the government: objective justice can result only from facts and reason, not arbitrary faith and appeals to mystic authorities. This is why the founding fathers – most of whom were deists, not theists – mandated the separation of church and state.

As to Ms. Chesler’s conundrum – the right to rationally enjoy sex free of medieval Christian duty to produce unwanted offspring is fundamental. Being forced to give birth, like being forced to remain silent under censorship, sunders our nature as integrated beings of mind and body, thought and action – and turns us into mindless slaves – just what both today’s religious right and pacifist left want.

If you cannot first defend individual rights on principle and have a government whose sole purpose is to protect those rights, then what difference is the specific form of the tyranny which later ensues? Whether burqas, gulags, gas chambers, or religious inquisitions and witch burnings – it won’t really matter because you won’t fully own your mind or body. The last vestiges of the Enlightenment will then have been totally buried and we’ll have some form of dark mysticism for centuries more.

Sarah Palin’s statement to her congregation about our troops going to Iraq – “Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God” – is identical to what Bin Laden is telling his jihadists…

I used to believe the left was the more dangerous assault on individual rights. Seeing Islam, I now know the religious right is far more dangerous.

Sep 4, 2008 - 9:54 pm 89. Pat:

Kerry asks why a growing fetus should not be protected like eagles’ nests are. This is the fallacy of petitio principe, or “begging the question.” In fact, neither eagles *nor* fetuses should be protected by the government independently of their owners.

A right is a moral principle that recognizes the fact that individuals need to be free from force and fraud when living in a society with other individuals.

Morality applies only to autonomous beings who have volition – this is why we don’t judge eagles, robots, plants, or fetuses as being moral or immoral – they are merely acting within a very limited range of options from their genetic or computer programming.

Because fetuses are not autonomous beings they can have no rights. To say a fetus has rights is to say that its host – an adult woman – does *not* have rights. This is a contradiction.

Infants and children have rights, and as they mature into adults capable of fully sustaining themselves, they gradually acquire the full panoply of individual rights – including the right to rationally enjoy sex free of any medieval Christian duty to give birth as a slave who doesn’t own *both* her mind and her body.

If an adult becomes a criminal, then he forfeits rights and is removed from the remaining moral individuals by being incarcerated.

Sep 4, 2008 - 10:30 pm 90. Natasha:

I am very leftist and EXTREMELY VOCAL, AS A FEMINIST AGAINST ISLAMISM but no way,

would I support a Mussolini-to Stalin type of SuperWoman ‘fascist’ totalitarian propaganda model to ‘have many children’ in some ‘myth’ that it would defeat Islam,

quite the contrary, it would aid and speed up the encroachment of Islam and let me clarify why.

Many here are of the belief that the overturning of Roe isn’t a threat, I believe strongly it is BUT what so many aren’t paying attention too, is the language of what defines ‘abortion’ is right now changing, and Palin herself with Feminist for Life have agreed upon this new language and that is, that Birth Control, is an abortificant (sic) and that includes the Pill.

So, if Roe was to be turned, it might not just be abortion but your access to birth control, and maybe its o.k. for you to live with that if its only in Alabama but not NYC, but ARE YOU WILLING TO PAY FOR ALL THOSE BABIES? FACT, teen age pregnancy is on the rise,

and I don’t quite think Palin wants to argue with that one, now do you?

In New York alone, I think it was like 60 percent of teen mothers were HOMELESS, maybe higher, I’d have to go back and check the numbers but, thats in one state, in some states thats higher,

but now, you add taking away Birth control and that is going to EXPLODE, and we have families now who can barely make ends meed without health insurance, foreclosures going through the roof, the Right wing gov damn sure isn’t going to do anything about that and you want to add more babies to that? Why?

