Conservatives Dating Liberals: A Guide for the Perplexed
Dear Belladonna Rogers,
I, a McCain-voting, Rick Perry-supporting, longtime active Republican ever since I donned my first “I LIKE IKE” button, have fallen in love with a liberal. We’ve been together for three months. She’s everything I ever dreamed of in a woman: very sexually attractive; highly intelligent (except for her politics); empathetic; kind; adored by my children (I’ve been a widower for two years, was married for 35, with four grown children) and loved by my grandchildren and we enjoy spending time together
Can this ever work in the long term? If so, how? Every time I see her Obama 2012 bumper sticker as her car recedes in the distance, my blood pressure rises 50 points.
Red Gent With Blue Lady in Austin, TX
Dear Red Gent,
Congratulations on finding the woman of your dreams — sort of. Since you were married for 35 years, you know that any serious relationship involves compromises, although at first glance, it isn’t easy to see what the compromise would be between Rick Perry and Barack Obama. Maybe…The Donald?
But yours is a serious question, so here’s my serious answer.
Any of several approaches may help you to make a go of this. The first three are guaranteed to fail. Why mention them at all? Because they’ll be the most tempting to do and the most important to avoid. Following them will be six positive methods that might make this relationship last. After that, I’ll discuss some of the factors involved in your and Ms. Blue’s political preferences that may, I regret to say, bode ill for a long-term commitment.
Three Prohibitions:
(1) The one that stands absolutely no chance of success is trying to persuade Ms. Blue not to like Obama. If she ever comes around to that view, it will have to be with no help from you. Depending on her personality, she could react by doubling down and becoming the last Obamaphile on Earth (other than, of course, Barack Obama), or resenting your efforts as disrespectful of her, or in a worst-case scenario, turning off you.
(2) Similarly, don’t mutter under your breath anything like, “You’re so smart. How could you ever vote for him?” See, women hear things muttered under men’s breath, and we take offense. Just because you say it quietly doesn’t mean it can’t be heard as clearly as if you had used a bullhorn.
(3) And don’t let this difference become fodder for bickering. You knew she was an ObamaGal the minute you first saw her bumper sticker, so you went in with your eyes open. Don’t pick fights over this, as tempting as that will be, or use it as a wedge issue to complain about something else about Ms. Blue you may not like. Keep politics out of your conversations.
Six Positive Approaches
(1) You could view this difference the way many couples view friends: there’ll always be some whom one of you doesn’t like as much as the other does — or doesn’t like at all. So, you could try to think of Obama as Ms. Blue’s friend whom you don’t have to like, just as she doesn’t have to like Governor Perry.
(2) You could also try to think of your political preferences as akin to having differing hobbies: you like to go duck-hunting, but you don’t insist that she join you. She enjoys shopping at Whole Foods Market, but you don’t have to tag along and be irritated by their self-righteous belief that their business is, in fact, a major religion, far holier than any actual faith.
(3) Speaking of religion, you could view this as similar to a difference of religion. You wouldn’t seriously consider trying to persuade a practicing Catholic to convert to your religion.
(4) Many couples differ on sports: either they root for different teams or one is a fan and the other would rather watch grass grow than watch a professional sports event. This is not, ordinarily, a cause for divorce.
(5) Another analogy that may help is to imagine that Obama is a relative of Ms. Blue’s whom you dislike, while Gov. Perry is like a cousin of yours Ms. B. doesn’t like. These aren’t deal-breakers in relationships, even in marriages. You just have to make sure that she doesn’t to sit next to Gov. Perry next Thanksgiving.
(6) In the ’60s, there was an expression you may recall even if you didn’t use it yourself: “giving each other space.” It sounds as goofy today as it did then, but the idea behind it — that each of you has a part of your life that you agree has a “No Trespassing” sign on it — is a good one, if you can manage it. You don’t intrude into her Obama euphoria, and she doesn’t encroach on your Lone Star principles.
* * *
As you’ve doubtless noticed, all six of these are based on a capacity that not everyone has: the ability to compartmentalize. If you can manage it, each of you would agree that your political preferences are off-limits for conversation, for teasing, for any mention at all. This is because any mention will be demeaning to the other person. There will always be an implication of, “How can you?” and, referring to the 2008 election, “How could you?” You don’t want that poisonous undercurrent running through your relationship.
One problem that may make your social life with Ms. Blue particularly difficult is that her friends may be at least as Blue as she is, while yours may tend to agree with you. How will you feel, and behave, at parties given by her friends, or over dinner with a couple of them? Have you already experienced the sense that you’re an outsider, never quite trusted because of the McCain 2008 sticker on your car? How will she feel around your conservative buddies, the sole liberal in the room or at the table? I’ve discussed this here and believe that it’s usually an exercise in pain management. Here’s one example of how opposing political views can affect a relationship:
The Inner Meaning of Political Preferences
The coping strategies I’ve suggested—no matter how seriously you try to apply them— may not work for you, because the choice of a candidate reflects deeper issues, which, in the long run, could open up a schism that turns into a chasm that finally dooms the relationship. I say this not to be negative, but merely realistic.
It would be different if you and Ms. B had met 40 years ago, and had had 40 years together during which one of you became less enamored of the core values of the Democrat Party while the other retained a belief in them. But during those 40 years you would have also raised your children together and had four decades of shared experiences. So even if, in 2012, you were to vote for different candidates, you’d still have had an accumulated lifetime of love and loyalty, not to mention 14,600 nights together. That adds up to a lot of intimacy. If, at the end of those 40 years, you had found that you were voting for different candidates, that would be a relatively small drop in a very large water tower.
The problem you’re facing is that the relationship is new and while there’s much to enjoy — not least, a woman in your life after two years of widowhood — what you and Ms. Blue don’t have is those 40 years. You’ve been together three months, which isn’t trivial but it isn’t the massive sweep of four decades, or even one. For you and Ms Blue to favor such differing candidates as Rick Perry and Barack Obama is a much larger drop in a much smaller receptacle than if you’d had 40 years of shared experiences preceding a difference of political opinion.
And there’s another thing. The fact that you wrote to me for advice implies that this difference is important to you, as it would not be to a man for whom voting for president is something he does every four years but doesn’t think much about in the years between national elections. The fact that you read www.PajamasMedia.com suggests that following politics is part of your everyday life. Politics is thus a far larger component of your daily existence than it is for a man for whom politics is like a white noise machine, whirring in the background of his consciousness, but that doesn’t rivet his attention 24/7.
LOL … Belladonna, your list omitted the question every male should ask when these conflicts arise: “Gee, we disagree … maybe she’s smarter than me?” Because in my experience, that’s the safe bet (although this reality can take a few decades to sink in).
