Beyond the Palin

TIME TO ADDRESS ISSUES OTHER THAN WHO CAN FIELD-DRESS A MOOSE!

  • Categories

  • Subscribe


  • Add to Technorati Favorites
  • hit counter
  • RSS Twitter Feed Long…

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Posts Tagged ‘Conservative’

Maybe We CAN Just Get Along…But We Still Can’t Date.

Posted by noetical on December 5, 2005

Hello everyone!

Welcome again to the annals of my adventures in the world of eDating. Before I begin, I would like to say that those of you who read these entries should feel free to enjoy my amusing anecdotes without feeling sorry for me in the least. Not all of my experiences have been bad…the bad ones are just funnier to write about. Besides, as I’ve mentioned before, I don’t consider the good guys fair game. Speaking of which, while this guy is not someone I would date, as it turns out, he’s not such a bad guy. For that reason, I actually asked his blessing to post this exchange with the caveat that I would remove any personal information that might identify him in any way. I really wanted to post this correspondence because it evolved in a way that I found interesting. In order to provide you with some background, I will begin with my online profile for Yahoo Personals, where he approached me. (Note: most of the initial details, like “Sense of Humor” and “Social Setting” are canned responses from which I chose as many as applied.)

About Me:
Gender: Woman seeking a Man
Age: 39
Marital Status: Single – never married
Body Type: Fit
Height: 5′ 7″
Eyes: Hazel
Hair: Auburn
Ethnicity: Caucasian (white)
Sense of Humor: Friendly, Clever / Quick Witted, Dry / Sarcastic, Obscure
Social Setting: Shy at first, but warm up quickly, Home Body, Better in small groups, Comic Relief
TV Watching: News Junkie, Movies, Documentaries, Channel Hopper, TiVo is my best friend
Living Situation: Alone, With pets, Family and friends visit often
Have Kids: No
Want (more) kids: Yes
Education: College Grad
Employment Status: Full-time
Occupation: Entertainment / Media
Income: No Answer
Religion: Not Religious
Attend Services: Never
Political Views: Very liberal
Astrology: Libra
Languages: English
Interests: Arts, Dancing, Family, Movies, Listening to Music, Outdoor Activities, Reading, Travel, Cooking, Computers / Internet, Television, Gardening, Crafts, Health/Fitness

My Headline:
I don’t care what car U drive…

In My Own Words:
…but, I *do* care if you’re cute, smart, funny, treat me with respect & get my jokes (CLUE: if you’re thinking right now “tell me one,” you most likely won’t get them =-)

WHAT I LOVE: Music that makes my body move; all-out, heart-pounding, lung-burning workouts that flood me with endorphins; books that make me forget where I am; movies that make me cry, laugh and/or think; people who make the world a better place; my mind & its perpetual motion; meaning & the search for it; laughing out loud; talking to bright people; learning something new; finding money in an old pair of jeans; being madly in love with someone whose very essence is intrinsically magnificent to me, just as mine is to him; savoring a root-beer float once every six & a half years (keeps ’em fresh!)

ABOUT ME: I believe in the beauty & complexity of the universe & cherish my time here, but if you consider creationism or “intelligent design” a science, I’m sorry but we are not a match. I am a drama-free (though not passion-free) zone, as I’ve always felt fortunate and prefer to laugh at life’s absurdities than cry of misfortune and play the victim. The full expression of my attention, energy & thoughts is a lovely force that can transform & enrich the lives of those around me. However, since I find myself & the world highly entertaining, getting my attention can be difficult…keeping it can be even harder…that is, unless you possess wit, are curious, intelligent and have a “good heart.” Beyond that, I’m looking for someone with whom I feel safe to be my whole, magnificently flawed self. He needn’t be without flaws, fears, doubts or weakness himself, but he must be willing to risk the discomfort of that journey…wherever it may lead. Come on…it’ll be fun! =-)

ABOUT YOU WITH ME: We’ll make each other laugh…even in difficult moments. We won’t keep our opinions to ourselves, but we’ll *never* have to wonder whose side the other is on. We’ll be comfortable letting each other “do our own thing”…even when we’re occupying the same space. We’ll have each other’s backs, even when we’re facing each other. We’ll inspire each other to be better people. When we look at each other, we’ll know how lucky we are to be together, making it difficult to keep our hands off each other…and mostly we won’t 😉

PLACES I’VE BEEN: Italy—Venice, Rome, Milan, Florence, Pompeii, Naples; Belgium—Brussels, Bruges; England—London, Bath, Bristol; France—Cannes, Nice, Paris; Germany—Munich, Hamburg, Berlin, Frankfurt; Austria—Vienna, Salzburg; Canada—Toronto, Winnipeg, Montreal; Switzerland—Zürich, Genèva; various cities—Bangkok, Sydney, Warsaw, Dublin, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, Budapest, Amsterdam, Tijuana …& all over the US.

FINAL FACTOIDS ABOUT ME: Jane Austen is my 13th cousin, 6 times removed (whatever that means;-); Princes William & Henry are my 8th cousins (sadly, I never get invited over =-); Pres. Bush is my 10th cousin, once removed (NOTE: sorry, but if you like or voted for him or his father, we’re NOT a match); I get most of my news from the NY Times & “the Daily Show;” I put myself through Columbia University in NYC; my middle name is Renée, after René Descartes. (My dad’s a philosophy professor, so my brother & I were named after famous philosophers. I lucked out though…my brother’s middle name is Erasmus.)

