|
The support the Palins really need
Share
Email
Print
CommentWASHINGTON — Ever since John McCain picked Sarah Palin to be his running mate, many have lavished praise on her decision not to have an abortion after she and her husband learned that their youngest child, Trig, would be born with Down syndrome.
Do those telling Palin “attagirl” and “way to go” have any idea what challenges and struggles Trig’s parents — and all of us who care for children with special needs — live with every day? Though everyone cheered the Palin family in Minnesota this week, will those people be there for that little boy and his family when their support is really needed?
Do those telling Palin “attagirl” and “way to go” have any idea what challenges and struggles Trig’s parents — and all of us who care for children with special needs — live with every day? Though everyone cheered the Palin family in Minnesota this week, will those people be there for that little boy and his family when their support is really needed?
How much better it would be if we could see past the hyper-toxic subject of abortion in this election and let Sarah and Todd Palin’s decision spotlight a topic far from our national consciousness: the needs of Americans with disabilities. They are our country’s most underserved, neglected and marginalized minority.
The parents of every special-needs child know that the Palins have a hard road ahead of them. The heartbreak of watching the isolation and loneliness Trig will face because he wants to be like other kids but isn’t. The first time they find out he sits alone in the cafeteria and on the school bus. The realization that Trig understands why he doesn’t get asked to the movies or birthday parties like other kids but doesn’t know what he did wrong.
The parents of every special-needs child know that the Palins have a hard road ahead of them. The heartbreak of watching the isolation and loneliness Trig will face because he wants to be like other kids but isn’t. The first time they find out he sits alone in the cafeteria and on the school bus. The realization that Trig understands why he doesn’t get asked to the movies or birthday parties like other kids but doesn’t know what he did wrong.
The toughest challenges that Sarah Palin will face as the Republicans’ vice presidential nominee will probably look like a walk in the park when, as a mother, she sees how invisible her son is to people who look away or through him at the grocery store or the mall. She will be frustrated by doctors who dismiss her concerns as overreacting or have no answers for her questions. She will grow weary of the mountain of legal documents she and her husband must sign and the annual negotiations and pleas they must endure with a phalanx of teachers, therapists and administrators about what Trig’s curriculum will be at school.
The Palins will come to understand with acute clarity that while the sky is the limit for their other children, for Trig the world will gradually become a smaller place. And it will be their life’s work to make sure that world is safe and nurturing and fulfilling — a place where strangers don’t take advantage of him or abuse him when they can’t be there to prevent it. They will be tested and angered and have their hearts broken. But the most challenging journey will be Trig’s, as he struggles with the basic tasks most of us take for granted.
The Palins will come to understand with acute clarity that while the sky is the limit for their other children, for Trig the world will gradually become a smaller place. And it will be their life’s work to make sure that world is safe and nurturing and fulfilling — a place where strangers don’t take advantage of him or abuse him when they can’t be there to prevent it. They will be tested and angered and have their hearts broken. But the most challenging journey will be Trig’s, as he struggles with the basic tasks most of us take for granted.
Still, there will be joy. The Palins will discover that this child will change their lives in ways they could never have imagined, and they will be richer for it. They will make friends and meet teachers, therapists and volunteers at Special Olympics and Best Buddies who will open their hearts and love Trig, treating him with a dignity he too rarely receives. Those good, compassionate people and the other special families who become part of their world will get them through tough times.
It is said that God chooses the families to whom he sends His special children. The Palins are indeed right that Trig is a blessing and a gift. But how much better would it be if, instead of praising Sarah Palin for not choosing abortion, we could focus instead on what this child, and all disabled Americans, need from us? If we could be there for the Palins on the journey they face as a family? Doing so would surely add to the diversity of an election year that has already shattered barriers of race and gender.
(Crosby is a novelist. She and her husband have an autistic son. This essay first appeared in the Washington Post.)
It is said that God chooses the families to whom he sends His special children. The Palins are indeed right that Trig is a blessing and a gift. But how much better would it be if, instead of praising Sarah Palin for not choosing abortion, we could focus instead on what this child, and all disabled Americans, need from us? If we could be there for the Palins on the journey they face as a family? Doing so would surely add to the diversity of an election year that has already shattered barriers of race and gender.
(Crosby is a novelist. She and her husband have an autistic son. This essay first appeared in the Washington Post.)
