Wednesday, March 05, 2008

No accounting for (or understanding) tastes

I have a very dear, longtime best friend. We've experienced a lot of life in tandem--college, dating, marriage, child-rearing. We even played music together for a few years. She's twice the Christian I am.

Up until recently we even agreed on politics. But she's fallen in deep like with Ron Paul. I will never, ever, ever understand this one. He's a crack pot with white supremist ties and squirrelly ideas. My favorites have got to be abolishing the IRS (as much as I love the idea of not paying taxes), shutting down the Federal Reserve and allowing for competing currencies within our borders. Then there's his unexpected take on SOX which he describes as a huge burden upon the American people. I can't quite figure out how making publically funded corporations accountable for how they spend money acquired from the public can possibly be bad for the American public.

Your family is looking for you Ron, they need some help storing their winter nuts.


Scotty said...

Which is one of the reasons why, generally, I have no real inclination towards politics and/or religion; those two subjects place far more strain on relationships than I think is necessary.

'looking for winter nuts' - LOL

Now tell us how you really feel, Mary.


Julie Carter said...

Ron Paul makes me uneasy, but I think at least half of my uneasiness is unfair. Yes, the stormfront and white supremacist and like groups adore him, and that makes me cringe.

A candidate can't control who likes him, of course. But is it telling that they do like him so very much? That's an honest question. I don't know if it's telling or just what it is. I don't know if it's fair to judge him for it. I do judge him for it (and for those newsletters! Don't get me started).

Mary O. Paddock said...

Hi Scotty. I kind of enjoy debating the existence of God and religion as long as everyone stays respectful. But I have friends who are non-believers who would prefer not to discuss it and those who do. That decision is as intensely personal to them as my decision to believe is to me.

But I've never felt particularly secure with debating politics because I'm generally inadequately armed with information and the complexity of the issues often seem to elude me.

Hi Julie. You're probably right about our mind's eye image of Ron Paul being somewhat unfair thanks to the media's spin on him. On the other hand, guilt by association isn't helping him; you've got to wonder what he's saying that they like so much. Maybe he's speaking in code.

And, yes, those newsletters really are a thing to behold. 'Reminds me of a fear-mongering Christian mag a friend subscribed me to some years ago. Their take on the government was only slightly more twisted (involved satanic rituals in the white house and so on).

Scotty said...

I kind of enjoy debating the existence of God and religion as long as everyone stays respectful.
Ditto from me, Mary.

I likewise have friends who are nullifidian and don't mind discussing the subject just as much as those who possess a faith of some description. Like you, that decision is as personal to them as my decision to remain neutral is to me.


Politics _ I have one fairly simple philosophy on that (generally speaking); as soon as one candidate (or the other) descends into name-calling, gender stereotyping, or downright mean-spiritdness, they've lost my vote. I'd rather register an informal (donkey) vote than give power to someone who would fall prey to such a juvenile tactic. Sometimes, kids fighting in a schoolyard exercise more maturity than political candidates do.

Debby said...

Careful there, the donkey vote is Democratic. Some of us are FORMAL Democrats even! Good post Mary. I don't understand the fascination either. I think a lot of people are fed up with the government. Ron Paul is a (knee) jerk response. He doesn't hold up to any amount of reasoning. The people behind him are not reasoning people. Sorry about your friend, but I believe it to be truth.