If you’re a male (liberal or conservative) so iron-clad in your beliefs as to be 100% sure that you’re never wrong, there’s no need tell a woman … she’s already noticed it and either dumped you already (most likely), or decided to tolerate your inflexibility (less likely).
“…Because in my experience, that’s the safe bet…”
Statistically improbable. More likely, you’re just sexist.
I’m pretty ironclad in my belief that if I take a dive off of the 2nd floor balcony that it’ll really hurt at the bottom. There is the possibility that I could be wrong in this, but frankly, you’re not likely to talk me into doing that just for beeps and giggles.
Thank goodness I was smart enough to marry a man smarter than me!!
But even if she’s smarter than our correspondent, the fact is that even the smartest person is sometimes wrong — and in some cases, usually wrong. Intellect only indicates the ability to learn, not the willingness; and besides, no matter how smart you are, you are of necessity limited in what you learn by your environment. This clearly sweet lady may not have had adequate exposure to conservatism to “come to the light.” for this reason, I want to enthusiastically encourage the gentleman to marry her as soon as possible after swearing to not discuss politics. If she’s that smart and sensitive, she’ll come around anyway.
Why do I say this? Because as everyone here should know, conservatism isn’t something you talk about; it is, rather, an integral part of who you are. If she loves this gentleman, she’s probably made half her journey to enlightenment already.
Actually, men are a lot smarter than women think.
In this day and age, our customary authority as head of the family has been compromised by law; our role as provider has been usurped by the government (which provides “support” with money extracted from us at gunpoint); we can be cut off from money, property, and children at the whim of the woman and the court.
The only thing that is left is to let the women push us around until we’re exactly where we intended to be – and now it is her idea!
LOL … Belladonna, your list omitted the question every male should ask when these conflicts arise: “Gee, we disagree … maybe she’s smarter than me?” Because in my experience, that’s the safe bet (although this reality can take a few decades to sink in).
I have no trouble believing that most women are smarter than you, too.
It’s like Clint Eastwood sez: “A man has to know his limitations”!
Eastwood- A Man’s Got to Know his Limitations
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VrFV5r8cs0
Love the smilies. Do you have to pee or something?
What a fine example of pretzel logic, be it ever-so-far off the mark.
Belladonna, much of what you say makes good sense but then again in matters of the heart, reason doesn’t always rule.
Maybe we conservatives are just more open minded. In a recent Financial Times article on the dating site, match.com, the author says:
“Conservatives are far more open to reaching out to someone with a different point of view than a liberal is.” That is, when it comes to looking for love, conservatives are more open-minded than liberals.”
Anyway, good luck to Red Gent!
The full article is here: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/f31cae04-b8ca-11e0-8206-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1VBZan8T8
Expat …
That was my experience too. I went back in to the dating pool about 6 years ago now, and was surprised at how narrow-minded some of the women I met were. I would be busy thinking them “charming and fun to be with.” They were busy thinking: “Nazi.”
One evening, on a date with an attractive local theater lady — having mentioned that I was Libertarian in an email the day before — she interrupted dinner with a very strident: “What about GUNS! GUNS kill people!” Apparently she had gone out to LP.org and found a piece on Second Amendment rights and had decided that I was anathema. Why she had waited so long to shoot me down I don’t know. (I should have asked.) But there I was mortally wounded in the middle of a good Chicago $100 meal Terminal indigestion.
I thought she was foolish and uninformed, though still charming in a certain way … she thought I was a lower form of life. All of which may illustrate that men are foolish, OR that as conservatives we ARE more forgiving. Or both!
You should have replied: “No, dear. People kill people.”
Actually, it was one of those “too stunned to talk” moments.
I sometimes think that conservatives – as a rule – are much smarter than liberals. We reject “dumb” arguments after thinking them through, and assume that other people have put at least SOME thought into their opinions. So the old “Guns kill people” is completely empty as an argument, and we know it.
(I lived around guns all of my growing up. We were in a neighborhood of hunting/fishing folks in the Midwest. You expected that every home had at least one loaded firearm. In 59 years of experience, no one was ever hurt.)
The stunner is the emotion that liberals put into their weak arguments. They are genuinely incensed. Pure, raw emotion reigns. Reason – like Elvis – has left the building. At least for me, it’s a bit like talking to someone who is unbalanced. I just don’t what to rile them any further.
There’s a kind of tyranny in this method of argument. Or maybe demagoguery would be the better word.
I think your were correct with tyranny. It’s a tactic they use to shut any and all conversations down.
But I know what you mean by the raw emotion. I made the mistake in laughing at a liberal friend once. She’s not my friend any more.
I was discussing the damage of liberals taking fathers out of the home to society and the woman I was speaking to was almost hysterical about abusive husband and fathers. I told her the evidence didn’t support that statement. She just sat and whimpered. I told her I was sorry she was upset (but not upset about what I said) and she said it was all so upsetting. I literally laughed out loud (the idea that a statement so upset someone like they were affected personally hit my funny bone) and asked her how it could be upsetting to her as it didn’t affect her at all. She just sniffed and whimpered some more. Ho well!
Very true. Crazy people kill people. Good people shoot crazy people before they kill people, or before they kill more people than they’ve already killed. And that’s a good thing, eh? I mean if you can stop a sociopath shooter before he can do more harm, that’s good thing, right? Is this were the Code Pink harpie throws her martini in your face?
Dear Red Gent:
Better she be Blue than you, back away from this temptation. It is one thing to have supported Obama in 2008 and quite another in 2012. At the least she is going to want to redistribute your money and watch a whole lot of MSNBC. Life is short, now pick up the phone and call that nice widow from church you’ve seen at a couple of RNC fundraisers. You know, the one your kids like.
As nice as Ms. Blue may be, if she thinks we need four more years of Obama, well, let her down gently. Some of those liberals have hair-triggered tempers. Good luck.
I find I’m in agreement with you. Politics is a world view. It is what defines your values – your morals. I just don’t believe you can live with someone whose beliefs are so antithetical to your own.
I would have to agree. I recommend one more night of raunchy sex, then cut her loose to suck the life out of some other poor bastard.