Join the conversation
Comment guidelines
All comments will be screened and may take several hours to be posted.
• Keep comments clear, concise and focused on the topic in the story.
• Comments exceeding 300 words will not be posted.
• Refrain from personal attacks, degrading comments or remarks that do not add to a constructive dialogue.
• Comments implying suspects in crime-related stories are guilty before they have been proven so in a court of law will be deleted.
• Do not post e-mail addresses or links except for pages on Napavalleyregister.com or government Web sites.
• Comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined.
• Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.
• If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact dross@napanews.com or bkennedy@napanews.com
For further information on the comment guidelines, click here.
|
|
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 6, 2008 7:19 AM:
Downs is a comparatively mild human birth defect. There are birth defects much more severe than Downs or autism. Many severe birth defects require care lasting longer than the parent's ability to care for the children by themselves.
The author asks a question, "What do we owe American families who have children with special needs"? This is a euphemism for 'money'... as in 'fund the care of'' these children.
When it comes to people we don't know personally, there essentially only two ways that most of us help and they are charity or taxes.
Charities are fine but noticeably inconsistent to fund care for the entire life of a special needs child.
Taxes are consistent and share the costs among American taxpayers, but a certain percentage of folks scream in mortal agony at the mention of taxes for almost any purpose.
When I consider my tax payments I find that I LIKE the idea of paying taxes to take care of special needs children a whole lot more than seeing my tax money squandered on overseas military adventures in countries that did not attack the US.
But I still pay my taxes.
I think this falls under 'provide for the general welfare' clause in the US Constitution.
Call me a 'socialist' if you wish, but there are some things that a civilized society should pay for with taxes on everybody who wishes to be part of that society.
Modify a common 'conservative' slogan slightly:
"If you don't want to pay taxes in America... then go pay them someplace else."
~Ruff "
Sandra wrote on Sep 6, 2008 10:10 AM:
It was very interesting to me that you chose to inerpet the real questions she asked, which were, "But how much better would it be if, instead of praising Sarah Palin for not choosing abortion, we could focus instead on what this child, and all disabled Americans, need from us? " and "If we could be there for the Palins on the journey they face as a family?", as a need for money.
Wow, if it was only as easy as throwing money at the problem....We throw money at problems all the time, and what we get is more bureacracy to support, and still have the original problem unsolved.
I think the writers call was for way more than money....I find it interesting that you did not see that. "
Dwayne wrote on Sep 6, 2008 11:23 AM:
A Democrat sweep of Congress in the upcoming election will be a "change" alright... The socialistic redistribution of wealth that is being tauted by their supreme messiah... That will accomplish their end goal of having more people on the dole... In other words, more voters...
Did you happen to Google (Obama) (Acorn) (Chicago) yet...??? Voter registration of dead people and illegals has been their objective... "
Bill wrote on Sep 6, 2008 11:56 AM:
Much is made of adoption yet there is little more than a highly unregulated overseer position of private adoption agencies. Those who sre not adopted are merely placed in the foster care system until they are aged out then cast upon the waters to survive as providence will have it.
Hydrocephalic children may arguably fair better in terms of care by the state responsible than many children with lesser disabilities. The bureaucratic red tape and lack of both financial and moral support offered the families of special needs children is pathetic in a society that claims such advanced moral status, economic certitude and technical know how.
I wonder what one months spending on the war on terror would do to alleviate the terror of families of special needs children. It certainly would not end their crisis or provide them any real security but it might be money better spent.
If Ms. Palin or the author had actually advocated for the needs of these special people perhaps I could find more sympathy with their view. Rather instead of sound policy and presenting alternatives or attempted solutions we are treated to stump thumping window dressing and appeals to patriotism in stead of identifiable programmatic change.
In the current election cycle neither party will approach this issue, much Ms. Palin who now has the opportunity to present a plan and become a true advocate for children and families with special needs.
May the Gods of politics prove this infidel and his clairvoyance wrong. "
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 6, 2008 12:09 PM:
That's a big bunch of people to take care of... just pitching pennies in a jar at the supermarket doesn't nearly do the job.
When Americans pay taxes laid on by the government to 'promote the general welfare' we are helping people we never meet or even hear about... to live better lives.