And here is our exchange. As usual, I’ve quoted exactly, including all spelling errors and typos. To be fair, I should mention that the only reason my responses aren’t riddled with similar errors is that I’m a bit of an anal control freak when it comes to writing. I obsessively check anything I send out to ensure that as many errors as possible are removed before I hit “send.”

On 11/18/2005 06:14 pm PST, “AnotherConservativeGuy” wrote:
Bummer! I thought WHAT A HOT BABE but then I read your profile…. I am not the true love you seak but you do seem like a nice woman and you are pretty. Just wanted you to know…
—AnotherConservativeGuy

At this point, I had no way of knowing that he was another conservative guy rejecting me for my politics, but I thought it was worth finding out why someone who found me attractive would be put off by my profile. So, I responded with this:

On 11/19/2005 10:03 am PST, I wrote:
Dear: “AnotherConservativeGuy”:

Thank you for the compliment; I’m sorry we’re not a match. Out of curiosity, what specifically in my profile “bummed you out?” I’m always interested in how others perceive my profile. If you wouldn’t mind, I’d love to know. Thanks!

Best, Noetical.

On 11/19/2005 05:07 pm PST, “AnotherConservativeGuy” wrote:
Ok so your photos are good except for the 1/2 naked one. Get rid of it. It seems a little desperate and sleezy. Your face is really nice and your profile is great. I am conservative and I know most liberals are angry and super opinoinated. I wouldn’t fit. My last girl friend was super liberal but it was well thought out and we got along great. You are not open to other ideas so i am sure you will find some flamming liberal who dosn’t belive in god. Its just not me. Every thing else seems good.. I realllllly like your eyes…… I could look into them all night …… Your ideas make me want to puke,….
—AnotherConservativeGuy

Well, as you might imagine, upon receiving this response, I was simply giddy with anticipation, as I contemplated how savagely I was going to expose his idiocy here when I got
this reply from him. This exchange was turning out to be even better than the first ConservativeGuy! Not only was he being intolerant and judgmental but, in addition, this one was being overtly rude. At this point, I should also show you the pictures to which he refers, so that you can see what he’s talking about.

My main picture is here on the left: 

Main_1
And the one here to the right of the other is the “1/2 naked one”:

Naked

 

 

 

 

 

 

Admittedly, the picture of me on the right is a bit silly and cheesy. I like to think of it as my “Varga Girl” shot. I haven’t taken his advice and deleted it from my profile. To be honest, I don’t know if my unwillingness to do so is because I disagree with his characterization of the picture, or because I was born the kind of stubborn person who is inspired to contrary action when someone tells me what to do. Either way, it’s up to stay for the time being.

Anyway, before I could post the exchange here, I had to respond to him in my most measured and reasonable tone…which is my way of being a condescending bitch while feigning civility. I did try to vary it a bit from what I said to the other ConservativeGuy, but there were some pretty good lines from that. Please excuse any repetition…I mean, why re-invent the wheel? So here is what I sent him:

On 11/21/2005 01:08 pm PST, I wrote:
Dear: “AnotherConservativeGuy”,

Thank you so much for writing me back, as I found your reasons for thinking we wouldn’t be a good match to be quite interesting…although, I have to say that your statement that my ideas make you “want to puke,” seems quite angry and judgmental.

In reviewing my profile, the only two statements I could find that might be considered biased were, “if you consider creationism or “intelligent design” a science, I’m sorry but we are not a match”; and “Pres. Bush is my 10th cousin, once removed (NOTE: sorry, but if you like or voted for him or his father, we’re NOT a match.)” Admittedly, the Bush quote quite clearly indicates that the man I seek is not a Republican, but it was meant to be funny rather than hostile in the context of admitting my distant and obscure relationship with the Bush family. As for the first statement about science, I assure you that many people who believe in God also believe in evolution; even more agree that the Earth was created in more than six days and that dinosaurs became extinct long before humans began roaming the planet.

Since these two statements and my self-identification as being “very liberal” are the only indications in my profile of my political ideas, I find it curious that you find all of my ideas so repulsive. Nonetheless, I thank you for your astute feedback. Without it, I never would have guessed that in my profile, I come off as a desperate, sleazy, angry, super-opinionated and closed-minded woman with a really nice face and attractive eyes, in search of a flaming liberal who doesn’t believe in God.

I realize you responded to my question out of courtesy, and it is not my intention to pick a fight with you, however, since you have attacked my ideas based on presumptions about what “liberal” means to you, I want to leave you with a couple of specifics for the record. In general, I consider myself a “liberal,” but my politics are not “liberal” down the line, as I take each issue as its own question, which you probably do as well. I find labels to be ambiguous at best and misleading at worst, especially considering the ways in which the meaning of these words continually evolves. I’m “conservative” when it comes to many economic issues, “liberal” on many social issues and “centrist” on various other issues. For instance, I strongly believe in a person’s right to believe that the first woman was made from a man’s rib, but I don’t want my tax dollars to be spent on teaching that to children in our public science classrooms. I think it is more appropriate to teach the Bible in church sermons, Sunday school classes and in the home…which by the way are the places I learned about God growing up.

As for Republicans being “conservative,” I’m not sure what that means anymore because the current administration and predominantly Republican congress doesn’t seem fiscally conservative or responsible to me at all. In fact, one might say that they spend money like drunken sailors.

Well, if you’ve read this far, thank you for taking the time to read my response, and I hope you haven’t puked =-) While I may be deluding myself, I hope that you are wrong that I am not open to ideas that are different from mine. Whenever I engage in public discourse, whether it’s in someone’s living room or here on this little slice of cyberspace, I think of myself as being a part of this giant forge in which we all heat, hammer and shape our thoughts. I believe in this process, even though most of the dents we each make in the communal metal are imperceptible.