For a stronger military? When, in what, 18 years? Who feeds all these kids and provides CHILD CARE and all that during those 18 years? Or do we become like Romania? And adoption like back in the fifties, you mean when all those colored children were rotting in orphanages, well, one problem with that utopic fantasy,

we can barely hold up our Foster Care infrastructure much less that many families with That kind of income to take in that many children, we don’t LIVE in the same society as our grandparents did in the 40s. So guaranteed its going to lead to an evermore increasing population of homeless women and children,

because quite frankly, Americans and THE MISOGYNIST SEXIST MALE ENTITLEMENT [YOU KNOW, 90 YEAR OLD MEN ENTITLED TO SCREW GOT TO HAVE THAT VIAGRA BUT NOW WOMEN, NO NO, AND IF YOU GET PREGNANT ITS TOUGH LUCK SWEETIE],

don’t give a damn about women and children in this country, unless they are t & a plastered on bulletins or media images. So, the idea of a mass forced birthing machinery [which is so much like the misogyny and FORCED PREGNANCIES IN ISLAM] is going to assure one thing,

vulnerable women and children and prisons filling up and Guess WHO IS GOING TO BE THERE ARMS WAITING? [especially when you consider, Catholic Charities, aka pro-life mind you, are bending over backwards bringing over Somalian Muslims to work, for you know, Businesses who demand 'cheap labor' and those Muslims are demanding SHARIA LAW IN THIS COUNTRY and our companies are appeasing them, all with the help of tax dollars,

but oh, dare we even pay for Child Care, LOL. So America you want forced pregnancy [and that is the agenda, do some digging beyond the she's cute and he's a skunk and all the other kaka myopic popularity thinking in this country],

but who do you think, is going to be there with arms wide open, to sympathize with the disenfranchised? Give you a hint,

whats the largest conversions in Prison today?

who are converting to Islam in droves in Europe?

answer: prison–Islam
Europe: women, and WHY?

Because they’ve been dealing with double and triple burden and Islam promises them that unlike the male counterparts they won’t be sexualized, screwed, abandoned and left to fend for themselves [lies of course but women who are in That desperate of a situation, you'd be surprised] and guess what America,

GET OUT OF YOUR WHITE IVORY TOWER ONCE IN A WHILE AND FIND OUT WHY IN PLACES LIKE MICHIGAN, YOUR AFRICAN AMERICA WOMEN ARE CONVERTING TO ISLAM IN DROVES?

WANT TO ADD TO THOSE NUMBERS?

You create an extreme misogynist and yes, religious fascist type of ‘no choice for women’ and I promise you, its going to backfire in a huge way, because you WON’T provide the infrastructure and aid needed, Hell, the right won’t even do something about child support [or the left] but thats besides the point…not focusing right now on the left,

programs for women were cut and will continue to be cut, and now we want a forced population boom leaving thousands of women AND CHILDREN worse off, and you don’t think the Pan-Islamist-far Left alliance won’t Jump on that?

Going those extremes is not only utopic and ludicrous its JUST BAD NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY…IT LACKS OF COMMON SENSE.

Give you an analogy, lets say, I live in a bad neighborhood, with gangs all around me. [gangs are Islam, I'm American right wing yeehaw capitalism]

So, I send my children except for the girls, to go fight the gangs…

my girls, I tell them to get pregnant, and I barely have funds now as it is, I’m in debt to other places, lets say they too are fighting gangs. So my girls get pregnant and I have Their children to now feed…as well as my girls [remember, analogy],

ok, so, my house is full and we are barely making ends meet…its on crisis level and one of my girls is starting to get a tad upset…to Add to that, I go buy bullets and then sell them half price to the gangs around me of which, my kids are fighting to make income,

hey hey, we sell and invest in Saudi, OMAN [Bush's trade deal, uh huh], IRAN [oh yea, Israel put out a big ole list of USA INVESTMENTS IN BOTH IRAN AND PAKISTAN],

so here I am, selling bullets to the very gangs shooting up my kids, my girl then says, screw this, meets one of the gang members who promises to take care of her and so off she goes with them, and so, now a house divided…how long do you think that will stand?

Another thing to look at, lets say, you have a no abortion no birth control and we wind up, like Peru, you Do know, what happens when you have that amount of women and children that vulnerable right? Sex industry largest industry of employment for women in America, hey hey [but psst, its all about the fetus] but anyway, you have a expanding segment of vulnerable women, now you have, AMERICAN WOMEN AND CHILDREN BEING TRAFFICKED FROM AMERICA, TO OTHER COUNTRIES and don’t think it won’t happen because if you think that,

you are clueless to the economic conditions and violence to women and children worldwide and the entire global sex industry, or paid rape industry run by cartels and black markets and WHERE DO YOU THINK THOSE MONIES GO TO?