And that is all part of raising the living standards of all Americans who share in this thing called the United States of America.
When one child goes to bed hungry in this country it is the same as if my child goes to bed hungry, because all children are 'my' children.
These are not just my ideas, I got them from that famous socialist and community organizer, 'Jesus of Nazareth'.
~Ruff "
sickothis wrote on Sep 6, 2008 2:06 PM:
And btw: dead people don't vote. The whole "voter fraud" red herring is a rightwing tactic to try to distract from the real issue of the past, which is election fraud. "
glenroy wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:07 PM:
The fact is, since the first Bush Administration Democrat liberals dominate the top 100 most wealthy congressional members, the defining difference is the model by which the wealth has been attained…as opposed to creating jobs and products through small and medium sized businesses…. Most of these big spending Democrats wealth resulted from nepotistic government influence and/or inherited family wealth from assets held off shore well out of reach of the Internal Revenue Service….nothing will shut them up faster than putting their money where their mouths are…..the silence would be deafening. "
Madison Jay Hamilton wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:16 PM:
Sandra wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:19 PM:
Raven wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:34 PM:
and these wealthy democrats seem to be going against their own self interest by advocating increases in the tax rates for the wealthiest americans.... "
Dwayne wrote on Sep 6, 2008 5:41 PM:
According to Bible prophesy, that's exactly what has been predicted.... But then, atheists and socialists have no qualms about re-interpreting God's word for their own purposes...
Rage on, Ruff...... "
Bill wrote on Sep 6, 2008 5:49 PM:
russ wrote on Sep 6, 2008 6:56 PM:
The writer says'
"..instead of praising Sarah Palin for not choosing abortion, we could focus instead on what this child, and all disabled Americans, need from us?"
We should praise Sarah Palin and all families who ask little from the government and take care of their own children within their communities.
When did we begin to expect the federal government to take care of us and all of our problems?
America is great because of the American people. "
sickothis wrote on Sep 6, 2008 9:38 PM:
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 7, 2008 1:56 AM:
You see, when I was younger my wife and I took care of Alzheimers patients.
As the saying goes, "Talk is cheap".
I've seen families who talked a good game, but would do anything to keep from taking their mom home for Thanksgiving Dinner, came late, and returned them 2 or 3 hours early before we had finished Thanksgiving dinner ourselves.
These phonies where always very complimentary about the job we did taking care of their mom, told her she looked nice... yessir lots and lots of 'emotional support' when you broke their arms to make them show up.
So I understand real well, all the "high-minded" good sounding rhetoric that many folks use to gloss over the basic fact that they were really moral deadbeats.
In my view the people who say "You can't just throw money at [Downs, autism, mental health, hydrocephalia, you name it]" and then spend a lot of time telling us all about the 'emotional support' side of things and ignore the MONEY required to take care of the handicapped have at best... a hollow morality.
Patting disabled persons on the head and telling them how much you 'support them' and then later yowling about the tax money used to install handicapped ramps on city streets or handicapped parking spaces near a store or restaurant is the very definition of hypocrisy.
But they think they are putting it over on the rest of us.
~Ruff "
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 7, 2008 9:47 AM:
I personally was discussing moral reasons for supporting actual financial help to the handicapped, Dwayne.
I did say that the principles put forth by noted socialist and community organizer 'Jesus of Nazereth' were my motivation for actually wanting to support the handicapped instead of just mouthing hypocritical platitudes.
Dwayne, drink more DECAFE!
You are trying to put words in my mouth... but now that you mention it...
I think Jesus might be more proud of 'community organizers' who actually do something for 'the least of these my brothers' than all the get-rich-quick off the poor schemes pushed by people who hire lobbyists to get welfare (earmark) checks from Washington,DC -- and then lie about it afterwards.
I don't think that Jesus was real big on lying - something we see Republicans doing a lot of around here.
;o)
~Ruff "
Sandra wrote on Sep 7, 2008 11:04 AM:
I can only shake my head at what you read into things that isn't there. Just as you read into the writers original letter. "
freeport56 wrote on Sep 7, 2008 12:05 PM:
So a slight interaction with Alzheimer patience has shaped your world view of how these people are treated?
From the 1970's (High School) through the early 90's I worked with Special Olympics kids. Obviously, this was long before FMLA was even dreamed of. What I saw, friends families included, could be summed up in one word, love. Entire families readjusted their lives to care and enjoy these kids, whose disabilities went far went far beyond Downs and Autism.