I actively consume a variety of opinions each day from talk radio, friends & family, various blogs, newspapers, magazines and cable news shows. We live in an age where there are so many voices contributing to the public dialogue that it can sometimes seem like a meaningless cacophony, but, I consider this superfluity of opinion to be a quality problem that I’m happy to have. Furthermore, I am proud to live in a society that encourages such discourse. I don’t agree with every opinion I read or hear, but each helps me to see an issue from a new perspective and helps me to test or temper my own.

Good luck in your search for a “match”!

Best, Noetical.

Now all I had to do is sit back and wait for the reactionary response that I was sure he’d send. But, much to my surprise, he sent me this in reply instead:

On 11/21/2005 05:05 pm PST, “AnotherConservativeGuy” wrote:
<>That is the problem with e-mail sometimes what I meant isn’t how it is taken. I assure you I am not in the least angry. I just was giving you a little ribbing. Your profile comments may come across as angry to others  also, I assume you just don’t want to have a relationship with some one who has a different world view. I can understand that. Except, I guess in reality I would say it isn’t important what one believes just that they have thought it out and understand why they believe it.

<>I didn’t say you came off as sleazy. It is that damn photo. It gives the wrong message. If I thought you were a sleaze I wouldn’t have paused to write. Actually I find the other photos of you very attractive. You have deep eyes and what you wrote is very good.

<> I don’t know you. I feel some honesty, (my opinion), should be taken as advice from someone who doesn’t know ANYTHING about you and shouldn’t be a reflection on your self image. You asked my perception was, not what the truth was.

<> It was a perception based on a very limited view. To be honest, now that I have been so rude and blunt, you have come back with a clarifying response that shows you are a well thought out woman with great depth of character. I feel terrible for being so rude. I just went back and read my e-mail…..Ouch that is an asshole e mail. Not the way I meant it.

<> You must understand cyber dating sites are not a good place to meet someone. One becomes grouped in with the rest of the people. I like to think this isn’t true, but it has not been my experience. I think a better place to find companionship is doing what one loves to do. I personally have been trying to cancel my account but It seems difficult to do.

<> You know what, I just need to apologize. I jumped to several assumptions based on wrong perceptions. Thanks for writing me back.

<>—AnotherConservativeGuy

Wow…maybe my expectations are low, but I was impressed that he acknowledged fault and apologized. Maybe we can just get along. Well, the apology was nice, but at this point, I faced a dilemma. I really wanted to write about this exchange, but ethically I was conflicted about exposing him to ridicule after he turned out to be a stand up guy. After spending some time over the Thanksgiving holiday thinking about it, I decided to just let him know I was going to write about it and give him the chance to ask me not to. Following is the note I sent to him:

On 12/03/2005 05:46 pm PST, I wrote:
Dear: “AnotherConservativeGuy”:

Sorry it took me so long to write you back, but I got tied up with family responsibilities over the holiday week. I just wanted to say thank you for your last note to me. Most men wouldn’t have taken the time to admit they had been less than chivalrous, as you have. I recently posted on my blog (noetical.blogs.com/noet_all/2005/09/why_i_dont_date.html) a similar exchange with another Republican I met online. I was less than charitable to him in my commentary regarding the exchange, as he lacked the manners that you clearly have shown in your most recent response. While it would have been highly entertaining to make fun of you on my blog, I’m happy to know that liberals and conservatives can be civil to each other. With your blessing, I would like to post this exchange from beginning to end in order to show the contrast with the other…proving to all my flaming liberal friends that not all conservatives are dolts =-) Of course I would take out your name and all of the personal details that identify you. Let me know.

In the meantime, good luck in your search…as you can see from my profile, I don’t live in your city anyway. I originally changed my settings for your city, as I was on the verge of moving there for a new job, but things have changed and I’ve taken a new job here instead. I’m sure you will find a great conservative girl with beautiful eyes someday soon.

Best, Noetical.

On 12/03/2005 06:23 pm PST, “AnotherConservativeGuy” wrote:
As I said at the begining of this exchange somewhere. My last girl friend was a very liberal american policy hateing, packistani. After talking to her I found we were closer in our ideas than we thought We just had different ideas on how to get there. Liberals think about conseritivesthe same as   we think of them. Most Republicans are just a little bit less talkitive about It. I hear liberal say discusting things about George Bush all the time in public. Why is that? I understand there is a lot of hate toward him and his policies…. But why do they have to voice their opinion in public all the time? Maybe people could focus less on politics and more on being good people.

I also have to admit, although it is no excuse, I was pretty drunk when I wrote that ass hole letter to you. I am verry sorry again. I am sure you are a great woman. I am sure it is my loss you are not moving here.

As far as meeting a nice woman with pretty eyes….. Who knows… I won’t hold my breath……
—AnotherConservativeGuy

At the end of the day, I think this was a more interesting exchange than the other, because I gave this guy the opportunity to redeem himself. We’re all human and, he’s right, the inability to hear inflection in an email can make it an imperfect means of communication. While I still wouldn’t date him, I’m glad not to hate him either. In the meantime, I should say I had a great time last night with a new guy I’ve been seeing. He’s a flaming liberal who doesn’t believe in God. Love that!

Posted in Diary of a Mad eDater, Humor, It's All About Me, Politics, Rants, Religion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Why I Don’t Date Republicans…

Posted by noetical on September 26, 2005

Hi Everyone!

