How Sarah Palin Changed my Life

[WordKeeper]

joylangtry you wrote "I have to confess she's fun to watch. At least, right now she is, and I get to continue to practice detachment. "

I had to laugh -
I use Rush Limbaugh as a kind of thermometer on my healing. If I can stay detached I am healing if not I'm in the mire. Now that's a test!

[WordKeeper]

livefree - I must say, based on your post, that I don't think you really are a social liberal.

I think the erosion of personal liberties is a grave concern. I am still angry and appalled by what Bush and Cheney did to severely erode our personal liberties in the false claim that they were necessary to make us safer. I am further (not surprised but) disappointed that these intrusions have not been repealed under the Obama admin.

[Tam9]

Originally Posted by WordKeeper

I think the erosion of personal liberties is a grave concern. I am still angry and appalled by what Bush and Cheney did to severely erode our personal liberties in the false claim that they were necessary to make us safer. I am further (not surprised but) disappointed that these intrusions have not been repealed under the Obama admin.

Gosh - maybe it's because they are making us safer!

Freedom comes at some cost.......it's not a given. We can't make our country safe by doing nothing or being sitting ducks.

[Lil Chris]

Originally Posted by Tam9

Freedom comes at some cost.......it's not a given. We can't make our country safe by doing nothing or being sitting ducks.

Those who trade liberty for security deserve neither - Benjamin Franklin

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by Tam9

We can't make our country safe by being sitting ducks.

Well excuse me! I happen to be sitting down right now.

[joylangtry]

"Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. Security does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than exposure." ~ Helen Keller

I totally agree with this philosophy.

[wachusettgirl]

Originally Posted by joylangtry

"Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. Security does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than exposure." ~ Helen Keller

I totally agree with this philosophy.

This is a beautiful quote, thanks for reminding me of it. I agree with it's philosophy as well, with the understanding that it is a philososphy, and as such is useful within certain contexts. For example, if you had children in your charge, would you jeopordize their safety just for the benefit of a daring adventure?
I'm not advocating war, or torture or the violation of human rights in any way, but sometimes the people that are put in charge make mistakes because they are human, and because national security and things of that nature are complicated.
Their actions may be misguided, but their motives aren't always evil.

[aggie]

the thing that bothers me...is that our country has always criticized other countries for taking away liberties, torturing, etc...but then it is ok for us to do...and we will rationalize it any way we can to make it sound different and ok. that i don't get.

[Tam9]

Originally Posted by Lil Chris

Those who trade liberty for security deserve neither - Benjamin Franklin

What's your point here?

How do you think men have become free over the hundreds of years - by doing nothing?

[joylangtry]

Originally Posted by Tam9

What's your point here?

How do you think men have become free over the hundreds of years - by doing nothing?

I think that in general we are born free. We domesticate ourselves. All it takes is to recognize that humanity is one entity, and that my hurting you or him is also hurting me. When people understand that, these debates will be unnecessary.

In Franklin's day, people fought for liberty and gave up what many might have perceived as security.

Originally Posted by wachusettgirl

if you had children in your charge, would you jeopordize their safety just for the benefit of a daring adventure?

That provoked some reflection. My kids are 25 and 28; of course as a mother I fed, clothed and sheltered them, and taught them how to look both ways to cross the street. That's basic nurturing and common sense. But most of all I loved them and encouraged them to express themselves. My family was into skiing and snowboarding, and the kids loved to jump, my daughter competitively. There are parents who would be afraid to let their kids do that. So, they might say that my answer to your question is yes. But, I don't think so.

What I want to know is, why are people so afraid? Has everybody forgotten that life is good and we are here to enjoy it?

I need to go out and smell some roses, I think.

"Fear is the path to the dark side.
"Fear leads to anger.
"Anger leads to hate.
"Hate leads to suffering."
~ Yoda

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Tam9

What's your point here?

How do you think men have become free over the hundreds of years - by doing nothing?