Brilliant… LMFAO…..Totally agree though, I tried the dating a progressive liberal once and only once… She was German…. that probably says it all, those folks don’t seem to have an inbetween… either its the ‘big schmile, big schmile, gang or its the socialism uber alles gang…
We had a tiff about an afterwork appointment I had and she wasn’t happy, turned up and called me outside and then was given the 3rd degree what sorta man are you that you didn’t take her feelings into consideration deal… ho hum, tried and the word is tried… to explain that this was a regular conservative club event I have been attending for X years and she was welcome to attend… Oh My, she threw a hiss fit, called me a Nazi and then threw herself onto the grass and kicked her pretty little legs and feet line a 9 year old… Suffice to say I was amazed and just started laughing like a look, one of the best pieces of comedy theater I had seen in a long while…
I binned her that night…
Damn Nut Job… Oh yeah and when I visited her house I was intructed to pee sitting down!!! Of course I did….just used the sink instead…
Cheers,
Doc: Somali Basin
When the newness and it’s excitement (mainly physical attraction) wears off, what will you be left with? As a woman who found herself in the dating pool again in my late thirties, political leanings were my number one attraction point. I would not have cared how attractive a liberal man was or how lonely I was. His views would have acted on me stronger than a cold shower. God smiled upon me and rewarded my patience. I have a wonderful conservative husband who is also attractive. While he admits to having dated a couple of liberal women before we met, he claims he knew deep down it would not be long term. I worry that you will eventually be turned off by the beliefs of Ms Blue. In fact, I am almost certain. The good news is that the lesson learned will make you even more grateful for the conservative woman in your future. And don’t worry, there is a much bigger pool of attractive and smart women in the conservative pool anyway!
Four words for Red Gent: James Carville Mary Matalin
In defense of those who voted for Obama in 2008 — and I admit there isn’t a lot to be said for them — there were some significant minuses to McCain.
Sure he was a war hero — but all those stories about him losing his temper under small or no provocation, that suggests to me that his tortures in a North Vietnamese prison camp may have left him with some significant brain damage. (And since when does being tortured inside a prisoner-of-war camp make someone a war hero? That term used to be reserved for soldiers who take out enemy machine-gun nests singlehandedly, against incredible odds, etc. If Mccain had successfully escaped from the camp — that would make him a war hero. Spending lots of time inside there being tortured, no. Confusing the concepts of victim and hero is exactly the sort of thoughtless liberal nonsense that conservatives should guard against.)
And let’s not forget his tropism toward pleasing the MSM. Didn’t he just recently refer to tea-party members as “hobbits”? That’s the McCain I’ve known and disliked for years; nice to see he hasn’t changed. And as for executive ability, let’s not forget that during his several runs for president he had a hard time organizing his campaigns, with staffers back-biting each other in the press and quitting amid bursts of bad publicity. That’s not a good sign about a politician’s ability to be president.
And finally he was rather old. Old people’s abilities very widely, and every voter who knew others as old as McCain who definitely no longer had the physical stamina or mental acuity to be president would have regarded that alone as reason enough to vote for the other candidate, unknown though he was. In short, there were some strong reasons to vote against McCain in 2008. In the long-run, it may well be that after the presidential nominating conventions America was doomed to having a bad president in office 2008-2012 no matter what.
He is a war hero because he refused early release, and endured years more of inhuman treatment because he was loyal to his fellows in prison. That takes real grit and, whatever else you may say about him, he MUST be honored for that. Obama is a pygmy beside him, if only for that reason.
I’ll gladly second that. John McCain is a true American hero. Which is what makes it so hard to listen to him agreeing with Obama on closing Gitmo; to hear him defend illegal immigration as being some sort of sin on *our* part; and to sit patiently by while he joins with Al Gore in telling us — nay, berating us — that we need to pass Cap and Tax, which would suck hundreds of billions of dollars out of our already-failing U.S. industrial economy in order to appease a THEORY that the power of Man eclipses that of the power of NATURAL climate fluxuations, the power of the Sun himself, and the power of (massive gas-emitting) global plate techtonics. McCain is a hero. His policy recommendations are a disaster of the first order.
All true, along with how he wanted to run a “respectful campaign” against Ayers’ pal, being real polite and all. But this was about our country– not McCain. He did not fight hard enough.
And he suspended his campaign to rush back to Washington in order to demonstrate how awful his judgement is. Why rush back to vote with the ruling class? He could have done that later.
But he had one impossible-to-ignore thing going for him… He was not Obama.
If it matters to either of you, no.
You’ll hate her, she’ll loathe you, then things will get bad. Try something with a chance, like a vegan mail-order bride with whom you share no common language, culture, religion or race.
You are attracted to her. OTOH, she seems to be seriously attracted to you as well. Part of it likely is because you are a conservative. Remember, you stop being a conservative, she will lose interest.
So push the pedal to the metal for some real sparks. Set up lunch dates in the afternoon and make her listen to Rush Limbaugh.
It’s not just the ability to compartmentalize.
It’s also the ability to put things in proper perspective.
Such a relationship can work if the both of you realize that there’s much more to life than one’s political beliefs. And that does come easier to mature (or even senior) folks than to the young.
A young man or young woman hasn’t had time to develop perspective. For them, politics can take on a near-apocalyptic significance. (At those Obama rallies in 2008, it was young women, not 70 year old retired women, who were swooning at Obama’s feet.) Young people are so prone to following fads and getting infatuated with Popular Causes that it can become the most important thing in their lives. For them, trying to deal with their obsessive concern with their favorite cause can be nearly impossible.
James Carville, a staunch Democrat who was one of Bill Clinton’s top advisers, fell in love with and married Mary Matalin, a staunch Republican conservative who was one of Pat Buchanan’s advisers. But they were already in their late forties when they started dating. By then, both of them had come to think of politics as a fascinating game, NOT the future of Western Civilization.
Sinz54, your thoughtful post reminded me of Robert Heinlein’s novel of a (very successful!) rightie-with-leftie romance: Double Star.
The nice thing about Heinlein’s story is, folks respect each other’s differences. Indeed, that’s very largely what the story is about.
That is so special. Respecting the mindset of others. Except, of course, when life-or-death matters are on the line. Or maybe that is too stark. How about mere success-or-failure matters? Should we accept the sensibilities of all persons? Where shall we take this?
Frank, yah seem like one of those guys (many of whom are posting on this topic) for whom correct politics is more important than passion-and-love.
I reckon Robert Heinlein’s Double Star is not the book for folks who feel this way.
The book you want is Norman Spinrad’s The Iron Dream.
——————————————-
The Iron Dream
URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Iron_Dream
This seems more like infatuation, which is based on sexual attraction, than the type of love that makes for the foundation of a lasting relationship.
Infatuation involves projecting all manner of good qualities on the object of one’s attraction that may or may not actually exist.
The letter writer’s infatuation with someone who has the poor judgment to support Obama in 2012 is similar to the infatuation displayed by too many voters taken in by Obama’s “hope and change” rhetoric in 2008.
Not good.