Once again, it’s time for me to write about the absurdities of my eDating adventures. This time, I’ve changed my charming suitor’s name, in case he finds this post. I would like to avoid his wrath. By the way, this post includes some things written by him, which I’ve quoted exactly…spelling errors and all. I will call him “ConservativeGuy.”

So this is a guy I first met at one of those “speed dating” things, so I actually have met him in the real world. A few days before meeting him, he also sent me a note at match.com, expressing interest in me. He was okay-looking, so after meeting him, I replied to his match.com email and sent him my contact info, but after a couple of short emails back and forth, nothing really happened. Our last exchange was on August 30th. Then on September 17th, we were matched up on eHarmony.com. (If you’re thinking right now that I’m on too many of these stupid eDating sites…you’re right…but that’s another story =-)

Anyway, following is some of the information from his profile at eHarmony:

Match Name:  ConservativeGuy (name changed to protect the obnoxious)

Location: 
Encino, California, United States

Occupation:
  Investment Management

Height:
  5′ 10”

Age:
41

Ethnicity: 
White, non-Hispanic

Match Created: 
September 17, 2005

Last Communication: 
September 18, 2005

The things ConservativeGuy can’t live without are:

  • Close relationships – family & friends
  • A need to be a productive member of society
  • Great sense of humor
  • Helping others through volunteer work
  • Having goals and ambitions

The most important thing ConservativeGuy is looking for in a person is:
Honest and open with a great sense of humor and a zest for life. She should have her own opinions (even if they differ from my own) and should be knowledgable and willing to discuss current events and the world around her.


Well, he doesn’t sound so bad, right? …And I knew he wasn’t ugly, so I was glad that almost immediately he sent me the following email from the eHarmony site:

From:  ConservativeGuy

To:  Noetical

Subject:  Hi Again

Date:  17 September 2005 01:04 PM Pacific

In looking at your profile, I do believe we have communicated on another site.  If you want to chat just let me know….

—ConservativeGuy


So, I wrote him back…figured I’d give it one more shot:

From:  Noetical

To:  ConservativeGuy

Subject:  Re: Hi Again

Date:  17 September 2005 08:09 PM Pacific

Hi again ConservativeGuy =-)

Yes, I’d love to chat. Feel free to write me or call me. My number is:  310-xxx-xxxx
My actual email address is: me@xxxxxxxxxx.com

Best, Noetical.


Now before I go on, let me explain that eHarmony has everyone pick ten “Must Haves” and ten “Can’t Stands” to share with their matches and I’m going to share mine here with you:

MY MUST HAVES:

Shared Politics…
      I must have someone who has political beliefs which are the same or similar to my own.
Autonomy…
      I must have a partner who will give me space to be my own person.
Intellect…
      I must have a partner who is bright and can share my understanding of the world as well as enjoy discussing important issues.
Sense of Humor…
      I must have someone who is sharp and can enjoy the humorous side of life.
Loyal…
      I must have someone I can count on to always support me.
Communicator…
      I must have someone who is good at talking and listening.
Emotionally Generous…
      I must have a partner who enjoys people and is generous with his or her compassion, attention, sympathies and love.
Curiosity…
      I must have a partner who is hungry for new information and knowledge and who strives to learn as much as possible.
Strong Character…
      I must have a partner who is honest and strong enough to do the right thing.
Chemistry…
      I must feel deeply in love with and attracted to my partner.

MY CAN’T STANDS:

Anger…
      I can’t stand someone who can’t manage their anger, who yells, or bottles it up inside.
Lying…
      I can’t stand someone who lies to anyone-especially to me.
Rude…
      I can’t stand someone who is belittling, impatient or hateful to people in any situation.
Petty…
      I can’t stand someone who focuses on imperfection.
Judgmental…
      I can’t stand someone who finds fault with everyone and everything.
Racist…
      I can’t stand someone who believes that any particular ethnic group to which they belong is superior to the rest of humanity.
Infidelity…
      I can’t stand someone who engages in sex outside a committed relationship.
Pessimism…
      I can’t stand someone who always sees the glass as half empty.
Mean Spirited…
      I can’t stand someone who has a devious nature and is mean to others.
Intolerance…
      While I understand that religious conviction is a positive trait, I can’t stand someone who is self-righteous and feels that their particular faith is the only one that matters.


All of the choices are pretty basic, and his didn’t vary from mine that much, but here are the ones he chose:

HIS MUST HAVES:

Intellect...
      I must have a partner who is bright and can share my understanding of the world as well as enjoy discussing important issues.
Sense of Humor…
      I must have someone who is sharp and can enjoy the humorous side of life.
Family…
      I must have someone who shares my desire to have or adopt children.
Responsible…
      My partner must be financially responsible.
Emotionally Generous…
      I must have a partner who enjoys people and is generous with his or her compassion, attention, sympathies and love.
Attractiveness…
      I must have a partner who is considered “very attractive” by most current standards.
Affectionate…
      I must have someone who is comfortable giving and receiving affection.
Sexually Knowledgeable…
      I must have someone who is mature and experienced as a potential sexual partner and is able to express himself/herself freely.
Strong Character…
      I must have a partner who is honest and strong enough to do the right thing.
Chemistry…
      I must feel deeply in love with and attracted to my partner.