The greatest danger to our freedom is not Al Qaeda. We have endured far worse losses than anything they could dish out.
The greatest danger to our freedom is not domestic terror or crime. We have dealt with these issues in the past and come out in one piece.

The greatest danger to American freedom is the fear of the American people. Our fear has put innocent folks (demonstrably innocent and noted as such by a military review board, in the case of Abdul Hamid Al-Ghizzawi). Our fear has led us to waste immense resources and thousands of lives in the wrong war. Our fear has made us accept wire-tapping and the suspension of civil rights at the center of our democracy. Al Qaeda, with all its forces rallied into a single effort, could not do as much damage to the principles this country was founded on as we did in our frenzy to stay safe.

[joylangtry]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

Well excuse me! I happen to be sitting down right now.

Daffy, are you sure you're in the right thread?

[Tam9]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

Our fear has led us to waste immense resources and thousands of lives in the wrong war. Our fear has made us accept wire-tapping and the suspension of civil rights at the center of our democracy. Al Qaeda, with all its forces rallied into a single effort, could not do as much damage to the principles this country was founded on as we did in our frenzy to stay safe.

What you are saying is fine and dandy, however what would you do? How would you handle the Al Qaeda/terrorism problem?

Do actually think that wars have taken place without innocent lives being the casualties? Surely you don't believe that past wars and campaigns for freedom have been pure with only the transgressors paying the price! There is much naivitée going on here! War is ugly! To date, there has been no delicate or innocent way to obtain freedom. The road to gaining and maintaining freedom can be very ugly.

[Brutha]

What you are saying is fine and dandy, however what would you do? How would you handle the Al Qaeda/terrorism problem?

There really one way to fight terrorism:
See that the terrorists don't get supported by the people in their country.

Therefore the goal should be to convince Muslims in the middle East that the western world is good and the Al Quaeda is bad.

When you frame everything as a war between Christians and Muslims it's clear which side the average Muslim that lives in a country in the middle East will take.

That makes it very harmful to have someone like Palin in a high office when there are videos where Palin says that the US soliders carry out Gods plan in Iraq/Afghanistan.
Framing it as a crusade is the worst possible way to deal with the problem (Overseas Contingence Operations > Great War on Terror).

After John Boyd who happens one of the most important American thinkers about the theory of war in the last century, every war gets won or lost on the moral plane, because it determines the amount of support that your enemy gets.

Moral leadership is very important in a conflict like this.

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by Brutha

There really one way to fight terrorism:
See that the terrorists don't get supported by the people in their country.
...

There's a theory that terrorists get support from people who felt done wrong by. Sounds plausible to me. The solution would be to acknowledge the wrongdoing and repair the damage done.

A book I recommend on this is 'Exile' by Richard North Patterson. It describes many aspects of the Palestine / Israel / Middle East conflict, including terrorism from both sides. Food for thought...

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Tam9

What you are saying is fine and dandy, however what would you do? How would you handle the Al Qaeda/terrorism problem?

For domestic terror, I'd treat terrorists the same way I treat every murderer. A fair, public trial with the exercise of the law. Our justice system maintains its integrity only if it refuses to bend the rules in dispensing justice. By giving the most hated people rights, the system can show it has moral superiority. It is giving a message to the killer, "Though you do not respect rights, we do. Your punishment is in defense of those rights." Any other system sends the opposite message... There are no shortcuts.

For international, diplomacy need not be soft. But it must always be diplomatic. The terrorists do a fine job alienating themselves, until we step in to provide some justification for their rhetoric...

Surely you don't believe that past wars and campaigns for freedom have been pure with only the transgressors paying the price! There is much naivitée going on here! War is ugly! To date, there has been no delicate or innocent way to obtain freedom. The road to gaining and maintaining freedom can be very ugly.