Yes, there were those that had been severly abused. Most of my experience with working with these kids is that the abuse happened in group homes more often than in families.
From your infalmatory remarks,"So I understand real well, all the "high-minded" good sounding rhetoric that many folks use to gloss over the basic fact that they were really moral deadbeats." is based on an assumption that all people treat disabilities this way. What you seem to forget is the emotional trauma these types of disabilities can have on the caregivers.
Money does not solve all our problems. Nor does it make them go away. The War on Poverty is the greatest example of that. Bureaucratic action is not always the best. The best people to care for these developmentally disabled are their families. For only the families can give them what they truly need and that is love, not paperwork. "
musikluvr wrote on Sep 7, 2008 2:31 PM:
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 7, 2008 4:06 PM:
What many of you do not realize is that in the natural world of biblical times, many of these children were subjected to ritualistic torture due to the fanaticism of the times. Later they were targeted by witchcraft hunters. These children were often abandoned in the wild. Families were often too burdened by their own large families (no birth control) to care for the abandoned handicapped children in their communities. In a resource depleted and population competitive world, these children suffer the most.
I do realize that we can NEVER go to a place of genetically identifying many conditions, autism for example, and selecting them out of the gene pool. Autism comes in too many shades, often high functioning such as Aspergers. Engineers often have the gene for autism without expressing it. We would not want to eliminate that gene from the gene pool. However, with Down's Syndrome, I doubt the most mildly expressed version of the condition would have the capacity for self sufficiency. Are we doing these children any favors, or are we just being selfish by bringing them into the world when we have other choices? What's the point of prenatal genetic testing if you plan to never abort?
Some might argue that we are playing God. Aren't we already playing God by saving Down Syndrome children who would not have survived beyond infancy 3000 years ago? "
Raven wrote on Sep 7, 2008 4:35 PM:
I will butcher a statement I heard once that a society is judged not by how it treats its highest, but how it treats the lowest..... "
freeport56 wrote on Sep 7, 2008 9:33 PM:
It seems you do not hgave a tolerance for developmentally disabled people. I am glad you have a crystal ball to know exactly how people felt. If giving birth to a child is "Playing God" to you, then there are many goddesses in our society. 3,000 years ago they had not the knowledge to know what was wrong with these kids other than that they were possessed by demons.
Your arguement is rediculous at best.
Raven- I worked full time all those years and did this in my spare time. I think you will find throwing money at a problem does not always solve it. Example: $4 Trillion dollars spent on President Johnson's "War on Poverty" and the poverty rate remains the same.
Recent studies have reported that, men mostly, over 40 contribute to Downs Syndrome. Something about having kids over 40 for both parents.
You weill find that people will always sacrafice for those that they love. We are a frail species, subject to any one of million defects in our lives. why does a 30 yeard old woman suddenly develop Epilepsy without ever having any head trauma? Why do somne children die several days after birth for no reason at all? life is a risk we all take. "
freeport56 wrote on Sep 7, 2008 9:36 PM:
Jus a reminder. America's largest employers are small businesses of 20 and less employees. FMLA does not apply to them! "
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 7, 2008 11:31 PM:
You're very wrong about this Freeport. I am very passionate about taking care of those who have already arrived here and are handicapped. This is probably one of the biggest reasons I am able to label myself as a liberal. I actually care about those who have these enormous obstacles, and I believe that we as a society owe them the promise of financial and emotional support. Ask anyone who knows me and I am the first person to befriend and fight for handicapped people. I do not judge or turn away from them.
What I judge is a society who may have the ability to prevent such suffering in the first place. We have the ability to test for trisomy 18, 21 and some neural tube defects. By the time a woman is 35 to 39, 1 out of every 240 babies has trisomy 21, aka Down Syndrome. That's substantial.
3000 years ago, women did not live too far beyond age 35. We did not have antibiotics and modern medicine to keep us alive. if we stubbed our toe and ended out with an infection in our thirties, there was a greater chance than not that we would die from it.
Our modern medical treatments now allow women to reproduce way beyond the norm of nature. It's our responsibility to also use the technology to respond to the chromosomal abnormalities which occur as a result of our medical technology and resulting longevity.