HIS CAN’T STANDS:

Lying…
      I can’t stand someone who lies to anyone-especially to me.
Rude…
      I can’t stand someone who is belittling, impatient or hateful to people in any situation.
Racist…
      I can’t stand someone who believes that any particular ethnic group to which they belong is superior to the rest of humanity.
Cheating…
      I can’t stand someone who takes advantage of people.
Undependable…
      I can’t stand someone who fails to come through and is unreliable.
Infidelity…
      I can’t stand someone who engages in sex outside a committed relationship.
Mean Spirited…
      I can’t stand someone who has a devious nature and is mean to others.
Intolerance…
      While I understand that religious conviction is a positive trait, I can’t stand someone who is self-righteous and feels that their particular faith is the only one that matters.
Flirts…
      I can’t stand someone who constantly flirts with the opposite sex.
Victim Mentality…
      While everyone has times of self-pity, I can’t stand someone who continually sees himself/herself as a victim.


Okay, so he didn’t write me at my email address and he didn’t call me, but he sent me the following reply to me at eHarmony:

From:  ConservativeGuy

To:  Noetical

Subject:  Re: Hi Again

Date:  18 September 2005 07:55 AM Pacific

Small world!  So I see shared politics is a “must have.” Can you elaborate?


So I wrote back to him and elaborated:

From:  Noetical

To:  ConservativeGuy

Subject:  Politics
Date:  18 September 2005 09:54 AM Pacific

Hi ConservativeGuy. Yes, it is a small world…at least the LA dating scene is small =-)

This is a new “must have” for me. It’s not that I’m intolerant of other people’s beliefs…and I don’t need my partner and me to agree on EVERYTHING…but at least we should be coming at the issues with common assumptions. I find that it’s much more interesting to discuss issues with someone who has a similar foundation…otherwise, the conversation never really progresses to the more complex and stagnates at the base of the argument. It’s one thing to disagree on the solution, but if you disagree on the very nature of the problem, or even what that problem is, that can be a very frustrating wall to smash your head against.

I hope that makes sense. I think I’m better at answering this question verbally, so feel free to ask me again sometime on the phone.

If you’re really interested in where I’m coming from politically and how I interact with those with whom I disagree, you can check out the following link:
http://noetical.blogs.friendster.com/noet_all/2005/07/are_we_still_in.html

So you mention that you like to volunteer. What are the local causes that you support? What do you care about, believe in?

Best, Noetical.


Still not quite sure of me, he sent the following message in response:

From:  ConservativeGuy

To:  Noetical

Subject:  Re: Politics
Date:  18 September 2005 10:40 AM Pacific

Hi,

Scanned your website and your political statements.  While I am extremely conservative politically and more liberal socially, I certainly don’t have an issue if someone has a different viewpoint than my own.  However, it is important to me that they have an opinion one way or another and also that they can back it up.

—ConservativeGuy


Not sure what that meant, I mean, what the fuck?! So you wanna talk or not? And here’s the thing…for some reason, I wasn’t thinking “actually, I think you’re a dick and I don’t want to talk to you…please lose my number.” Instead, I sent the following message in response:

From:  Noetical

To:  ConservativeGuy

Subject:  Re: Politics

Date:  18 September 2005 03:29 PM Pacific

Dear ConservativeGuy:

Well, since you scanned my statements, you know that I *do* have opinions; and I hope you’ve concluded that I can at least argue their merits. So when you say that you’re “extremely conservative politically,” what do you mean by that? In general, I consider myself a “liberal,” but my politics are not “liberal” down the line, as I take each issue as its own question, which you probably do as well.

I’m conservative when it comes to many economic issues, but I’m not sure what that means anymore because the current “conservative” administration doesn’t seem fiscally conservative or responsible to me at all. In fact, I think they spend money like drunken sailors.

I admit that being “extremely conservative politically” has come to mean a few things to me that it might not mean to you, as being “more liberal socially” is incompatible with my understanding of extremely conservative political beliefs. The public conservative agenda has evolved dramatically in recent years in a way that I have found disturbing. Most of my issues with the current state of conservative politics are tied to the extent to which the Christian Right has become more powerful and influential in issues of public policy. For instance, I don’t have an issue with someone who believes that dinosaurs and people co-existed and that the first woman was made from a man’s rib, but I don’t want my tax dollars to be spent on teaching that to children in our public science classrooms.

I’ve never considered myself a libertarian, although I know many of my views are consistent with classically liberal principles. I took this online survey called “World’s Smallest Political Quiz.” According to that, my answers say that the best way to describe my political views is libertarian. I scored 90% on personal issues and 70% on economic issues. (It’s a funny little quiz; you should check it out at http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html)

I guess what I’m trying to say is that for me it’s more about sharing fundamental values rather than ideology. Hope that all makes sense and isn’t too much information. =-)

Best, Noetical.


Okay, now first of all, someone show me where in ANY of these emails I’ve identified as a “Democrat.” Then explain to me which part of my responses were hostile and aggressive. If you can do that, then maybe I will understand why this guy felt justified to send me this response:

From:  ConservativeGuy

To:  Noetical

Subject:  Hi Again

Date:  18 September 2005 05:09 PM Pacific

Hi,

I have been a Republican as long as I can remember because I suscribe to their fundamental belielf that putting the power and capital in the hands of people is much preferable to the government running affairs (which without exception are far more costly and less effective). Also, the recent election proved that Democrats are out of touch with the core values of the American public (religion, faith, etc which do matter to most Americans).  The fact of the matter is that the Democratic party has not been viable in the last 30 years with the exception of Clinton who lied to the American people, performed criminal acts (pardoning Rich), yet still had the christma to get away with it.  The Democrats do not stand for anything except for opposing those things that the Reblicans believe in (see comments of recent congressional hearings). And, if the best candidate they can come up with in 2004 is John Kerry (and Edwards who could not even win his home state) then they are in serious trouble. This is not a viable party in its current state and there is not a single candidate currently that could prevail in 2008 today.

—ConservativeGuy


While I wrote several responses to him in my head, after a few daze of not writing back to him, I got the following message about him from eHarmony:

Match Closed: One of the hardest things about any new relationship is deciding when or if you should continue forward in a relationship. ConservativeGuy has decided to permanently close communication with you at this point for the following reason or reasons:

  • I don’t feel that the chemistry is there.
  • I think the difference in our values is too great.

Okay, where to start? First of all, no shit the difference in our values is too great. …but what an idiotic way to respond to my considered explanation of my beliefs. He might as well have said, “yeah, well you’re a poopie head.” Whatever.

I hate it when Republicans talk about things that the last election “proved” about “most Americans.” The truth is, “most Americans” did not vote for Bush, even if you don’t take into account the fact that there were many “irregularities” reported (as detailed here in Wikipedia.) The number of votes that were officially counted for Bush was somewhere around 62,040,606. According to the census reports from July 2004, there were about 220,377,406 Americans over the age of 18 at the time. That means that only 28% of adult Americans voted for him. In what world is that MOST? At best, the election proved that MOST adult Americans don’t vote…which is another thing that bothers me, but don’t get me started.

As for the Bush administration “putting the power and capital in the hands of people,” that may be true…if you mean the “People’s Republic of China,” who make an obscene amount of money from the interest on their stake in our government. As of this summer, that stake had grown to $242 billion and that’s before the Katrina pots of gold have been factored in (which are going in part to pay for no-bid contracts that have gone to some of the same companies that have been getting rich from the war in Iraq.) According to an article in the Washington Post last week, “Foreign holdings of U.S. government debt exceeded $2.03 trillion in July, meaning that every man, woman and child in the United States owes foreign investors $6,846.”

Well, in re-reading this before posting it, I realize that it sounds much more angry than I intended. The truth is that I found this exchange to be highly amusing because this guy so clearly lacked the ability or will to do what he said he wants others to do, i.e. “back up” his opinion. While it was fun to watch him become aggressive and obnoxious so quickly, this exchange has confirmed my suspicion that I just can’t date someone with substantially divergent political beliefs.

And that my friends, is why I don’t date Republicans. =-)

Posted in Diary of a Mad eDater, Humor, It's All About Me, Old Media, Politics, Print Media, Quotes, Rants, Religion, Washington Post | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments »

Are We Still In Iraq?

Posted by noetical on July 20, 2005

This is a reeeelllly long email that I wrote in October of 2002 in response to a bunch of impassioned emails that my family was writing to each other at the time about whether or not we should go to war with Iraq (it was right after Bush’s resolution, back when we still thought Iraq might have WMDs.)

The first part is my take on the pros and cons of going to war with Iraq at the time…while I cannot include all of the emails from my family’s exchange, in order to protect their privacy, with her permission, I have included an email my Aunt Jeanine wrote. It is my hope that this will provide the necessary context, as it also includes snippets from some of the emails sent by various family members on the topic, which inspired/instigated my email to them.

(FROM Noetical:)

Dear All:

I will admit that my first thought when I saw all these emails was “oh no, this side of the family is just as dysfunctional as everyone else in my crazy extended family…somehow that had escaped my notice for 36 years.  But as I began to really read, I came to realize that while my initial realization does in fact hold some truth, I am grateful to be a part of a family whose members hold strong, impassioned values and beliefs…and have the intellect and will to express them.

On March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry began his famous speech, which inspired Virginia to join in the American Revolution with words reflecting this tradition: “No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.”

It is the very act of engaging in such a dialogue that distinguishes us from many other societies…not just because we are “free” to (there are many over the course of the years since 1776 who could attest to the fact that “freely expressed” ideas led to their persecution, and sometimes even death)…but rather because we are a people who consider it a responsibility to stand up our ideas and ideals.

I might not always feel proud of “America” as a government, world force or world leader…but I always feel proud to be an American. Nationalism, just as most “isms” are, is a movement, sentiment I have come to distrust and even fear. I think of it as a curtain that governments draw so that we cannot see what the “wizard” is up to…as though we can not be trusted to understand or reason in the face of complex issues. I ask not for the right to decide what to do about the situation in Iraq, but rather for the freedom to know, to discuss and to participate in a national debate without being labeled as “Anti-American.”

There has been much talk of Hitler on both sides and personally I think that we should all learn more history…there must be other times, other monsters from mankind’s recorded past from whom we can learn.  Hitler was a manifestation of the particular circumstances that existed during that moment of our past.  While there are many lessons to be learned from our interactions with Germany during that time, please remember that one of the most valuable lessons we have learned from our past mistakes is that history can help us understand the present…but cannot adequately define it.

The world stage and human condition continues to increase infinitely in complexity, making many of our assumptions and responses to a given crisis obsolete each every evolving moment. We imperil ourselves both physically and morally if we try to define our leaders, villains and movements of today with analogies which only serve as limited pieces of rhetoric designed to win our respective arguments…this is made most evident by the fact that BOTH sides are using Hitler to quickly stigmatize each other.  Yes our world has been forged by our past…each war, each momentous event gives form to our thoughts, our understanding. But who we are and what we do is a new and unique entity that merely resembles the progenitors from whom we have inherited this earth. In order to move forward wisely during this crisis, we must strive to understand, to the best of our abilities, the ways in which the unique circumstances of this place in time must be addressed.