Thats right, to those very forces you are fighting, to pay for arms, don’t think so, do some reading on the cartels that traffick women from Mexico to America, Asia to America, if they can TRAFFICK THEM IN THEY CAN TRAFFICK THEM OUT…

yea the ole Call to Motherhood Mutterkind, sounds all great and all doesn’t it, but you see there IS one difference,

in Germany, Italy and even in Stalin’s Russia, when they called for mutterkind and SuperMom for the Soviets, they had infrastructure, however primitive and lacking [and no, not slave houses either], but they had daycares, milk money, programs to assist women and housing, it may have not been the best, by no means, but Unlike America, they didn’t have this, oh viagra for men but honey, you scarlett whore, if you get knocked up, get a job you lazy biatch or you shouldn’t be working with kids or you should be working with kids or this or that or slam, slam, slam…

we don’t have that level of commitment in this country to women, HELL LOOK AT THIS ELECTION–come on, and to think, we will go back to 1940 [a time when MEN were a bit different] and think, that it will return to that to fight Islam and their high birth numbers? Na, not even, what it will do though, is it will turn so many women and poor to the very ones, who will use them, against America…they already are doing it AND,

to top that off, the Islamists will USE the religious turn to conservatism to PUSH their Sharia even sooner and I guarantee you they will do it over the matter of POLYGAMY, they already got ya on that one, LDS under Religious Freedom, hey, as long as its under some form of Christianity hey, ok to rape a kid…don’t think for a Minute the Islamists aren’t already working on that because they are,

that and using Native American Indian Tribal law as an example [see American Muslim Journal 2002]…and hell, any Fool can read their sites, they don’t hide it.

When I met the Muslim man I almost married I was a single mother, very low income, father a bible thumping sob and if I ever see him I’d be more than happy to ship him to you in a body bag…because my daughter has learning disabilities from no prenatal care…I worked, but didn’t have insurance and didn’t qualify for Medicaid OR food stamps…I was lucky I didn’t have her with the Fire Department…she’s 12 now, doing fine but, when I met him, he took me and the girls in [I had two daughters], and I will say, though they oppress their women, they do take a bit more earnestness in taking care of their children, sure, for dowry sales but you know what I mean…

IF, IF it hadn’t of been for my reading and his sisters and the fact I had enough sense to see, I might be married now, and who knows…

I promise you, YOU disenfranchise more women like that and leave more women and children vulnerable they will be targets and in their anger they will, turn and rend you to pieces…you REAP WHAT YOU SOW…YOU SOW INDIFFERENCE YOU WILL REAP INDIFFERENCE,

YOU SOW MISOGYNY ON THAT LEVEL AND THEOCRATIC MALE SUPRAMACY ON THAT LEVEL YOU WILL REAP IT…rest assured.

IT is bad policy, it is, very bad policy when it comes to fighting Islamism. Besides, you’ll never catch up to those kinds of birth numbers anyway…NOT UNLESS YOU START WITH 8 AND 9 YEAR OLD GIRLS, and the day America does that, mark my words, carve them in stone, I would do all in my power to revolt against that, thats a promise,

I would revolt against Sharia and I damn sure would revolt against any OTHER religion that mandated that kind of misogyny on that level and ESPECIALLY TO CHILDREN…

now what America can and Should do, for starters, STOP BRINGING THEM HERE VIA CATHOLIC CHARITIES FOR CHEAP LABOR…AND STOP APPEASING THEIR DEMANDS FOR SHARIA AND THAT MEANS, YOU DON’T GIVE THEM A MUSLIM HOLIDAY AND DUMP LABOR DAY ‘TYSON’, while displacing AMERICAN WORKERS, MANY OF THEM MOTHERS OF CHILDREN,

stop the investing in Iran and Dubai and stop feeding their trafficking of Armenian women that I’m sure, those monies go to buying arms that are used to kill our Soldiers.