Here’s my advice to the letter writer:
I do not agree with Belladonna’s assertion that you should not try to educate this woman. I think that you SHOULD try to do so, and if she remains obdurate or if she dumps you, then that tells you that there is a fundamental incompatibility of values between you and her that would have been fatal to a genuine long-term relationship.
Liberalism is often the product of indoctrination on the part of parents, peers, and the public school system. If she is so loyal to those influences that she cannot even give you a fair hearing when you debunk the liberal perspective, that reveals another problem – you don’t come first in her life. Don’t marry a woman unless you are certain that she is willing to attach her primary loyalty to YOU.
What are your spiritual views? How do they compare with hers? You need to do some talking with her about those deeper issues as well.
In some cases, liberalism is not only the product of indoctrination, but also the outward sign of a real spiritual sickness. Please give this a careful reading: Why Modern Liberals Are 100 Percent Wrong About Everything
Let’s start with a lamentable demographic fact: Women tend to be much more liberal than men. So if you want to spend time with a woman, it may not be a good idea to simply rule out liberal women.
Women traditionally take the role of nurturers in our society. Even though feminism tries to deny this stereotype, the solid truth behind it comes up all the time. Women would much rather be elementary school teachers or nurses than guys would, for example. Naturally, people who want to care for others tend to focus on the fate of those in need of care – the poor, the dispossessed, the losers in life. If you feel that way, and you don’t have any particular empathy for the people who produce the wealth you would like to see shared, you become a liberal.
So in understanding your liberal, realize that the problem is of perspective. She sees people in desperate need of resources, and this shadowy “government” has billions. Surely under enlightened leadership we can help the poor avoid their bleak fate?
There are interesting problems with the liberal perspective. First, it shows no empathy with the people who make the money, or even any knowledge they exist. Look at Obama’s speeches where he treats the rich and private jet owners as though they are evil. Second is that programs for the poor do surprisingly little for the poor and surprisingly much for those who run the programs. This is what conservatives have to explain – but it’s a difficult sell for those who are focused on the needs of the poor, and a hugely difficult sell for those who have benefitted from the programs.
In short, don’t think of liberals as evil. Feminist activists are, but garden variety liberals, those closer to the mushy middle who don’t think much about politics, just want to think of government as helping people.
Now, curiously enough this doesn’t mean you can change her views. People are surprisingly resistant to persuasion of this type. Remember, she is giving herself credit for being compassionate for being liberal, and being in society’s in-group from all she’s seen in The View.
So don’t think you will change her, but do think that if politics is not a central part of your relationship now, it doesn’t need to be in the future, either.
Hope that helps.
David
— “Let’s start with a lamentable demographic fact: Women tend to be much more liberal than men. So if you want to spend time with a woman, it may not be a good idea to simply rule out liberal women.Let’s start with a lamentable demographic fact: Women tend to be much more liberal than men. So if you want to spend time with a woman, it may not be a good idea to simply rule out liberal women.”
Unless you are a Muslim male with an attitude.
Well, it is one thing to be a liberal, or even a Clinton liberal. It is another thing to have been an “Obama liberal” in the last election cycle.
But it is a whole different ballgame to be an “Obama liberal” after watching his act for almost 3 years. Because Obama is not a liberal.
Sure, you can tone down the political discussions in order to avoid conflict, but an Obama 2012 bumper sticker, or anything even remotely in that category, should be causing alarm bells and warning sirens to go off inside your head.
one question
does red gent’s girlfriend know he’s a republican?
most liberals assume everyone within their social bubbles are liberals also
things might get ugly once that bubble bursts and reality is unimpeded
Yes, she does. In his original (much longer) email, from which I published a shortened version, Red Gent made it clear that their political cards are on the table and that Ms. Blue is well aware that’s he’s a conservative. Thank you for your question that helps clarify the situation.
LOL … David, how many “evil feminist activists” do you conceive there are in America?
• Tens of millions? All of them evil!
• Tens of thousands? Who are *very* evil!
• A few dozen? But they’re TREMENDOUSLY evil!
• Just Maureen Dowd?
Hint: under *no* circumstance debate this topic with your date!
I’m thinking about the Gloria Allred types who sue hair salons for charging women more for styling than men. Of course women’s styles are more complex and most men are far less picky, thus lower prices for men are not unreasonable.
That’s evil. I couldn’t’ date Gloria even if I found her cute. Actually, I think I did when I first saw her but once I saw how strident she was, I changed my mind real quick.
There are probably thousands of them. I doubt tens of thousands.
D
Having just recently wasted six good years with a “liberal” who, as a Bahai, thinks Islam is exactly the same as every other religion, thinks Barack Obama deserves another chance and just loves David Suzuki (shudder), I have another word of advice. RUN!
If both of you view it as a positive factor it will bring you together rather than drive you apart.
For example, you can both stay home on election day because your votes will cancel out.
Of all the lame advice only the this phrase has any concrete value; “following politics is part of your everyday life”.
Compartmentalize that.
The short term relationship is motivated highly by testosterone chemistry. The long term relationship will be influenced and be formed by intellectual values. It is not a question of liking a man (Obama) or not liking him, it is a question of what they represent intellectually.
If you can subdue and eradicate part of your intellectual capacity, then go for it.
Otherwise, in the long run it spells catastrophe or submission. Now as a non-American man I think………….(I better stop here)
Anonymous, you write, “It is not a question of liking a man (Obama) or not liking him, it is a question of what they represent intellectually.”
You seem to have completely skipped this part of Ms. Rogers’answer:
“The coping strategies I’ve suggested—no matter how seriously you try to apply them— may not work for you, because the choice of a candidate reflects deeper issues, which, in the long run, could open up a schism that turns into a chasm that finally dooms the relationship. I say this not to be negative, but merely realistic.”
Ms. Rogers herself says that the choice of the individual.
candidate “reflects deeper issues.” That’s what you seem to have ignored in her column when you wrote your comment.
Finally, I don’t think her advice is lame at all. I think it’s excellent.
I have always taken the position that whereas the issues we’re debating are serious issues what we think about them doesn’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. Of course our votes count and what we think has some influence on the people around us, but opinions are fluid and we can be mistaken. I find this approach to be reasonable but it hasn’t worked with many of my liberal friends. That may be because for the liberal, liberalism is a religion, not just a political point of view. They’re really serious. As someone (Bernie Goldberg?) said: conservatives think liberals are mistaken; liberals think conservatives are evil. You can’t live with a person who thinks you’re carefully considered opinions are evil.
My wife is much more liberal than I am, but she’s able to reason (rare in liberals) and because she owns a home and runs a business she has to be practical. She doesn’t want bums and petty criminals roaming the streets, she doesn’t wand a lot of illegals coming into the country and she’s aware that black ghettos are dangerous places and that it’s not racism but their own attitudes that make them that way. She’s halfway to being a conservative and for the rest we just agree to disagree. But we’re older, we’ve known each other for a long time.
