No Reaching Out

I have always asked, do I have to agree with you in order to work with you, share with you, talk to you, without being judged?  I have listen to attorneys of late that I like and respect resort to hatred and name calling all because of this election.  Although I have not been a huge Obama fan, and had thought well of McCain over the years, their convention was frightening as it was nothing but saber rattling.  Now, ALL of those that simple disagree with points of his campaign are so severely lambasted.  McCain's performance at the last debate and those robocalls were dispicable. I personally think it is because of this tactic that McCain will lose.  He cannot allow his staff, his VP nominee, and he cannot rev up his supporters, to call those that do not agree with them radicals, elites, socialist, and worse, and suggest the large majority of American's are anti-American who somehow need to be investigated.  You simply cannot malign so many, display contempt for your neighbor, and be so hateful to those who care for you, but might not fully agree with you politically, and expect to be able to work with people later.  You cannot deny everyone else the right to exist and then not expect them to be resentful later.  I have never understood why this tendency has always gravitated toward the religious right.  It would seem they would foregiving if nothing else.  But, most often they can represent the most vindictive and hateful people among us.  Whether it is because of latent racism or a since they are losing control, I do not know.  It probably varies for each one.  All I know is that it is not becoming.  Below is a Congressman at a Palin rally. Tomorrow I will voting for Obama.  Is he the best man?  I do not know.  Will he be a good president?  I do not know.  But, almost like a parent in which you know you cannot reward bad and dispicable behavior, you cannot reward the hard right and McCain/Palin with the presidency of the United States.

Comments

[Dan Nunley]

Hey Chuck, that's not a Texas Congressman is it? He talks real good don't he?

And America shouldn't be so quick to judge "Crazy Tracy." She's brave enough to sit down with the media and be up-front about her views. And when you really listen to what she says, her concerns don't seem to be so outrageous. She's concerned with Obama's outlook on racism and religion and how that would affect his policies. And there's ample documentation of Obama's speech and writings to legitimately question his beliefs regarding both issues. Liberals are always concerned with how Conservatives would allow their religious beliefs to impact their role in government, whether as President or Supreme Court Justice, so why can't Conservatives ask the same questions of Liberals? Isn't turnabout fair play. Liberals don't really expect freedom of expression and tolerance of differing viewpoints do be a one-way street do they?