Secure our shipyards and when you hear of some Mullah demanding Sharia deport his/her ass…oh, but I see, that might offend some of those in power, you know, with the money, so instead,

lets just plunge MORE women and children into poverty by forced pregnancy [remember, Bush is signing it, all birth control is now deemed as 'abortion'],

so, Obama or McCain and Palin, BOTH are bad policy if you are looking at fighting and keeping OUT Islam. YOU DON’T WIN A WAR ON THE FRONT BY PLUNGING YOUR SOLDIERS ON THE FIELD INTO STARVATION AND IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY DESERT AND SURRENDER TO THE ENEMY…

but, America, be stubborn, what do I know, just a low trash mother with kids eh…Napoleon, Russia, how many of his soldiers DIED in the winter because he was Insistent on leaving them there…to march?

How many deserted?

A weak nation, is no security, sorry, it just isn’t. You have to arrive at some balance…ESPECIALLY WHEN TEH SAME ONES IN GOVERNMENT ARE FEEDING THE ENEMY…

Natasha
Director of WAMI
Women’ Against Misogynist Imperialism

Sep 5, 2008 - 3:15 am 91. BBloom:

Thank you Battlecat for putting my thoughts into words.
I know after teaching in inner-city schools that I am not prejudice. I resent people who do not know me implying that I am. I read Obama’s books. I probably would have voted for him in the future, had he not done the hatchet job on Hillary. He has not served long enough for me to look back at a record and be sure that I could trust him to act in any one direction. Unfortunately, we are living in a world at war. War requires a soldier. As much as I hate to vote Republican, it seems more and more the rational choice.

Sep 5, 2008 - 7:17 am 92. Marion L:

Dear Mr. Wallis:

Evidence attesting to then Mayor Palin’s attempt to ban books (including evidence from Alaska newspapers) may be found at the Librarians Against Palin website at:

http://librariansagainstpalin.wordpress.com/

As for your contention that I am “another Daily Caustic Flaming Fraud”, if you are going to characterize me you might as well characterize me correctly. I am an American Jewish feminist and left/liberal democractic socialist who loves the Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That is my basis for criticizing Bush, Cheney, McCain, Palin and any other persons or governments that seek to restrict civil liberties and deny human rights.
Moreover, I am puzzled by your assertion that a belief in univeral human rights (a belief that I share with Dr. Chesler, despite our differences of opinion on some issues) would characterize me as a “fraud.” To the contrary, I think it characterizes me as someone who believes in core American values.

Sep 5, 2008 - 10:25 am 93. Harald Hill:

Daily Kos broke that ’story’, but it had already lost credibility with the Trig ’scandal’.

But you continue to follow it anyway. Do you really believe that she wanted Catch-22, Scarlet Letter, and Catcher in the Rye, all banned?

Sep 5, 2008 - 12:08 pm 94. Jeff:

Conservatism is the tired old need to hang on to the past while liberalism is the brand new approach to change for a better future.

Sep 6, 2008 - 8:18 pm 95. Ed Wallis:

Sorry Marion, SOCIALISM IS NOT AN AMERICAN VALUE. But thanks for being so open and honest about your intents to corrupt this society.

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:21 am 96. Ed Wallis:

Another short note to “Marion,”

The “Palin banned books” bleating you repeat here is a LIE:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/06/the-bogus-sarah-palin-banned-books-list/

Sep 7, 2008 - 4:23 am 97. Ed Wallis:

DEAR ME.

I didn’t know that providing a like refuting a point would get me CENSORED.

LET’S TRY THIS AGAIN, OK, KIDDIES?!

“…banned books…” NOT TRUE:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/06/the-bogus-sarah-palin-banned-books-list/

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:13 am 98. colagirl:

Natasha–little note: Posting arm-length, disjointed screeds on other people’s blogs replete with THE CAPSLOCK OF RAGE is not a very effective form of argument.

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:07 am 99. Ed Wallis:

If one is interested in a somewhat “surreal” approach to the Obama vs. McCain question, here is a very creative video:

http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=2281

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:30 pm 100. Natasha:

colagirl,

DISPUTE the argument then? Rather than attacking writing style, dispute it, or CAN YOU?