There has to be on some level the awareness that political dialogue is a game, a real and ernest game, but you have to have some objectivity to the world of ideas. That’s, in my opinion, the mature and civilized way to look at it.
Writing of you wife, you say, “She’s halfway to being a conservative and for the rest we just agree to disagree. But we’re older, we’ve known each other for a long time.”
Then you write:
“There has to be on some level the awareness that political dialogue is a game, a real and earnest game, but you have to have some objectivity to the world of ideas. That’s, in my opinion, the mature and civilized way to look at it.”
My comments: Anyone who believes that “political dialogue is a game” has clearly not read the histories of dialogues with Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Maybe in your neck of the woods it’s a game but out here in the very dangerous real world, political dialogues are far from any game.
Finally, if you ever want to write a few words 1,000% guaranteed to be taken as supercilious, pompous blather, be sure to end your comments exactly the way you did by writing, “That’s, in my opinion, the mature and civilized way to look at it.”
Whoah. You didn’t notice the haughty, arrogant condescension spewing from your words? You and you alone of all the commenters here are the “mature and civilized” one? That’s your unmistakable implication.
What I’ve learned from reading Internet comments is that when the commenter describes him- or herself as “mature and civilized,” it’s time to grab your watch, your wallet and your women and get away from the “mature and civilized” person as fast as possible. No one in the room is less likely to be either mature or civilized. When you truly achieve maturity and a state of being civilized, others will say it of you. You won’t have to announce it of yourself in such an unseemly fashion. Good luck learning true maturity and the hallmarks of a truly civilized person. You may not be young now, but it’ll still take another ten or so years before you learn not to alienate others by lording it over them with your self-satisfied, pain-in-the-a** self-satisfaction. It may feel satisfying to you, but it sure doesn’t fool the other readers here.
You persuade no one but yourself. The rest of us are extremely suspect about your motives and your
self-satisfied tone.
Do politically opposite couples break up more often than politically alike couples?
If so, what does this mean for our Republic?
Must it break up too?
David,
That is a hilarious take on the liberal mind. And so true. Especially “being in society’s in-group from all she’s seen in The View.” Spot on!
I sympathize with the writer’s predicament. I am in a similar situation except my husband is a liberal and I became a conservative in 2008 when I saw what the democrats did to Hillary and to our country. It has been a very tough road for me because prior to that I was one of them. Completely indoctrinated by family, school and peers to be a liberal. Liberals were good. Conservatives were mean and selfish. I cannot tell you enough how that philosophy permeates liberal culture. I figured out the truth for myself, I still have pretty much no conservative friends or acquaintances, as it is difficult to make new friends later in life, except for a couple of people who do not live my city. My husband and I have negotiated this new terrain by arguing horribly for awhile, and now we just don’t mention politics. It has been hard for him as well, as when he married me many years ago I was a liberal like him. And now I’ve changed. (Grown up).
I guess you folks (the writer) will have to figure it out, but sheesh, those uber liberal women can be awfully nasty. (Although there is hope, as I used to be one of them.) It is a complete orthodox religion and identity for most of them. And they definitely have a moral superiority in their minds. They honestly think they are more evolved than everyone else. I guess it depends on how big a role politics plays in your lives. I do know of a couple who voted differently, woman for Obama, Man for McCain. They are a good example of folks who can do it right. They respect eachother enormously, and don’t take politics personally. Both of them are quite open-minded and have each voted at times Repub and at time Dems, they are not lock-step with anyone, so it can be done. They also don’t even always tell each other who they voted for. I just heard about their political situation recently, as I have known them for years and they have a lot of interests, I think politics is a bit down the pike in order of importance for them. Good luck to you.
Why would an intelligent, capable, mature woman support Obama? Several possibilities: it is in her economic interest because her job or family is dependent on big government, her social/cultural circles are overwhelmingly liberal, she is ideologically committed to an abortion-friendly culture and all that implies, or she prefers that women be dependent on government rather than men. Some of these reasons have serious implications for marriage. Some do not.
I know that these kind of relationships CAN prosper, but those are long odds. Every time I see James Carville blurting out some mindless drivel on TV I am reminded of Mary Matalin’s abundant tolerance, and marvel at the fact that we have not yet seen the headline “Matalin Carves up Carville with French Knife”.
Speaking for myself, I could never enjoy happiness with a left-wing woman. I would be incessantly rubbing her nose in her hypocrisy and stupidity and no doubt she would either kill me or leave. Fortunately, I am married to a beautiful, intelligent, thoughtful conservative woman and we have been together for 30 years. We agree on everything political and not quite everything financial. My accountant (a conservative) is married to and works with a flaming liberal, and she hates to see me walk through the door because she knows she’s in for a dose of harsh reality… and it bugs the hell out of her (and amuses her hen-pecked husband who simply cannot discuss politics with her).
I’m fascinated by the hubris here. Many comments admit no space for open conversation or questioning of one’s own positions, only emphasizing the wrongness of the “other”. That doesn’t bode well for any relationship, for a society, nor for personal learning/growth. I think it’s great to stake out a position and hew to it: figure out what you believe and advocate for it. Hopefully based on broad research, historical perspective, and contextual understanding.
The idea that anyone, or any political position, has it all right all the time, is almost certainly flawed. The positions of conservatives in 20 years (maybe in 2) will be different, to some degree, than they are today. As will liberals. If we all keep on thinking.
And in that regard, being around those with differing opinions can be very helpful. Especially if you like and respect the way they think, and you’re capable of having interesting conversations about politics. Which can never be the same as simply trying to indoctrinate someone to your position.
Almost a century ago my mother, recently orphaned and living with her older sister and brother-in-law, was asked out by their next door neighbor, an Italian-American Catholic and a VERY nice man–I later met him!
My mother asked my aunt about it and my aunt, a member of the immigrant generation (my mother had been born in the USA) said, “DON’T START!”
I am of the opinion that this is operative here! (And this would hurt me because there are very few conservative Jewish women.) Today politics, especially to Pajamas Media followers, is as important as religion, so why set yourself up for stomach-churning arguments every time you see a bumper sticker?
Stay away!
Good points. I’m a conservative Jewish woman, although I didn’t see the light until 2008 when I saw what a tool Obama was. There must be other conservative Jewish gals out there. You are wise to stick to your core values. Good luck.
Jewish mother, Christian father. I’m about as conservative as they come. Self-described ‘fundamentalist conservative’ (as opposed to ‘conservative fundamentalist’)… My first vote cast was for RR II.