The road to maintaining freedom is not simple. It is not based on giving in to our base emotions of fear and wrath.
I am well aware that war is ugly. My father has been in one. When he returned, he was different. There was an emptiness behind his eyes. A glimmer of life that was gone. His instincts had changed. He was afraid. His stories showed, very clearly, the trauma he had gone through. It wasn't the details that revealed the damage. It was the calm way he would describe beheadings, or shrapnel wounds, or being under attack, as though they were no more than a story read casually in the Times. War is definitely ugly.

The question here, though, is not one of war. The war we went into in Iraq was utterly unnecessary. The war in Afghanistan, which may have been necessary, was blundered. But we are discussing personal liberties, not war. And the erosion of personal liberties does little to assist in war efforts. It provides less credible information than that obtained via intel efforts. It does nothing to keep prisoners from being a threat that a normal prison cell (or a max security, if we want to use that). And it ruins the reputation of the country, further radicalizing people who may otherwise help us. From both a moral and a political standpoint, it is just the wrong move.

[Tam9]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

For domestic terror, I'd treat terrorists the same way I treat every murderer. A fair, public trial with the exercise of the law.

You'd have to catch them first. What would you do to prevent yet another strike? That's why our means of obtaining intelligence has to be top notch and your objection to our losing some of our "personal liberties" is in question here. I'd be willing to forego some of mine to prevent another attack, or worse.

But we are discussing personal liberties, not war. And the erosion of personal liberties does little to assist in war efforts.

I thought we were talking about freedom and what it takes to obtain and maintain it. Also, there are no personal liberties to be had without freedom.

The big, bad terrorists out there would love nothing more than to be able to take all that away from us and impose their rules of law and ways of life on us. I guess the question is - how far would you be willing to go to maintain your current freedom and personal liberties?

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Tam9

You'd have to catch them first. What would you do to prevent yet another strike? That's why our means of obtaining intelligence has to be top notch and your objection to our losing some of our "personal liberties" is in question here. I'd be willing to forego some of mine to prevent another attack, or worse.

Well, that's the issue. Has the erosion of liberties provided substantial protection? What form of protection has it provided? The assertion seems to be that it has provided intel, classified intel that has thwarted attacks. Now, we can't know what that intel is even after the attack has been thwarted. We can't have any indication of what protection we are receiving for the liberties we are being asked to give. All we have is the bare ipse dixit of those receiving the additional power.

Oh yeah, and we also have lawyers who have reviewed the documents saying there are no dangerous secrets, generals within the military opining that we haven't received much beneficial information regarding terror, and no less than the CIA stating that most of the prisoners held at Gitmo should never have been there.

I do not find freedom cheap. If we're going to sell our freedom, we should at least get a decent return on investment.

I thought we were talking about freedom and what it takes to obtain and maintain it. Also, there are no personal liberties to be had without freedom.

The big, bad terrorists out there would love nothing more than to be able to take all that away from us and impose their rules of law and ways of life on us. I guess the question is - how far would you be willing to go to maintain your current freedom and personal liberties?

Well, we were talking about Sarah Palin . She had supported Bush's policies of keep Gitmo open, providing additional authority to the executive branch, and using "state secrets" rationale to prevent any real inquiry. Obama opined that most of these measures were excessive and has done some work to scale them back. Unfortunately, many of the measures are still in place and the justifications remain the same.

As to how far I, personally, would go: it is not especially relevant. The discussion is one of what we, as a society, should do.

To answer the question, I would give my life to preserve this country. I've taken oaths to faithfully defend the Constitution and the laws of this country and I intend to do so to the best of my ability. I've taken less lucrative jobs that require longer hours in order to do my part. I take this seriously.

[Tam9]

Yes, this is a thread about how Sarah Palin changed joylangtry's life! (and Daffy being a sitting duck) Sorry joy, but as threads often do, this one has digressed. My appologies!

As far as how far would you go to defend your freedom - I meant it in a societal context. How far would would we go collectively to defend our freedom?

As to how far I, personally, would go: it is not especially relevant. The discussion is one of what we, as a society, should do.

And this point:

Oh yeah, and we also have lawyers who have reviewed the documents saying there are no dangerous secrets, generals within the military opining that we haven't received much beneficial information regarding terror, and no less than the CIA stating that most of the prisoners held at Gitmo should never have been there.

I really find this hard to believe! All of a sudden there are no threats or at least none that have been uncovered - yeah right! The terrorists are backing off now.

I end my rant now - sorry to digress.

[joylangtry]

Originally Posted by Tam9

Yes, this is a thread about how Sarah Palin changed joylangtry's life! (and Daffy being a sitting duck) Sorry joy, but as threads often do, this one has digressed. My appologies!

.... sorry to digress.

No need to apologize. I like how this has evolved. I've enjoyed reading the views of everybody who posted.

The funny thing is, I am not politically focused at all, especially now. This thread started to be more about social and relationship issues, but in the context of a rift based on political opinions I placed it here. I pretty much expected to get some strong opinions as well as advice. I'm not disappointed.

So to update what I've done with all this discussion and advice: I've come to terms with the situation. I have found the closure I need. I have not contacted Trudy, and though at an earlier point I intended to write her a letter or call, as I prepared to go forward, I reached a final conclusion that it is time to let the relationship go.

There was a heck of a lot of additional background that I didn't include, only because the OP was so long. I won't go into it all, but reading all of the comments made here and then reassessing my values created clarity. While I can admit that my name calling rendered me essentially equal to the name involved (IOW I was acting like a F***ing moron, myself, at that moment), there is nothing I can think of that would cause me to tell a dear friend to leave my home over mere words.

When I consider some of the closeness that was shared between us, I still feel amazed that it ended that way, and it tells me that I really don't want her in my life. I have forgiven her in my heart and if she ever needs me I would not reject her. But as I said earlier, I don't believe in living in fear, and I know for sure that she does.

________________________

Personally, I think that putting all this energy into fighting terrorism is a waste of time. I think we do more damage to ourselves in our culture than any outsiders do. Being happy, feeling and sharing love, experiencing joy and similar states does more good than anything else.

Instead of putting your energy into defending your freedom, go out and exercise it. Walk down your street and say hi to your neighbors, and smile at somebody whom you may not ordinarily notice. Be kind to a stranger rather than suspicious. When you focus on the good you can do, and practice good will efforts to help your fellow humans, you may find that worry about terrorists will just kind of dissipate.

Of course, if we were all the same our world would be really boring, so... carry on.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Tam9

I really find this hard to believe! All of a sudden there are no threats or at least none that have been uncovered - yeah right! The terrorists are backing off now.

Justifying my claim:

Lawyers who reviewed the documents:
H. Candace Gorman (attorney for Abdul Hamid Al-Ghazzawi): "The government claims there are big, bad secrets in many of the documents that only we attorneys get to see. . . It is true that many bad secrets are in these documents, but the secrets that I have seen are what our government and military has done to these men. This is not about national security. This is about national embarrassment."

Military Generals:
Gens. Jay Hood and Martin Lucenti, former Guantanamo commander and deputy commander: "a large number... shoulder be there. . . and have no meaningful connection to al Qaeda or the Taliban". Gen. Hood: "sometimes we just didn't get the right folks. . . [but,] nobody wants to be the one to sign the release papers."

CIA:
CIA report from August 2002 concluded that most Guantanamo prisoners, "simply did not belong there".

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by joylangtry

While I can admit that my name calling rendered me essentially equal to the name involved (IOW I was acting like a F***ing moron, myself, at that moment), there is nothing I can think of that would cause me to tell a dear friend to leave my home over mere words.