Albert Einstein once said, reflecting this very sentiment at the dawn of the atomic age, “The release of atom power has changed everything except our way of thinking…”  He knew that we must begin to comprehend the incomprehensible if we were ever going to survive in a world in which we were newly capable of the incomprehensible…this was back in the 50s when all the existing plans for the Vietnam situation included the use of nuclear weapons.

That said, I think we can look to our past for better understanding of our present. At 7 p.m. on Monday, October 22, 1962, President Kennedy appeared on television to inform Americans of the Cuban missile crisis. In this speech he reveals some of the internal struggle that guided his response to the crisis:

“The 1930’s taught us a clear lesson: aggressive conduct, if allowed to go unchecked and unchallenged ultimately leads to war. This nation is opposed to war. We are also true to our word. Our unswerving objective, therefore, must be to prevent the use of these missiles against this or any other country, and to secure their withdrawal or elimination from the Western Hemisphere.”

Kennedy was not only a product of WWII, but furthermore felt personal shame from the fact that his father had been an active supporter of the early policy of appeasement toward Hitler in the ’30s.  By the time he was faced with the Cuban missile crisis, it had become conventional wisdom that Hitler could have been stopped short and WWII avoided had his aggression been checked years earlier.  No one can know whether or not this is true, but Kennedy wisely saw that whether or not it was true, the situation confronting him had unique aspects which called for a unique response. His belief in the absolute intolerability of a nuclear presence so near our boarders was countered by his fear of retaliation against the people of Berlin, should we act precipitously. There are many ways in which the Cuban missile crisis could have been resolved…but I believe that it was Kennedy’s determination to fully understand the various nuances of the situation in order to respond carefully and appropriately that led to a resolution that did not include nuclear holocaust.

In another part of that same speech by Kennedy, he speaks to concerns that many of us have about Iraq today:

“Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation’s security to constitute maximum peril. Nuclear weapons are so destructive and ballistic missiles are so swift, that any substantially increased possibility of their use or any sudden change in their deployment may well be regarded as a definite threat to peace.”

I do think that while the situation is different, these words reflect the feelings of those who consider Saddam’s actions to similarly constitute a direct and deadly threat.  While I agree with them as well as JFK that the mere possession of weapons of mass destruction by a country like Iraq constitutes a clear and present danger, I am not convinced that Iraq does have these weapons…I’ve seen the U2 surveillance photos of 1962…as did the world when Stevenson argued our position at the UN. I find it difficult to believe that forty years later our technology cannot manage to supply us with comparable evidence if in fact there is any.  If it really is true that Iraq is a direct and active menace to our lives, where’s the evidence…More proof, less rhetoric please. One of the ways our government got the scientists of the Manhattan Project to develop the atom bomb was to convince them (many of them Jewish) that Hitler was hot on the trail of developing the same weapon…which of course turned out not to be true.  Regarding this, Einstein said in 1946: “If I had known that the Germans would not succeed in constructing the atom bomb, I would never have lifted a finger.”

Of course I think we should defend ourselves…but from whom and how?  I think we need to respect the complexity of the situation and respond with a clear understanding of what is actually going on.  Instead all I hear is rhetoric that challenges my patriotism whenever I question the government…

If there is anything I want to learn from the past, it is that we cannot react to situations because our leaders say “just cuz.”  They told us that all communists were evil…so we blacklisted them, feared them and persecuted them. One of the byproducts of the 1950s red scares was that any person with history or understanding of Asia was branded a “pinko” or a “commie” and was “purged” from the “intelligence” community and government. This is one of the reasons that the government so terribly misjudged so much of what happened during the years we fought in Vietnam. Most of the people who could have knowledgeably advised the President had been weeded out of his pool of advisors…Do we really think that Bush is including men in his circle who understand all the nuances of the situation in the middle-east? Yes, he has people who have waged war there, but does he have people who have spent the time to understand what it is to wage peace there? These are my concerns.

Ron Rosenbaum, in his New York Observer Article “Goodbye, All That: How Left Idiocies Drove Me to Flee,” from October 14, 2002, he gets mad when people respond to Sept. 11th with the sentiment that “maybe it’s a wake-up call for us to recognize how bad we are, Why They Hate Us.”  But the truth is that we MUST wake up and endeavor to understand their legitimate grievances, because there is no other way to begin to understand why they do what they do.  How do we fight and win a war if we don’t even understand what we are fighting against…I’m not saying that theirs is a better way of life than ours…not even close.  But my way of life has taught me to question why…and I question why because I have a belief that there is power in knowledge and danger in ignorance.  If I am willing to support a war for anything it will be both of and for knowledge.

Some have quoted Jeanine as saying, “No wonder they all hate us,” and respond by saying, “what one wonders is, how much do the people who say that HATE the USA themselves.  Do you really think that Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and the rest of those people who hate us have a better form of government?”  My point is that there is no point to reacting to Jeanine’s effort to see the other side with a statement you know she doesn’t agree with. Of course she doesn’t think Iraq has a better form of government…and furthermore, I’m sure she doesn’t think that anyone who died on Sept. 11th “deserved it” because of US foreign policy.  But honestly, do you actually want to call off any real investigation into what the complex dynamics of the situation are by dismissing any questions as disloyal?  That just doesn’t sound like my family…and it certainly conflicts with many of the values you’ve managed to instill in me.