Gotta say, my best friend is a liberal. My dad is a leftist liberal (thinks that Nixon killed Kennedy and Jerry’s heart attack was engineered by the CIA… gotta love it) We all get along with each other and stay away from discussing politics.
I’d date a liberal guy (wouldn’t even ask about politics up front) – as long as he wasn’t rigid or intolerant. I wouldn’t want to date a conservative guy if he was rigid or intolerant – even if I shared his politics.
I want to congratulate the author on a well thought-out response to Red Gent. I think both political beliefs and religious beliefs spring from a set of values that each individual develops over time. Sometimes, if political beliefs are dominant, they influence religious beliefs, and sometimes it happens the other way around.
I once heard Chris Rock state in his comedy show that if two people are going to make it work, then they need to be in agreement. If both partners love to smoke crack, then they can have a wonderful relationship. But if one loves to smoke crack, and the other is born again, that relationship is doomed. It got a lot of laughs, but there is some truth in it.
Nevertheless, agreement at the level of core values is essential for long term compatibility. And I would like to add my own experience as an example. 6 years ago, my ex-wife had an affair which led to our eventual divorce after I learned of it. Last December, I began a romance with a woman who differed from me dramatically in both religious and political beliefs.
Initially, the romance was very satisfactory. It was wonderful, especially after experiencing the feelings of rejection that always accompany finding out your spouse has cheated on you, to feel wanted, admired, and desired by a beautiful young woman (she was 9 years younger than me.)
But this particular woman was from Romania, and her father had been a high ranking Communist Party official. And she grew up enjoying the benefits others in Communist countries did not enjoy because of her father’s position of prominence. Furthermore, while I was raised in an Evangelical Christian home where we attended church 2-3 times each week, she was vaguely conversant in Eastern Orthodox religion that she practiced every once in a while as it suited her.
At the outset, I was determined not to judge her for the differences, and just enjoy the relationship. But at some point in the relationship, she just assumed that I agreed with her values, and started making demands that conflicted with my values. And I compromised my values for a while in order to continue in the pleasantness of the relationship. But she did not see it as compromise. She saw what I was doing as “normal.” She did not even perceive a compromise on her part. And I am sure, because we talked about it later, that she also compromised on things that I viewed as normal.
But then, we both began to assert our “normal” values concerning child rearing (she had a 5 yr old son, and I had three teenagers), church attendance, intimacy, political ideology, etc. And we started having conflict. And it wasn’t like we were fighting. But I would draw back when she asked for certain things she considered normal. And she would hesitate when I asked for things I thought were normal.
When that happened, she and I felt a gap in our relationship. It created emotional conflict even when there was no outward fighting. She did not understand when I said “No” to a request she thought was minor. And she had tremendous difficulty accepting things I thought were very small requests. The reason for this conflict was a disagreement on the fundamental level of our systems of value. We agreed on our attraction and affection for each other. But we did not agree on core values about life.
Ultimately, this disagreement was too much to overcome. I never told her, but I, whose family came to America in 1630 and fought in every American war, had a very hard time listening to someone extol the virtues of Communism. She just couldn’t understand why I believed intimate sexual relationships should wait until marriage, and she just assumed my daugthers were intimately involved with their boyfriends. The thought that I would teach them to guard their virtue was a foreign thought to her mind. She wasn’t hostile to it. It just never occurred to her that it was even desirable. And when I was silent when she espoused views that conflicted with the values I inculcated into my daughters, my daughters would look at me oddly because I didn’t immediately contradict them.
The bottom line is that even though we had a genuine affection for each other that continues to this day, the reality of our fundamental differences at the core value level doomed our relationship from the start. I empathize with Red Gent. After losing his wife, it is heart-warming to find someone who genuinely likes you and wants to spend their time with you. But my recommendation is to keep her as a friend. You don’t have to judge someone harshly because they disagree with you. But ultimately, intimacy is more than physical attraction or emotional pleasure. It also includes general agreement on the core value level. Before you hurt yourself, or hurt the woman you genuinely care about, examine whether the compromises you will be asked to make are things you can actually do. Otherwise, you will begin to resent her for “making” you compromise yourself, and she you.
The key word here is ‘compromise’. A compromise is a bad bargain. You compromised your principles and values. A bargain is when the parties involved find some common ground, and both walk away content with the deal. You get no bargains, only compromise. Ugly, ugly compromise.
All righty then!
Thanks for sharing.
I would not get involved with a liberal woman. No way. The things that drive anyone to be liberal go far deeper than politics. You can tell which way a person leans (or will lean) politically by watching how they handle their lives and problems. There is a decidedly different life philosophy of liberals vs conservatives and it shows.
I can’t stand the liberal philosophy and it bleeds through to the decisions and actions in the person’s life that has adopted that philosophy. I don’t see how the subject of the column could have missed it. Probably a case of the little head thinking for the big head I’m guessing.
Dear Red Gent,
You are an older man. Widower, married 35 years until death did you part. You are a hot commodity to older women. Do not ever forget that. She either treats you and your politics with kid gloves, or you find another woman. You decide how to spell that out for her gently.
Relationships are all about who has what power. People need power over their lives. Married folks are surrendering some of their power to their partners and get some in return. If a person finds he is always surrendering and not seeing it reciprocated, the relationship is doomed. So, be careful how you wield your strategic advantage. You shouldn’t make her surrender, but use your advantage to get her to agree to not make you have to surrender on politics. Find the balance.
Still, I doubt you will be successful. Liberals tend to be not too rational when it comes to politics. Not all, to be sure. Much depends on how important politics are to each of you. She might be Liberal in what she espouses politically, but there may be a huge cognitive dissonance, as she may be actually more Conservative in how she lives. However, if you revile Liberals, and she reviles anything to the Right of Che, you are doomed. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
And there are other fish in the sea. Lots of equally wonderful Conservative women. Why reward the Liberal?
“Why reward the Liberal?”
Never thought of it like that. But I will from now on. No “treats” for the libs.
A great column topic. However this is not a political debate, it is a religious one.
She knows that utopia is right around the corner for everyone but that Conservatives are holding it all back. How is this different from the narrative of sin, Satan, faith and redemption?
We all felt that way in our teens and twenties. Any argument will simply be perceived as an attack on the religion. This is understandable given that she has had zero exposure to anything else.
I would keep the messenger safe by introducing or mentioning the views of ‘others’ – not yourself. Like a great column your read in Pajamas. It’s worked great on my wife. I send her all the latest VDH all the time.
Dear Red Gent:
Find yourself a nice conservative woman. You’ll certainly have a wide range to choose from. You don’t have to have this one. There are better ones out there for you.
My liberal friends (and most of my friends are liberal) do things I wouldn’t dream of. Over the years, I’ve seen them cheat on their taxes, treat illegals rudely, excuse their own teen-age kids’ misbehaviors and instead blame the police for catching them, and lie whenever convenient. And other things.
Now I love these friends (many of them life-long), and I’m not saying all liberals do things like this. I’m just telling you my experience, and these things are why I couldn’t be married to any one of them. I’m glad to be married to a man whose values and behaviors match my own.
In addition, I think things are going to become more divisive in the future, rather than less, and that will make it more difficult for couples who are opposites on the political spectrum.
My advice: Get her drunk as a skunk so that she is too sick to vote. Every little bit counts…
Since my divorce, decades ago, my first question to a woman has been “What do you shoot?” .. That one question filters out about 90% of the problems.
I’ve found that we can negotiate from that point onward.
If you aren’t liberal when you are young, you have no heart. If you aren’t conservative when mature, you have no brain.
I prefer women with both spines and brains.
I fell madly in love with a lady that who was the political polar opposite of me. She was equally in love and things progressed as they do.
A year, and many arguments passed, but we remained madly in love and wanted to take the next step. So we’re engaged and scouting out wedding locations, our parents are delighted, our siblings tolerated and the arguments continued.
Then shortly before deposits were made the arguments still continued. It was at that point that I realized I was about to marry someone who not only disagreed with my core beliefs but who denigrated them. It was then that I realized to my horror that love only gets you so far.
It was then that I made the hardest decision in my life and called off the whole thing.
I’ve know been married for six years to the love of my life and in retrospect the hardest decision of my life was also the best. I don’t feel differently about my first fiance but I know the right decision was made.
I truly hope our red gent makes the right one for him.
I think I have something important to contribute to this discussion. I am a conservative Republican who has been married 34 years to a liberal Democrat. She is a Kucinich for president voter. I am, I guess you would say, a neo-con. We met in the early seventies when I too was a liberal. I had actively supported McGovern and marched with her in an ERA rally, etc. But when we had children I quit smoking dope, I opened my eyes and saw what Jimmy Carter was doing to the country, and I saw who Ronald Reagan was and I voted for him and have never looked back. She needs me, and I need her. She labors mightily to make a good life for both of us. There is not a better woman on Earth. But conservatism is not in her. She has a liberal mother, I had a conservative father – maybe that’s it.
I have tried from time to time to expose her to my line of thought, but you are right, she just digs her heels in. So we mostly avoid politics between us.
There is so much more to life than how you vote, unless maybe there is a civil war on. But even if that were happening my duty and instinct would be to protect her. I don’t really understand how this works – I have never understood women. But understanding everything about life is a hopeless task.
If you respect each other, at a level deeper than politics, then go with it. That is what counts.
I couldn’t discuss politics at all with my liberal (ex) girlfriend. She would become enraged any time I tried to use facts. And then say that they couldn’t possibly be true. She didn’t have facts supporting her side. Just feelings.
Every conversation became a minefield. It always seemed like she was arguing with a caricature of a Republican, not with me. Several times I felt like looking over my shoulder to see who she was talking to.
Here on PM I can say that I would like to be able to help everyone but there just isn’t enough to go around, and you get what I mean. To a liberal that means that you are evil. Their self-image is completely tied to wanting to be perceived as wanting to help people. Whether they actually help people is completely irrelevant.
So, like, here’s the problem as we seez it. “Conservatives” tend to be much more tolerant of difference than libs. It isn’t a question of whether our gallant friend can live with differences vis-a-vis his red flame. The question is whether she can tolarate him. Liberals, in our experience, invest much more of their identity in their politics than conservatives, perhaps because liberalism is, at the core, based on unhappiness with that which-is. This unhappiess is a force of negation, resistance. When she turns it on you, dear Friend–watch out!!
I’d agree with that, I’d also add that generally speaking conservatives are generally able to discuss their beliefs more rationally and more dispassionately than most leftists who value “their feelings” above logic and evidence.
“But hers [Ms Blue's] is a loyalty to a politician whose lack of leadership skills, whose lack of judgment, whose inability to speak to a class of sixth-graders without a teleprompter are reasons that might give a 2008 Obama voter pause in 2012.” Ha! ha! God I love that. Thank you, Belladonna Rogers, for this delightful, whilst insightful, “advice” piece.
So you are in love with a Liberal. Get over it. When Liberals interact in any (repeat ANY way) with Conservatives it’s because they see a payday. Conservatives get up and go to work every day. That’s what’s important to Liberals. Unless this chick has a big trust fund get rid of her. And if she has a big trust fund recognize that she’s going to throw you over for some penniless PolySci prof in about 5 years. She probably has his phone number in her speed dialer right now.
I was born conservative in a family of mildly lefties, by the age of ten I had given up on all. I went to college in Austin which even in the dark ages was trending “loser magnet”. I often left dates half way through a party if they could not understand that all they were preaching never had worked, never would (ONLY those arranged dates with sororities etc. not real dates)Thank God this is Texas, lots of strong women with good sense. In the intervening half century I don’t talk to people who know people who talk to liberals, I fire anybody with an AlGore et al sticker. I don’t know anybody with an Obama sticker. One would think I would be hated but we are invited everywhere– maybe just as a “Bad Example” the wife goes some, I never do. Nothing but bad can come from a mixed marriage— sign me Neanderthal
Dear Red Gent. I have read all of the posts in this thread and my advice to you is this:
Run.
Run like there’s a psycho killer stalking your immortal soul. Run until you lungs feel set to burst, and then run even harder. Do not let this steel-clawed liberal harpy sink her poisoned talons into your exposed dorsal flesh. Give the rabid doberman your arm, that you might wrap the other around her torso and snap her spine. It will hurt like hell, but it will be better than losing your face and throat to the beast. Good luck.
Love is a powerful emotion,and I must admitt to having been in a relationship with a woman who were liberal,and even though every brain cell I had told me to break it off,I just could not,until I absolutly had to.It’s not going to work,and if you try to make it work,you will regrett it,and that is a truth that everyone must learn for themselves,so I will say no more about that.
However,I must add this question to Bellodona’s article.Exactly what is with people who insist on believing that Mccain was tortued in Vietnam,as if God himself had said it instead of a man who had great political ambitions and very little if any respect or love for anyone in this world except himself?Why would the North vietnamese have tortured this man? Exactly what would they have retrieved for their efforts? He was flying the A-4 skyhawk,an aircraft simple in design,that had been in the U.S. Navy’s arsenal since the fifties.He himself was a mediocre pilot with nothing to tell them.This type of silly assumption of the truth is disappointing coming from someone with such talent as Bellodona.T.