PROBABLY CAN’T, because what I say is true. And that just it, people can’t Handle the truth,

but keep pushing, keep pushing the poor and women with children into the allies of invisibility, sure, go right ahead, force more pregnancies too while you’re at it,

THE ISLAMISTS WILL BE THERE WITH ARMS WAITING…because American WORKING CLASS, not your stuck up ivory tower ‘privilege’ class, are being sold out by both sides, either way,

ISLAM WILL WIN because no body wants to look at the entire picture. Its all about agenda, as for rage,

come to my neighborhood smart ass, with your ’stuck up privilege’

CAPS LOCKS would be the least of your worries…you see unlike the majority of the ones with luxury to type online, from where I sit, I see a whole different world–of course, many from where I sit are the very biological fodder the elites use for their war over in Afghanistan and Iraq…HOW long do you think you can ignore veterans on the street before it BACKFIRES in your PRIVILEGE faces? How long?

I stand firm, you Don’t form a strong national security when you stab in the back the very ones who are doing the dirty work, keep disenfranchising, keep perpetuating the industry of poverty, the prison industrial complex [with a high rate of Islamic conversions] and one day,

it will come back to bite you in the ass. So you can throw out all the snide stuck up comments to my posts all you want BECAUSE YOU DON’T LIKE WHAT I HAVE TO SAY, but if you could pull your head out of your Ivory Tower ass once in a while and LOOK AT THE WORLD AROUND YOU, and no, not talking about the trip to the mall, no, talking about get in the real working class and under-working class neighborhoods, cities that are decaying, war zones in our cities, and SEE who is working those areas,

you got the Trojan Horse inside, and its A LOT OF AMERICA’S OWN DOING, and the thing is, their numbers are growing…Obama is not EVEN a fragment, of what is boiling under the surface.

It never ceases to amaze me the utter stubborn and stupidity of people, when a messenger who has worked behind those left scenes [and not talking 100 years ago] KNOWS,

and warns, but all you can do is

‘using caps and blah blah blah’

ok Sure, keep on a going…learn the hard way.

But don’t say America, you weren’t warned…

Natasha

Sep 8, 2008 - 12:48 pm 101. Natasha:

here, just in case you think I’m like way off base,

Islam, converts via helping the Homeless,

http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/1526

then, do some research on the number of converts to Islam in America since 9-11, the percentage of those being WOMEN,

now, then do some ‘long term’ thinking, imagine, double the population of homeless women with children or women in prison or, disenfranchised and discontent…and there you go,

it really doesn’t take a Genius to figure it out. Also, do some research on the percentage of hard core leftists that are converting to Islam. Especially the men in those parties…fact is, this isn’t 1940, and, you can suppress these people and taser them all you want, but remember something, one Big difference between people here and people, lets say, South and Central America,

people here have some knowledge of what it IS to be middle class and not having to live with absolutism, even Hoffer himself said, as well as Fromm,

its those who HAVE KNOWLEDGE AND WHO LOSE, who will REVOLT. NOT those with generations ‘used to being serfs’…

its real simple, betray those who you rely on for your security and ‘privilege’, and one day, they will, betray you. A house divided will not stand…its ONE thing, to try and retain some of that former patriotism, its another, to go all gung ho right wing fascist and then expect it to not have repercussions.

Not in THIS day and age…the danger is in underestimating the ‘indifference and apathy’ of your average joe and susie…they may be complacent, maybe even not political in tune, but thats what IS so dangerous, they can be very easily led once they get to that stage of restlessness. It is true, you Reap what you So, reap misery, you’ll sow misery.

The thing is, I’m just as opposed to Islamism as the rest of you…but I will stand firm, going extreme right wing Mussolini type of fascist society, is EXACTLY WHAT THE FAR LEFT WANTS AMERICA TO DO-WITH THE PAN ISLAMIST ALLIANCE.

playing Right into their hands…

Natasha

Sep 8, 2008 - 1:31 pm 102. Marion L:

Dear Mr. Wallis:

You recently wrote:

“Another short note to “Marion,”

The “Palin banned books” bleating you repeat here is a LIE:”

I know that Palin did not actually ban any books and that the lists of books allegedly banned are false.
However, Palin did express interest in banning books from the Wasilla public library and attempted to fire the librarian when the librarian made it clear that she did not wish to support Palin’s efforts to do so.

Sep 17, 2008 - 2:14 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: