In the beginning ... what?
With no TV reception, I've been spared the recent barrage of campaign ads. But I do have Internet access, and I'm flooded with suggestions to watch this or that on YouTube, and with e-mails that begin, "You've just got to see this." Sorry. Campaign ads are not designed to inform. They're designed to persuade. If they provide any facts at all, the facts are one-sided and chosen for their emotional impact. They're the result of ...
I know from experience that all I have to do to get a response from readers is to mention the word, "abortion." My last column, headlined, "Woman chosen for wrong reason," was no exception. What I said in the column was this: "Palin was chosen ... because she is anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, and anti-evolution." But as far as the McCain campaign goes, she was chosen for the right reasons. She has energized Christian fundamentalists and through them, the rest of the party.
The United States may get its first female president after all.
Whatever happened to humility? Where are the meek, the merciful and the peacemakers? Too many people claiming to be good Christians appear woefully short on these biblical commandments.
Friday was not a good day. I was stuck in the house waiting for a repairman who was scheduled to arrive "between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m," if a missing part could be found.
Sometimes I pick up the newspaper, turn to the opinion page, and read the last line of a column or letter to the editor first, just to figure out where the writer wants to take me. The last sentence of a recent column in the Atlanta papers certainly got my attention.
My daughter saw the books on my desk. "More Bush bashing," she remarked. "Not at all," I replied.
Sen. Johnny Isakson's recent call for a compromise on energy policy is getting a lot of coverage. The Georgia senator wants Republicans to embrace conservation initiatives and alternatives such as solar and wind in turn for Democratic acceptance of nuclear power and a more aggressive exploitation of our own oil resources (Alaska and off the Atlantic Coast).
Several years ago, when I was more active with the League of Woman Voters, I went to Washington, D.C., to meet three other league members in an effort to put a budget issue on the League's national agenda. One woman was from California, another from New Jersey, and the third from somewhere in the Midwest.
When I think about the problems facing our country today, I recall a story of the man who lost his way and stopped to ask directions from an old farmer.
One of our politicians, a member of Congress I believe, defended his support for a gas tax suspension by saying that his job was to "... listen to the public and make them happy." Perhaps it's just as well I can't find that particular clipping right now. No matter which party this man represented, someone would have accused me of bias. However, both John McCain and Hillary Clinton favor the ...
When I was studying anthropology at Georgia State College eons ago, I had a professor who liked to ask the young women students how they would feel about sharing their husband with one or more other wives. Polygamy, he said, is a worldwide norm. Only modern industrial societies mandate monogamy.
The presidential race is sucking up all the available oxygen these days. Hillary, Obama and McCain are everywhere. Their every utterance is hashed over by the media and the water cooler crowd alike, and it's likely to stay this way until November.
We're told Ronald Reagan won the Cold War by driving the Soviet Union into bankruptcy. Now the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are pushing the U.S. in the same direction.
The first mistake was calling it Obamacare. Apparently that moniker was coined by Hillary Clinton back in 2008 when she ran against Barack Obama in the primaries. She called her own plan Clintoncare. We're talking about national health coverage. Why not call it that? Because the name is politically neutral -- neither a rallying cry for one side nor a cudgel for the other.
Page 1 of 1