How incredibly naive you are.
T: “Bigfoot” is being kind. Your comment reveals not only naivete but also simple ignorance. You write:
“Why would the North vietnamese have tortured this man? Exactly what would they have retrieved for their efforts? He was flying the A-4 skyhawk,an aircraft simple in design,that had been in the U.S. Navy’s arsenal since the fifties.He himself was a mediocre pilot with nothing to tell them.”
All war-time torture is not for the purpose of obtaining secret information. In McCain’s case, as in enormous numbers of torture cases, the whole point was to persuade the Prisoner-of-War (POW) to read a statement, on camera, denouncing his own country. Such statements are then disseminated all over the world (Viet Name, FYI, was pre-Internet) and TV stations would show the American POW saying that the United States of America was an evil nation engaged in an evil war.
That’s what John McCain’s North Vietnamese Geneva Convention-flouting captors were trying to get McCain to do—not, as you believed, give up some secret Defense Department war plans.
In case you don’t know what the Geneva Convention is, here is a summary from Wikipedia: The articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) extensively defined the basic rights of prisoners (civil and military) during war; established protections for the wounded; and established protections for the civilians in and around a war zone. The treaties of 1949 were ratified, in whole or with reservations, by 194 countries.
North Vietnam did not abide by the Geneva Convention during the Viet Nam War.
Without meaning to be unkind, it helps to know a little history before you attack any columnist on PJM. Your ignorance led you to insult Belladonna and to reveal how little you know of the purposes of the torture of POWs by rogue governments.
A gentleman (or gentle lady) would apologize.
SEMPER FI— I assume that if Belladonna is writing here,she is an adult,semper fi,and can endure a little dissagreement without falling to pieces.I have no apologies for having a differing point of view and expressing it in a decent way,which is what I did,and you do not need to stand up for her,and fawn over her,she is,after all,a wordsmith,is she not,and more than capable of taking care of herself? Nor is she a God.I am aware that the North vietnamese,like the North koreans in Korea,tortured American military personell for the purpose of extracting confessions which were publicized.And just for the record,our hands are not entirely clean in this type of thing in any conflict the United States has engaged in.However,I do not believe Mccain was tortured.He was injured when shot down,and the North Vietnamese imprisioned him and treated his wounds,but the Admirils son was not tortured.And by the way,I’m no lady. T.
Dude, don’t be so desperate. Dump this lib and head off to any candidates Republican hq. That place will be CRAWLING with available damsels waiting for their prince conservative.
You’re vulnerable and you’re not thinking straight. I mean, this is for the REST OF YOUR LIFE.
On a macro scale, Cultures follow survival rules like in the animal kingdom. If one does not find a way to safely perpetuate and defend its territory, it goes extinct…quickly. You would both need to have one foot outside your own herd. Thus Political culture would need to be at arms length for both and they would need another cultural overlap like religion, class, or hobby etc…to keep them bonded and able to communicate in a shared language.
If he can afford the possible pain and struggle, I would not actively discourage him trying. If after his previous loss, he definitely could not financially, mentally, or emotionally afford a future divorce, then it sounds like poor risk.
Obama, Perry, and Presidential Speech
The Obama White House is absolutely aghast, appalled, and chagrined but not over the president’s record low approval numbers or the unemployment rate. Instead, trashing about for something to distract the electorate from his monumental failures, Obama and his brain trust were all exercised ove their latest target, Texas governor and GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry and his ”inflammatory rhetoric” regarding Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
Perry had the temerity to suggest that if the Obama-Bernanke Fed prints more inflated greenbacks over the next year or so, prior to the general election, it would almost be “treasonous.”
Speaking in Iowa while President Obama was traversing the same region on what Mitt Romney called his “magical misery bus tour,” his taxpayer-funded, non-campaign trip in a million dollar, black-shrouded, Canadian-manufactured vehicle on his quest of votes next year, Perry said of Bernanke, “If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I don’t know what y’all will do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas.”
Gasp!
Those statements were interpreted by Obama’s primary, global news mass media supporter, Reuters, and by the White House as “threatening.” Not incidentally, the London-based, leftist-oriented Reuters has rarely printed a negative word or article about Obama although it verily overflowed with George W. Bush invective.
Also, to clarify, the Washington-based Federal Reserve System doesn’t print money, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing does. However, the 12 Federal Reserve banks serve as America’s central banking system and the Fed is responsible for destroying currency deemed unfit for circulation, a destructive task it has lately been accomplishing in more ways than one.
Newly-announced presidential candidate Perry was speaking extemporaneously in Iowa, absent an Obamian requisite teleprompter prop, when he issued his “threat,” which is far less threatening than a teleprompter malfunction would be to the president.
No doubt, Bernanke, re-appointed as Fed chairman by Obama, would be greeted in the Lone Star State for what he is, a shill for the administration and a “one-worlder” who has little fear of inflation or deflation and has vowed not to repeat past errors of the Federal Reserve which resulted in the Great Depression even as his monetary policies are heading us in the same direction, or worse.
No reasonable observer thinks Perry was seriously suggesting Bernanke would be physically assaulted in Texas and White House Press Hack Jay Carney was engaging in typically over-reactive, hyperbolic campaign rhetoric when he chastised the governor by saying, “I certainly think threatening the Fed chairman is not a good idea. . .”
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5227)
Does that mean it is a conservative trait to bluster and swagger a little about physical threats, but to know heh, heh, that it is really just kidding? Hey, maybe Bernanke is a terrorist…or acting like a terrorist.
I have to live with both groups, and have felt the wrath of both. What is most amazing is how many on both sides are absolutely blind to their own, er, traits. Are libs more emotional and feeling oriented than righties? Well yes, except when the righties are more emotional.
There are rational arguments to support and debunk both sides and there are great (and not so great) passions as well. The damned trick is to know which way to turn our car at any given time. Some times you choose one side to drive the car, sometimes the other and you do your best to get them to stay on their side of the road, but not drive the damned car into a tree to the left…or the right of the road. Of course, those of us in the middle of the road aren’t in a particularly safe place either and have to swerve some too.
Here is the problem: When in your twenties, a lib might be smokin’ hot. She might stay smokin’ hot for quite a while, but maybe you were counting on something else to happen:
If you are not a liberal when you are twenty, you have no heart.
If you are not a conservative when you are forty, you have no brain.
When she is still a liberal at forty-something, you know she has no brain. Since her looks have probably faded, too, the decision is pretty easy.
And in the grand tradition of liberals…. Apologies to anyone who I might have offended… etc., etc.