This has nothing to do with my lack of support for those already here. I do not think we are doing anyone any favors by knowingly bringing handicapped babies into the world though. "
XMAN wrote on Sep 8, 2008 2:42 AM:
Raven wrote on Sep 8, 2008 4:35 AM:
freeport56 wrote on Sep 8, 2008 10:39 AM:
I guess it is the parents choice to bring that child into the world.
While you say you support those already here...you seem to be advocating that those that are pregnant with a disabled child abort them?
Am I understanding you correctly? Are you advocating genic purity?
Raven- your comment makes no sense. "
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 8, 2008 1:06 PM:
This is not about genetic purity. That's absurd. Like I said before, most embryo's with trisomy chromosomal defects are naturally aborted by the body. Those that survive are treated humanely, at least in this country, because of our willingness to be generous with our resources. Btw, note that not everyone wants to be generous toward our handicapped. They want it taken care of primarily through "charity". Also note that in the natural world, defective offspring usually die shortly after birth because the mother knows she cannot possibly care for an infant who can never care for itself. We've moved away from abandoning such offspring but I feel we have a responsibility to prevent the suffering in the first place. My issue has to do with our inability to detect chromosomal abnormalities in the early embryonic stage.
History has not been so kind to these individuals and there's always the possibility of repeat. I will venture to guess that many of these children become institutionalized and that the quality of their lives are greatly diminished, even in modern times.
This has nothing to do with genetic purity. It has to do with being realistic about the future of these severely handicapped individuals and asking the question about "quality" of life. If we are going to expand lifespan through artificial means, we need to be realistic about other types of risks (the association of age with Down Syndrome). Taking away a woman's right to abort these children is what Palin would do if she could. "
suze wrote on Sep 8, 2008 3:42 PM:
Sandra wrote on Sep 8, 2008 4:21 PM:
Wow....Who are we to decide what should be considered suffering, and what is a state of grace? What is truly selfish is thinking we have the right to decide that. I know some downs syndrome people and if you asked them would they have wanted to live their lives, or been aborted, I would expect they would answer the same as you or I would.
I am prochoice. I also am of the opinion that many times the choice of abortion is a selfish one. That is why it is an agonizing decision that is between a woman and god. It is something that person will carry with them always.
Many times those with disabilities can show us "selfish" ones what true courage is. Have you ever thought ouside of your needs, and what you consider to be suffering, to realize that every human being contributes something to this world? Even the evil ones, such as Hitler, have taught lessons to the rest of us that we should never forget. "
Sandra wrote on Sep 8, 2008 4:28 PM:
Ok, this is what I make of that:
From what I can see, which is pretty much the same as you, it would appear that this beautiful child has a loving family around him. Many people work every day who have children, disabled or not. Many children grow and thrive in a loving family environment with both parents working.
It seems this record is stuck into the same old sexist groove. If Palin was a beacon from the left, you can rest asured this would not even be mentioned. "
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 8, 2008 4:38 PM:
I fear that she has already ignored her role as "mother" and prioritized her role as governor of Alaska. That's fine except she now has a daughter who is pregnant because she replaced dialogue about birth control with abstinence only preaching. This is not a subject which a mother can just hope for the best. Daughters need REAL guidance in this area directly from mom, not dad. Palin's distractions are far beyond a special needs baby.
And since we're on the subject; if Palin doesn't believe in birth control, she could potentially have more babies while serving as Vice President. That's a real possibility you know. Being pregnant, raising a Down Syndrome child, guiding the rest of her offspring, it's a heavy load even if nothing changes. The question is whether she will prioritize family over politics or visa versa. Some of you may argue that she can do it all. That's highly unlikely with THIS degree of burden. The situation cannot be equated to a single teen Clinton child either. Palin faces a complex family situation filled with greater than average uncertainties; complicated by the dynamics of a large family and beliefs that require more than lip service. "
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 8, 2008 5:09 PM:
I am entitled to an opinion on what I consider "suffering". I am also entitled to abort an embryo I feel will be suffering if I am ever faced with such a situation. Have you ever seen a severely handicapped Spina Bifida child? Have you ever seen a child hooked to a ventilator who has never been able to take more than a few breaths on his own, who cannot verbalize pain? I have. If all you've ever been exposed to are mild cases of Down Syndrome, than there's no way for you to identify with what I'm talking about.
And as a society, we make decisions about "suffering" all the time. Some parents are given options about allowing heroic measures when a child is born with overwhelming medical challenges. The choice of "suffering" is put into their hands. When an old person is near death in a convalescent hospital but is denied pain medication because it "might kill them", aren't we making decisions about what degree of "suffering" is tolerable and which group of people should be subjected to suffering? Decisions about "suffering" are made every day. You're just not in a setting to see it. People who must make these tough decisions should not have guilt trips laid on them by people who want to remove those choices. If Palin wants to raise the issue of aborting defective embryos, which she will, some of us will fight back to justify it on the grounds that it prevents "suffering". "
Raven wrote on Sep 8, 2008 6:04 PM:
WorksInNapa wrote on Sep 8, 2008 6:25 PM:
If my mother could pull it off then Palin shouldn't have a problem at all raising a young Down Syndrome child with all the family support she has. This should not be an issue at all. There are plenty of other valid reasons to chew up on when it comes to Palin. "
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 8, 2008 8:52 PM:
All my years of taking care of Alzheimers patients... getting them from state homes with bone-deep bedsores and nursing them back to health... You know, it can take months to get a bone-deep bedsore to heal up...
The lack of sleep... the hospital visits... watching these people slowly losing their memory, their minds, the ability to walk, hold their bladders and bowels... ending up in a fetal ball...
All those years... then to end up being the only person with them when they pass... because their 'family' won't show up...
Those years and years... that freeport56 ever so breezily dismisses as 'shallow experience'...
Taught me something...
Usually the folks that breezily dismiss the trials and experience of others...
Tend to be... not all of them... but many of them... tend to be... a perfect reverse weather-vane...
The kind of folks who heartily approve of politicians who wrap themselves in the flag and then cut money to care for the elderly, the handicapped, and children... to fund a war-machine that makes some people millionaires and others into maimed wrecks.
NEVER trust a politician that such people support.
By their fruits shall ye know them.
~Ruff "
Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 8, 2008 9:42 PM:
You may personally be Mother Theresa, but even she could only care for the people she knew of.
I don't know why some folks who may go 'all out' for the stricken people they know about personally seem to have an empathy-ectomy when it's not somebody they know personally, or hear about in church, a newspaper, etc.
Such people often yell "Yay! No More Taxes!" at reports that funding to care for the aged at home will be cut by Republicans in the California Legislature.
And thus we get politicians like Sarah Palin who cut funding for children with health issues yet can borrow big money to build a money-losing indoor sports arena for a town about one tenth the size of Napa.
Politicians with poor judgment like that make even worse judgments as the organizations get bigger and the percentage of 'strangers' grows..
Nobody can know every single one of 300 million Americans... we have to trust that some agency will care for the orphans we don't know, the abused children in another county, the mentally handicapped, and the aged or sick with no family members, and to build roads, bridges, hospitals, provide police and fire protection.
That requires agency, policies and taxes laid by the legislature "to provide for the general welfare".
That is my point and that why I keep saying that emotional support is NOT ENOUGH.
~Ruff "
Sandra wrote on Sep 9, 2008 9:00 AM:
Vocal, you absolutely have a right to an opinion, as I do.. I never said you could not state your beliefs on this subject. The letter was about Palin and her downs syndrome child. Your post said what it said. Is it now your stance that you were NOT refferring to DS, but to brain dead people only? I am not being sarcastic, I am confused. If I knew my child would be born brain dead, I would probably choose to abort. As I stated I am pro choice. I also stated that much of the time choosing abortion is a selfish choice. In the instance of a brain dead child, I do not think it is. In the instance of a DS child, it is my opinion that it is a selfish choice. Would I impose my will on another and not allow them to make that choice? Absolutely not. Would I think they were selfish? Yes I would. Would I judge them for being selfish? No, I would not. That is between them and the higher power.
As I said before, everyone alive on this earth contributes in some way. Who gets to choose who is worthy to contribute? The only person who gets to make this choice is the one bringing life into this world. Your opinion, or mine does not matter. But you asked a question and I answered it. If you did not want to hear an answer, you should not have asked the questions. "
Native74 wrote on Sep 9, 2008 1:40 PM:
It's almost as bad as when they didn't allow women to be teachers once they were married... "
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 9, 2008 2:28 PM:
If you read the link in Mike Haley's blog today, it discusses how easily we are distracted by the controversial issues surrounding Palin that are not necessarily as important as asking the question, "is she qualified". "And what is her level of experience?".
For all of those, like me, who are easily distracted by the emotional stuff, we need to get back on track and ask the really serious questions about how this person would perform as president if something happened to McCain. That's more important than debating her pro life or anti contraceptive for teens stance. "
freeport56 wrote on Sep 9, 2008 5:39 PM:
And how much is enough? Whwere is the CAP? Look at what it has done to California. Spend, Spend, Spend! $160 Billion and counting. But to Ruff, sure raise taxes what the heck. My and your kids and theur grand kids can bare the burden of paying 40,50, and 60% of their incomes to pay for people who partied their whole lives and did not prepare fort the future.
We can pay for all those people who do not belong here too, it's only money. I worked at the 4th largest county hospital in the country. I saw my fair share of sarrow Ruff. Stuff happens in life. We do not have to payt fopr everyone. It is not the gonerments job. We are not here, and you do not work just to paty for everyone else.
that isa why you save, invest and plan for a future you have no control over. You do not single out the class that provides most ofd the jobs, investments, and capital and say "by the way I need 28% more of your income".
Those corporation you love so much will help for the retirement of thousands through their investment of stocks and bonds. You would pick their pockets and take away from their future for deadbeats. yeah, I said it. Unprepared people wind up being deadbeats only out for the dole "
freeport56 wrote on Sep 9, 2008 5:44 PM:
But I still pay my taxes.
I think this falls under 'provide for the general welfare' clause in the US Constitution.
Call me a 'socialist' if you wish, but there are some things that a civilized society should pay for with taxes on everybody who wishes to be part of that society."
No mention by Ruff of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
I guess my owning a firearm for protection falls under the same catagory. Since the police can no longer protect all of us I need to protect myself. After all I am just looking out for my and my wife's "General Welfare".
No, we do not want your type of welfare state. that is definately not what the founders want. Become French and you can have it all. "
Raven wrote on Sep 10, 2008 6:56 AM:
Sandra wrote on Sep 10, 2008 1:44 PM:
(Ruff, pay special attention to item #1.)
1. Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.
2. She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.
3.She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.
4. Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.
5. Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum." "
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 10, 2008 3:24 PM:
Originally, Social Service was set up to take care of those who could not "easily" care for themselves. Not only is war siphoning those resources down a drain, our handicapped must compete with mothers who are not responsible about reproduction. I understand that some of you don't want to hear that side of the story but we should not have this conversation without facing the truth.
Moderate Democrats need to start talking about how our social services are being distributed. Think of it as a big pie that never changes in size. The bigger the bite one group is allowed, the smaller the bite for another. It's all a big competitive game and it needs fixing. I believe Democrats are both capable of fixing this situation and being compassionate about those truly in need. People do not have to resort to becoming "Republican" because they are fed up with enabling. It's going to be easier putting Democrats into office and working on this issue than allowing Republicans to give lip service to the situation, continue fattening the super wealthy AND throwing resources down the war drain. "
freeport56 wrote on Sep 11, 2008 6:02 PM:
Those are not my words! I would do great bodily harm to myself if I ever spoke that way.
But for those of you who want to kick more in, how about another 20-25% from your paycheck. That would put you right about where BHO wants you. "
vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:39 PM:
Funny thing is, even though I am a liberal leaning, yet moderate Independent, I still see fault in the democratic party whom I typically support. I see a much greater level of deception and fault among Republicans, though. Nevertheless, I am still willing to admit that Democrats are not perfect and that there are issues which need fixing. I don't jump into one arena and suggest that everything within those boundaries is correct. My opinions are based on the world both inside and outside of that arena. The arena doesn't own me just because I tend to hang out there.
I have not seen any type of moderate behavior from even one of the conservatives posting here, not one. I just want to say that we are so terribly divided at this point, it no longer feels like a united people living inside a united country. We have quickly forgotten how the events of 9/11 united us all. Is that what it takes, a disaster, to become united? If so, we are in serious trouble. We must quit treating every issue as though it's black and white. I'm willing to admit that gray exists. I wish you would too. "