One thing I love about being human: we all act like a f***ing moron at times . No, really, I love that. We are so complicated, so prone to small and large errors, so emotionally complex and so, so human. Yet, for the most part, we're doing the absolute best we can with the tools we have. I think Angela said that, and it has been a great solace to me in dealing with people who are acting like f***ing morons or in accepting that I have been a f***ing moron.

[wachusettgirl]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

One thing I love about being human: we all act like a f***ing moron at times . No, really, I love that. We are so complicated, so prone to small and large errors, so emotionally complex and so, so human. Yet, for the most part, we're doing the absolute best we can with the tools we have. I think Angela said that, and it has been a great solace to me in dealing with people who are acting like f***ing morons or in accepting that I have been a f***ing moron.

Beautiful... this is one of the best things that I've read here in a long time. It feels true, and so much a part of the learning and growing process that we're all experiencing in our lives in this moment, not that we're trying to be f***ing morons, but that we just sometimes are... and hopefully there are lessons to be learned.

[Andyee]

Sarah Palin changed my life too)) But in an other way:

I realized that you don't have to be smart to become a president. I mean, come on! She almost became president(McCain would not live long) after saying that dinosaurs lived 4000 years ago)) I read some news arround the world and people are laughing like hell.

[Strem2]

Originally Posted by cylon

You haven't learned anything from this discussion, have you.

Cylon, Your original post was clear and pointed. This is not.

Joy, I have had similar problems with my younger brother. We were all raised Republican. Today, I cannot say anything to him about politics because he is so opinionated.

Now, I am also opinionated, but I like to think I am reasonable. He does come back at me with Republican talking points and Rush Limbaugh quotes. Most of these "discussions" are in email.

My partner has said, several times, "If you love your brother, you won't have these discussions. Just tell him that you love him, and you're proud of him." When I follow this advice, everything is smooth sailing.

I also worked with a family who were Israeli and Pittsburgh Republican. I tried to stay away from politics, but the husband (Israeli) was so hot about that election and all the Fox talking points, and the anti-Obama Israeli position, that he would often bring up something that Hannity had said. I almost always responded even though I knew better. And, he would often win the discussion, because he didn't follow logic or abide by facts. You just can't win an argument if the other side is allowed to make up facts. His wife would just say calmly, "I'm anti-abortion, so I can't vote for anyone but Palin."

My one rule of "discussion" is never to call anyone names. Another rule is to avoid personal attacks (such as "she doesn't have the vaguest idea what she's talking about" rather than, "she's a f***ing moron". Yet, even with these two rules things can get heated these days.

Here's where I agree absolutely with Cylon! The media is filled with opinion and editorial these days disguising as news. When I was young, it was difficult to determine whether a news caster had Democratic or Republican leanings. A news story was pretty much the same, whether you were watching channel 2 or channel 5. Now, not so hard.

And, we see media wars. One politician goes on TV and says, "YWC. I would never say, XYZ!" And then the news media, representing "truth" on the other side, will show ten video's of him saying "XYZ." The people who like the politician get angry, and those who don't are amused.

This is not American. This is more like the British system. Now the Brits don't allow gun ownership, and they have the "stiff upper lip" as a national personality. Culturally, they are less violent, so the verbal sarcasm and attacks are cathartic and less likely to cause riots. In America, we have assassinated, or tried to assassinate several presidents. We kill doctors who we don't like. We kill ministers who we don't like. We kill people who have different sexual orientations than we do.

I wish we could go back to the days of Walter Cronkite where a newsman would correct the facts during the interview - because that was the job of media, to present facts/truth, not opinion.

[yossarian]

Great story. You have a real talent for story telling.

I don't have any advice but I just wanted to relate how much I enjoyed that read

"I will say it in the cold light of day: Sarah Palin is a F******** moron!"

Hilarious

[kwicherbichen]

That is so weird. I hate when stuff like that happens among friends. It really stings.

BTW, George Bush is a very funny man. He likes to come visit my university. I need to figure out the address to his house. I wonder if he will allow students a visit.