So anyway, let’s have a trial…let’s put Saddam on trial for crimes against our nation…and let’s see what he’s done, what he is planning. Did he participate in the conspiracy to blow up the world trade centers? Does he have nukes? Inquiring minds want to know. Pull back the curtain of nationalism and let’s have it out like Americans…freely and openly in pursuit of the truth and a better, safer world.  If Bush can give us facts and evidence to march toward war…I’ll get in line.  But I’m not willing to blindly and “patriotically” accept that Bush knows what’s best for me or my brothers.  We’re talking about asking our sons and even daughters to kill and die for something.  To use your analogy…if we’re going to send our children out to kill the guy who is threatening us…shouldn’t we make sure that it isn’t just a rumor…started by that guy up the street who never really liked him? Our constitution gave congress the responsibility of declaring war because war is a serious thing and the congress is a slow deliberate body that requires the participation of multiple points of view…a process which we have skipped in the past with poor results.

I do believe that this is a struggle between good and evil…I just don’t think that we can say that the US is good and Islam is evil…to me it is much more complicated.  Furthermore, to the extent that any struggle against evil entails good…how can we “fight the good fight” without remaining mindful of what is good?  Surely the sanctity of life, even Muslim life, is paramount.  Cesar Chavez once said of violent action that “…If you use violence, you have to sell part of yourself for that violence. Then you are no longer a master of your own struggle.” Don’t let us loose what is good about America in our fervor to defend it. Chavez also said of violence that it “just hurts those who are already hurt…Instead of exposing the brutality of the oppressor, it justifies it.”  If we really are going to win a war against the ‘Islamo-fascists’ we must also win the war of minds.  You can say to the guy in Baghdad that you’re there to save him from the oppressive regime of Saddam Hussein, but ultimately it doesn’t go over as well when you’ve just bombed his house and killed his wife and children.

All that said, I guess what I’m really saying in response to the poll is that the jury is still out with me…I want to see more than just the opening and closing arguments of the prosecutor before I vote on the verdict.  The whole thing scares me and I hope we survive…sometimes I worry that we won’t…on the same days I think how lucky we were to have Kennedy on the switch in 1962.

Maybe nothing can help America and the ‘Islamo-fascists’ have a meeting of the minds. Voltaire said it well back in 1764: “What can we say to a man who tells you that he would rather obey God than men, and that therefore he is sure to go to heaven for butchering you? Even the law is impotent against these attacks of rage; it is like reading a court decree to a raving maniac.”  But the court of world opinion is populated by many who have yet to come to a verdict.  All I’m saying is that the process is important…even if the maniacs don’t get it.  It isn’t for them anyway, it’s for us.  Well, if you’ve gotten this far, you probably need a nap…I love you all and thanks for reading my rant.

Love, Noetical.

SO THAT WAS MY TAKE. FOLLOWING ARE SOME OF THE THINGS MY FAMILY WROTE THAT LED TO MY RANT:

on 10/10/2002 4:00 PM, Jeanine wrote: I’m taking a poll. A quick “YES” or “NO” will suffice…although a paragraph would be great, too. Thanks.

Q. Do you agree with the passage of the president’s Iraq resolution?

Answers as of 10/11/02:

Noetical’s Grandmother: “No. But I guess it is a done deed now.  We’ll just have to pray that he has sense enough to show a little restraint.”

Noetical’s Uncle: “No. I believe we need to take a strong position. However, we must build consensus and we should use the United Nations. We should do everything possible not to be viewed as an aggressor. I believe the benefit of taking out Iraq does not at this time overshadow the negative of world reaction and the possibility of setting off the entire Muslim nation against us. It will be a short-lived victory, solving little, unless we are reacting to outward aggression by Iraq. I fear that simple minded Bush either doesn’t understand the risk, or is simply using this for political gain, trying to detract from other problems at home, such as the economy. Sorry this wasn’t a short answer.”

Noetical’s Cousin: (He is busy with school and admits he hasn’t enough info to form an opinion, yet. I’ll bias him!)

Noetical’s Other Cousin: (I don’t have his email address. But I have reason to believe he would say “NO!!”)

Noetical: (No response yet.)

Noetical’s Brother, Morgan: “Nuke ’em says I.”

Noetical’s Sister In-law, Julia: No. I do not agree. I don’t believe we should wage war on Iraq without the support of the UN or the world community. . .”

Noetical’s Sister, Mariah: “No. I’d say more, but I don’t want to convulse and foam at the mouth right before bed.”

Noetical’s Sister, Megan: (taken a bit out of context): “No. …Our government is out of control. I think a riot is long overdue.”

Noetical’s Aunt, Jeanine: “This resolution is more than the ok for Bush to bomb Iraq. It transfers the power vested in Congress (by the constitution) to the President (one man), giving him the right to declare war whenever and wherever HE sees fit—without discussion from we-the-people. It also sets an arrogant, outrageous precedent for other nations to violently aggress against their own enemies (“Well, the U.S. does it.”). If this is not ok for other countries to do, why is it ok for us to do? Have we no shame? No wonder the world hates us!

Should we bomb Iraq right now? Absolutely not. Not without UN support. Not without proof that danger from Iraq is eminent. Not for votes. Not for oil. Not to distract us from the REAL risks to homeland security: an economy, education and healthcare system in shambles.

Can you tell which is the Terrorist Nation? Personally, I think the U.S. needs a regime change.”

END OF FAMILY EMAIL SNIPPETS

OKAY, well…that’s me and part of my family…at least when it comes to politics. I hope you found this interesting.

Best, Noetical.

Posted in Politics, Quotes, Rants | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »