Noet All

What's Going On With The "Stimulus" Bill?

President Obama's first major piece of legislation is being called the "Stimulus" Bill by the Democrats, the "Welfare State Giveaway" by the Republicans and "H.R. 1: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" on the Hill. While trying to make sense of what is actually in the bill, I found an excellent site called, GovTrack that allows people to track legislation as it winds its way through Congress.

Following is the description of the bill from GovTrack: 

Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.

In addition to providing the full text of the bill, the site also offers an update feed of all the bill's legislative activity. If it's working correctly, it will automatically update this post with the most recent activities in regard to the progress of this bill.

Following is that feed:

I hope you find this as informative and helpful as I have!

Best, Noetical.

Have You Voted Yet? My Early Voting Story...What's Yours?

So I finally voted. I live in Los Angeles County in California, and there is only one place to vote early here:

   

It was an interesting experience to say the least. First of all, it was a pain to go there, as the only place to early vote is about an hour from my house. Once I got there, the line took me two hours to get through...that's two hours exactly to get to the part where I was given my ballot. Then it took another half hour to find an open booth, vote and double check my selections. While standing in line, I talked to the various people standing around me. Most were Obama supporters, as you might expect in Los Angeles County. The guy standing in front of me was very nice and wore an "Obama for President" T-shirt until we got close enough that he was required by law to remove it. At first, we talked generally about why we supported Obama. He was an African-American male in his 40s, I'd guess. Nonetheless, he was adamant that Obama's superior intelligence was the primary reason for his support for Obama. (For the sake of the remainder of this post, I'll call him ObamaShirt.) Here's a picture I posted on twitter from the early vote line of ObamaShirt:

   

One of the crazy realities about voting for the first African-American to run on a major party ticket for President is that many people feel the need to defend their vote in some way. I suppose as a white liberal woman, I should feel defensive myself. I should feel the need to explain that I'm voting for Obama for reasons other than "liberal guilt." Were I a black woman, I might feel the need to explain the reasons for voting for Obama other than his race. Perhaps not. 

Since I'm not black, it's hard to suppose who I would be if I were. As it is, I find it difficult to feel anything that would necessitate a justification for my Obama support. I'm not saying that I'm immune to liberal guilt, I'm just saying that it isn't something that overwhelms my consciousness to the point where I notice it as a primary motivator. 

In fact, my support for Obama as a politician and leader is the strongest I've ever felt in my adult life. This support is grounded in an appreciation for the breadth of knowledge, keen insight and wisdom he has exhibited during his public life. The confidence I have in his abilities is too strong to stem from guilt or obligation. 

Now, before you go running for the antidote to the Kool-Aide you're now convinced I must be drinking, I will say that I have much lower expectations of what Obama will be able to accomplish as President than I do of what I believe he has the capacity and desire to do. Much to the chagrin of most candidates over the years, a President does not have the power to unilaterally execute his promises. Even with an expanded definition of the powers of the Executive Branch, Bush was unable to push though 100% of his agenda (thank goodness.) 

I believe Obama will be a more effectual leader than most, however. One thing that he seems to have an innate sense of, is the fact that the power of a President flows from his connection to the people. As such, I believe he will utilize his exceptional communication skills to rally the populace behind his political agenda. But I digress... 

So, I'm standing in line with Obama supporters in front of and behind me. At one point, I take a moment to discuss Proposition 4 with a woman standing a few people in front of me. It requires a waiting period and parental notification before minors can obtain abortions. We discuss the ways in which that might be problematic for girls who have abusive parents and; we agree that someone considered old enough to take responsibility for a child should have the right to decide if that is something she is willing and ready to do. 

Not long after that exchange, ObamaShirt brings up Proposition 8, which essentially eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Turns out, that like many people, ObamaShirt has eclectic political views and; not all of his views were "liberal." By the way, I'm fine with that. While it is true that in general I consider myself a "liberal," my politics are not "liberal" down the line, as I take each issue as its own question. I find labels to be ambiguous at best and misleading at worst, especially considering the ways in which the meaning of this word and its opposites continually evolve. 

I'm "conservative" when it comes to many economic issues, "liberal" on many social issues and "centrist" on various other issues. For instance, I strongly believe in a person's right to believe that the first woman was made from a man's rib, but I don't want my tax dollars to be spent on teaching that to children in our public science classrooms. I think it is more appropriate to teach the Bible in church sermons, Sunday school classes and in the home...which by the way are the places I learned about God growing up. But I digress again...one of my bad habits =-) 

I won't go into the discussion we had at length, but suffice it to say that the conversation included him retrieving his Bible from his backpack to read Leviticus 20:13 to me:

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

I with the old "slavery is in the Bible" argument. When that didn't work, I countered with Leviticus 20:18:

"If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from their people."

This passage basically means that it is also an offense to God for a man to sleep with a woman when she is having her period, even if that woman is his wife. Since most Christians don't consider that to be the taboo that they believe homosexuality is, this seemed to be a legitimate route. Unsurprisingly, this line of reasoning failed to sway him as well. Ultimately, I grew tired of the argument and moved on to crowd watching. 

Happily, I noticed at that moment that Larry Wilmore, regular contributor to the Daily Show was standing about ten people behind me in line, waiting to vote. I walked back and accosted him for a photograph. As someone who has spent most of her life living in either Los Angeles or New York, and who has worked in the entertainment industry for many years, I've met quite a few celebrities, including Jon Stewart several years back. Nonetheless, I've never asked someone famous if I could take their photograph before. I guess I've been socialized to leave celebrities alone for the most part. 

The thing is, it was just too perfect that I had been standing in line, waiting to vote for an hour and a half, trading Leviticus passages with a stranger, and one of the guys from the best political satire show of our time happened to be standing in line with me. Had to ask him! He was very nice about it. The photo didn't turn out, because the light was bad and I had to take it with a borrowed cell phone...but at least I have the story! 

So that's my story of voting early. I don't know if it's worth it for everyone to vote early...but I'm happy I did. It was certainly an adventure...one that could only happen in this crazy democratic experiment they call the United States of America! 

Whether or not you vote early...DO vote. You'll never wait in line for a ride or movie or concert that makes more of a difference in your life than the vote you wait to place in this election. And who knows...you may just get a few great stories out of the experience!

Why "Trickle-Down" Economics Has Lost Favor Since Katrina.

ENOUGH!

Last Thursday night, along with about 38 million other Americans, I tuned in to watch Barack Obama give his historic acceptance speech for the nomination of his party. I have to admit that I was already a strong supporter, but I was happy to be so powerfully reminded why. I'm proud to support a candidate who will stand up to the powers that be and say, "ENOUGH!"

As he began to lay out the case for his economic plan, over John McCain's, he obliquely referred to "trickle-down" economics:

"For over two decades, he's subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy—give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is—you're on your own. Out of work? Tough luck. No health care? The market will fix it. Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps—even if you don't have boots. You're on your own.

Well it's time for them to own their failure. It's time for us to change America."

As most people know, this weekend is the three year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina causing 53 different breaches in the levees surrounding greater New Orleans, which led to eighty percent of the city being submerged in water. When I hear the term "trickle-down economics," I can't help but think of those poor souls crowded into that stadium, rain dripping from above, to weather the storm. After spending most of the Labor Day weekend that year, transfixed by the Katrina coverage, I posted a brief response, which listed four words, which had started running through my mind that weekend, and corresponding quotes:

"AMERICA," as in: "Is this really happening in AMERICA?"

"POVERTY," as in: "If you live in POVERTY, you don't have an SUV to drive out of town before the hurricane arrives."

"LEADERSHIP," as in: "People aren't frustrated by the lack of LEADERSHIP, they're dying because of it."

"WATER," as in: "The streets are filled with WATER!" and "Where the fuck is the food and WATER?"

The aforementioned words inspired the following QUOTES OF THE WEEK:

AMERICA:
"I love AMERICA more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually."
—James Arthur Baldwin
"If we ever pass out as a great nation we ought to put on our tombstone 'AMERICA died from a delusion that she had moral leadership.'"
—Will Rogers
"I believe the most solemn duty of the American president is to protect the American people. If AMERICA shows uncertainty and weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This will not happen on my watch." (...unless you're poor.)
—George W. Bush

POVERTY:
"It is a tragic mix-up when the United States spends $500,000 for every enemy soldier killed, and only $53 annually on the victims of POVERTY."
—Martin Luther King, Jr.
"The mother of revolution and crime is POVERTY."
—Aristotle
"POVERTY may be the mother of crime, but lack of good sense is the father."
—Jean de la Bruyere
"POVERTY is the worst form of violence."
— Mahatma Gandhi

LEADERSHIP:
"One of the true tests of LEADERSHIP is the ability to recognize a problem before it becomes an emergency."
— Arnold H. Glasgow
"The only safe ship in a storm is LEADERSHIP."
—Faye Wattleton

WATER:
"You don't drown by falling in the WATER; you drown by staying there."
—Edwin Louis Cole
"WATER, WATER, every where, Nor any drop to drink."
—Samuel Taylor Coleridge

I can't help but notice that the quotes I posted that day resonate even more today than they did three years ago.

Quotes of the Month

Hello Readers!

Long time no post. Sorry about that. As you can see from my last post, I finally found someone to keep me out of the comically miserable world of online dating. While I've thought of many other topics about which to comment since then, I haven't gotten around to posting any of them.

In an effort to break open my writer's block, I've decided to gather some quotes here that I believe speak to some of the craziness bouncing around the airwaves this month about religion in the public square. In fact, there have been various moments in this unusually long presidential primary season in which God, Christianity, the Bible and differences in creed have emerged. In addition to Romney’s "Faith in America" address on December 6, 2007, one of the more memorable of such moments happened at the May 3, 2007 Republican debate, where one reporter asked the GOP hopefuls the following question:

"Is there anyone on the stage who does not … believe in evolution?"

Of the 10 candidates, three (Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee and Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo) raised their hands. Brownback has already dropped out of the race and Tancredo’s numbers are still too low to count, but Huckabee is surging to the front in many polls. He’s become what you might call a “contender.” This actually makes sense, given that according to a recent Gallup poll, 68% of Republican voters  say they DO NOT believe in the theory of evolution (compared to 37% of Independents, 40% of Democrats who don't and 48% of Americans overall.)

Given that in a 2006 poll, 84% of Americans said that religion played a very or fairly important role in their lives, no one should be surprised to see the candidates for the presidency wearing their religion on their sleeves. Even the candidates of the relatively secular democratic party are testifying about their faith and its importance in their lives. Thus, with candidates on both sides of the "aisle" flinging religiosity at the cameras, I thought it was time to look at some of the things that others have said in the past about God and about religion's place in society. I've gathered quotes from a variety of voices, from various points of view. I'll leave you to figure out mine from the editorial choices I've made, both in selection and juxtaposition. I will open with one of my favorite jokes by Emo Philips, which is exactly on point:

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, "Stop! Don't do it!"

"Why shouldn't I?" he said.

"Well, there's so much to live for!"

"Like what?"

"Well... are you religious?"

He said yes.

I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?"

"Christian."

"Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"

"Protestant."

"Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"

"Baptist"

"Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"

"Baptist Church of God!"

"Me too! Are you original Baptist Church of God, or are you reformed Baptist Church of God?"

"Reformed Baptist Church of God!"

"Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?"

He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!"

I said, "Die, heretic scum!", and pushed him off.

QUOTES OF THE MONTH:

Mitt Romney:
"There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree."

Quentin Crisp:
"When I told the people of Northern Ireland that I was an atheist, a woman in the audience stood up and said, 'Yes, but is it the God of the Catholics or the God of the Protestants in whom you don't believe?'"

Thomas Jefferson, 1816, in a letter to Mrs. H. Harrison Smith:
"I never told my own religion nor scrutinized that of another. I never attempted to make a convert, nor wished to change another's creed. I am satisfied that yours must be an excellent religion to have produced a life of such exemplary virtue and correctness. For it is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be judged."

James Madison, 1785, Memorial and Remonstrance:
"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other sects?"

John F. Kennedy, Address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on September 12th, 1960:
"I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish—where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source—where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials—and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all."

Dan Quayle:
"...I pledge allegiance to the Christian flag and to the Savior, for whose Kingdom it stands, one Savior, crucified, risen, and coming again, with life and liberty for all who believe."

Benjamin Whichcote:
"Among politicians the esteem of religion is profitable; the principles of it are troublesome."

Aldous Huxley:
"At least two thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity, idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political idols."

Mitt Romney:
"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom."

Thomas Jefferson:
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.

Wendy Kaminer:
"I don't spend much time thinking about whether God exists. I don't consider that a relevant question. It's unanswerable and irrelevant to my life, so I put it in the category of things I can't worry about.

Francis Bacon:
"Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation; all of which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, even if religion vanished; but religious superstition dismounts all these and erects an absolute monarchy in the minds of men."

George Santayana:
"My atheism, like that of Spinoza, is true piety towards the universe and denies only gods fashioned by men in their own image to be servants of their human interests."

Margaret Mead:
"We will be a better country when each religious group can trust its members to obey the dictates of their own religious faith without assistance from the legal structure of their country."

Pat Robertson:
"...There is no such thing as ... separation of state and church ... in the Constitution. It's a lie of the left."

Thomas Jefferson, in a Letter to Connecticut Baptists:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

John McCain, Campaign Speech of February 28, 2000:

"I recognize and celebrate that our country is founded upon Judeo-Christian values, and I have pledged my life to defend America and all her values, the values that have made us the noblest experiment in history. But public—but political intolerance by any political party is neither a Judeo-Christian nor an American value. The political..."

(APPLAUSE)

"The political tactics of division and slander are not our values, they are..."

(APPLAUSE)

"They are corrupting influences on religion and politics, and those who practice them in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country."

(APPLAUSE)

"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right."

George Washington:
"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."

Abraham Lincoln:
"The United States government must not undertake to run the Churches. When an individual, in the Church or out of it, becomes dangerous to the public interest he must be checked."

Mitt Romney:
"...in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America—the religion of secularism. They are wrong."

Barry Goldwater:
"Religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives."

Sinclair Lewis:
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."

Martin Luther:
"Religion is not "doctrinal knowledge," but wisdom born of personal experience."

George J. Mitchell:
"Although he's regularly asked to do so, God does not take sides in American politics."

John Dietrich:
"The President of the United States summons the nation to church on Thanksgiving Day to give thanks to "Almighty God" for the abundant harvest and all other blessings. But what has Almighty God—I have no desire to appear irreverent—what has Almighty God as a personal being to do with the harvests? If it is he who produces our crops, then being Almighty there should never be a failure of crops. But since crops frequently fail, it follows that there is no Almighty person in charge of them—unless he brings failure purposely. Therefore, if God is to be thanked for large crops, he must be blamed when the crops are a failure. . . . If God sends the rain and the sunshine which develops and ripens our wheat, who sends the storms and the insects which destroy much of it? And if he sends both, then why not thank him for one and blame him for the other?"

Rabbi Sherwin Wine:

"There are two visions of America. One precedes our founding fathers and finds its roots in the harshness of our puritan past. It is very suspicious of freedom, uncomfortable with diversity, hostile to science, unfriendly to reason, contemptuous of personal autonomy. It sees America as a religious nation. It views patriotism as allegiance to God. It secretly adores coercion and conformity. Despite our constitution, despite the legacy of the Enlightenment, it appeals to millions of Americans and threatens our freedom.

"The other vision finds its roots in the spirit of our founding revolution and in the leaders of this nation who embraced the age of reason. It loves freedom, encourages diversity, embraces science and affirms the dignity and rights of every individual. It sees America as a moral nation, neither completely religious nor completely secular. It defines patriotism as love of country and of the people who make it strong. It defends all citizens against unjust coercion and irrational conformity.

"This second vision is our vision. It is the vision of a free society. We must be bold enough to proclaim it and strong enough to defend it against all its enemies."

Susan B. Anthony, on the Women's Suffrage Platform:
"I tell them I have worked 40 years to make the W.S. platform broad enough for Atheists and Agnostics to stand upon, and now if need be I will fight the next 40 to keep it Catholic enough to permit the straightest Orthodox religionists to speak or pray and count her beads upon."

Thomas Jefferson:
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg."

Ulysses S. Grant:
"Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep the church and state forever separate."

Albert Einstein:
"Science can only determine what is, but not what shall be, and beyond its realm, value judgments remain indispensable. Religion, on the other hand, is concerned only with evaluating human thought and actions; it is not qualified to speak of real facts and the relationships between them."

Anaïs Nin:
"When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow."

Benjamin Franklin:
"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."

Noam Chomsky:
"Three quarters of the American population literally believe in religious miracles. The numbers who believe in the devil, in resurrection, in God doing this and that—it's astonishing. These numbers aren't duplicated anywhere else in the industrial world. You'd have to maybe go to mosques in Iran or do a poll among old ladies in Sicily to get numbers like this. Yet this is the American population."

Albert Einstein:
"Scientists were rated as great heretics by the church, but they were truly religious men because of their faith in the orderliness of the universe."

Galileo Galilei:
"The intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how heaven goes."

Clarence Darrow, at the Scopes trial, Dayton, Tennessee, July 13, 1925:
"I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure—that is all that agnosticism means."

E. B. White:
"Democracy is itself, a religious faith. For some it comes close to being the only formal religion they have."

Frederick Douglass:
"I prayed for twenty years but received no answer until I prayed with my legs."

Ralph Waldo Emerson:
"The religion that is afraid of science dishonors God and commits suicide."

Galileo Galilei:
"I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reasons, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."

James Baldwin:
"If the concept of God has any validity or any use, it can only be to make us larger, freer, and more loving. If God cannot do this, then it is time we got rid of Him."

Karl Marx:

"Religious suffering is at one and the same time the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is therefore in embryo the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo."

Mark Twain:
"Man is the religious animal. He is the only religious animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion—several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat, if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven."

Jonathan Swift:
"We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another."

Blaise Pascal:
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."

Albert Einstein:
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Susan B. Anthony:
"I always distrust people who know so much about what God wants them to do to their fellows."

Thomas Paine:
"I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. I believe in the equality of humans; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow creatures happy."

Jane Wagner, (line from The Search for Intelligent Life in the Universe, performed by Lily Tomlin, 1986):
"One thing I have no worry about is whether God exists. But it has occurred to me that God has Alzheimer's and has forgotten we exist."

Gore Vidal:
"I'm a born-again atheist."

Sigmund Freud:
"Religion is comparable to a childhood neurosis."

Clarence Darrow
"I do not believe in God because I do not believe in Mother Goose."

Henny Youngman:
"I once wanted to become an atheist but I gave up . . . they have no holidays."

On that note... I wish you all a very MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

Best, alita.

Maybe We CAN Just Get Along...But We Still Can't Date.

Hello everyone!

Welcome again to the annals of my adventures in the world of eDating. Before I begin, I would like to say that those of you who read these entries should feel free to enjoy my amusing anecdotes without feeling sorry for me in the least. Not all of my experiences have been bad...the bad ones are just funnier to write about. Besides, as I've mentioned before, I don't consider the good guys fair game. Speaking of which, while this guy is not someone I would date, as it turns out, he's not such a bad guy. For that reason, I actually asked his blessing to post this exchange with the caveat that I would remove any personal information that might identify him in any way. I really wanted to post this correspondence because it evolved in a way that I found interesting. In order to provide you with some background, I will begin with my online profile for Yahoo Personals, where he approached me. (Note: most of the initial details, like "Sense of Humor" and "Social Setting" are canned responses from which I chose as many as applied.)

About Me:
Gender: Woman seeking a Man
Age: 39
Marital Status: Single - never married
Body Type: Fit
Height: 5' 7"
Eyes: Hazel
Hair: Auburn
Ethnicity: Caucasian (white)
Sense of Humor: Friendly, Clever / Quick Witted, Dry / Sarcastic, Obscure
Social Setting: Shy at first, but warm up quickly, Home Body, Better in small groups, Comic Relief
TV Watching: News Junkie, Movies, Documentaries, Channel Hopper, TiVo is my best friend
Living Situation: Alone, With pets, Family and friends visit often
Have Kids: No
Want (more) kids: Yes
Education: College Grad
Employment Status: Full-time
Occupation: Entertainment / Media
Income: No Answer
Religion: Not Religious
Attend Services: Never
Political Views: Very liberal
Astrology: Libra
Languages: English
Interests: Arts, Dancing, Family, Movies, Listening to Music, Outdoor Activities, Reading, Travel, Cooking, Computers / Internet, Television, Gardening, Crafts, Health/Fitness

My Headline:
I don't care what car U drive...

In My Own Words:
...but, I *do* care if you're cute, smart, funny, treat me with respect & get my jokes (CLUE: if you're thinking right now "tell me one," you most likely won't get them =-)

WHAT I LOVE: Music that makes my body move; all-out, heart-pounding, lung-burning workouts that flood me with endorphins; books that make me forget where I am; movies that make me cry, laugh and/or think; people who make the world a better place; my mind & its perpetual motion; meaning & the search for it; laughing out loud; talking to bright people; learning something new; finding money in an old pair of jeans; being madly in love with someone whose very essence is intrinsically magnificent to me, just as mine is to him; savoring a root-beer float once every six & a half years (keeps 'em fresh!)

ABOUT ME: I believe in the beauty & complexity of the universe & cherish my time here, but if you consider creationism or "intelligent design" a science, I'm sorry but we are not a match. I am a drama-free (though not passion-free) zone, as I've always felt fortunate and prefer to laugh at life's absurdities than cry of misfortune and play the victim. The full expression of my attention, energy & thoughts is a lovely force that can transform & enrich the lives of those around me. However, since I find myself & the world highly entertaining, getting my attention can be difficult...keeping it can be even harder...that is, unless you possess wit, are curious, intelligent and have a "good heart." Beyond that, I'm looking for someone with whom I feel safe to be my whole, magnificently flawed self. He needn't be without flaws, fears, doubts or weakness himself, but he must be willing to risk the discomfort of that journey...wherever it may lead. Come on...it'll be fun! =-)

ABOUT YOU WITH ME: We'll make each other laugh...even in difficult moments. We won't keep our opinions to ourselves, but we'll *never* have to wonder whose side the other is on. We'll be comfortable letting each other "do our own thing"...even when we're occupying the same space. We'll have each other's backs, even when we're facing each other. We'll inspire each other to be better people. When we look at each other, we'll know how lucky we are to be together, making it difficult to keep our hands off each other...and mostly we won't ;-)

PLACES I'VE BEEN: Italy—Venice, Rome, Milan, Florence, Pompeii, Naples; Belgium—Brussels, Bruges; England—London, Bath, Bristol; France—Cannes, Nice, Paris; Germany—Munich, Hamburg, Berlin, Frankfurt; Austria—Vienna, Salzburg; Canada—Toronto, Winnipeg, Montreal; Switzerland—Zürich, Genèva; various cities—Bangkok, Sydney, Warsaw, Dublin, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, Budapest, Amsterdam, Tijuana ...& all over the US.

FINAL FACTOIDS ABOUT ME: Jane Austen is my 13th cousin, 6 times removed (whatever that means;-); Princes William & Henry are my 8th cousins (sadly, I never get invited over =-); Pres. Bush is my 10th cousin, once removed (NOTE: sorry, but if you like or voted for him or his father, we're NOT a match); I get most of my news from the NY Times & "the Daily Show;" I put myself through Columbia University in NYC; my middle name is Renée, after René Descartes. (My dad's a philosophy professor, so my brother & I were named after famous philosophers. I lucked out though...my brother's middle name is Erasmus.)

And here is our exchange. As usual, I've quoted exactly, including all spelling errors and typos. To be fair, I should mention that the only reason my responses aren't riddled with similar errors is that I'm a bit of an anal control freak when it comes to writing. I obsessively check anything I send out to ensure that as many errors as possible are removed before I hit "send."

On 11/18/2005 06:14 pm PST, "AnotherConservativeGuy" wrote:
Bummer! I thought WHAT A HOT BABE but then I read your profile.... I am not the true love you seak but you do seem like a nice woman and you are pretty. Just wanted you to know...
—AnotherConservativeGuy

At this point, I had no way of knowing that he was another conservative guy rejecting me for my politics, but I thought it was worth finding out why someone who found me attractive would be put off by my profile. So, I responded with this:

On 11/19/2005 10:03 am PST, I wrote:
Dear: "AnotherConservativeGuy":

Thank you for the compliment; I'm sorry we're not a match. Out of curiosity, what specifically in my profile "bummed you out?" I'm always interested in how others perceive my profile. If you wouldn't mind, I'd love to know. Thanks!

Best, alita.

On 11/19/2005 05:07 pm PST, "AnotherConservativeGuy" wrote:
Ok so your photos are good except for the 1/2 naked one. Get rid of it. It seems a little desperate and sleezy. Your face is really nice and your profile is great. I am conservative and I know most liberals are angry and super opinoinated. I wouldn't fit. My last girl friend was super liberal but it was well thought out and we got along great. You are not open to other ideas so i am sure you will find some flamming liberal who dosn't belive in god. Its just not me. Every thing else seems good.. I realllllly like your eyes...... I could look into them all night ...... Your ideas make me want to puke,....
—AnotherConservativeGuy

Well, as you might imagine, upon receiving this response, I was simply giddy with anticipation, as I contemplated how savagely I was going to expose his idiocy here when I got this reply from him. This exchange was turning out to be even better than the first ConservativeGuy! Not only was he being intolerant and judgmental but, in addition, this one was being overtly rude. At this point, I should also show you the pictures to which he refers, so that you can see what he's talking about.

My main picture is here on the left: 

And the one here to the right of the other is the "1/2 naked one":

Admittedly, the picture of me on the right is a bit silly and cheesy. I like to think of it as my "Varga Girl" shot. I haven't taken his advice and deleted it from my profile. To be honest, I don't know if my unwillingness to do so is because I disagree with his characterization of the picture, or because I was born the kind of stubborn person who is inspired to contrary action when someone tells me what to do. Either way, it's up to stay for the time being.

Anyway, before I could post the exchange here, I had to respond to him in my most measured and reasonable tone...which is my way of being a condescending bitch while feigning civility. I did try to vary it a bit from what I said to the other ConservativeGuy, but there were some pretty good lines from that. Please excuse any repetition...I mean, why re-invent the wheel? So here is what I sent him:

On 11/21/2005 01:08 pm PST, I wrote:
Dear: "AnotherConservativeGuy",

Thank you so much for writing me back, as I found your reasons for thinking we wouldn't be a good match to be quite interesting...although, I have to say that your statement that my ideas make you "want to puke," seems quite angry and judgmental.

In reviewing my profile, the only two statements I could find that might be considered biased were, "if you consider creationism or "intelligent design" a science, I'm sorry but we are not a match"; and "Pres. Bush is my 10th cousin, once removed (NOTE: sorry, but if you like or voted for him or his father, we're NOT a match.)" Admittedly, the Bush quote quite clearly indicates that the man I seek is not a Republican, but it was meant to be funny rather than hostile in the context of admitting my distant and obscure relationship with the Bush family. As for the first statement about science, I assure you that many people who believe in God also believe in evolution; even more agree that the Earth was created in more than six days and that dinosaurs became extinct long before humans began roaming the planet.

Since these two statements and my self-identification as being "very liberal" are the only indications in my profile of my political ideas, I find it curious that you find all of my ideas so repulsive. Nonetheless, I thank you for your astute feedback. Without it, I never would have guessed that in my profile, I come off as a desperate, sleazy, angry, super-opinionated and closed-minded woman with a really nice face and attractive eyes, in search of a flaming liberal who doesn't believe in God.

I realize you responded to my question out of courtesy, and it is not my intention to pick a fight with you, however, since you have attacked my ideas based on presumptions about what "liberal" means to you, I want to leave you with a couple of specifics for the record. In general, I consider myself a "liberal," but my politics are not "liberal" down the line, as I take each issue as its own question, which you probably do as well. I find labels to be ambiguous at best and misleading at worst, especially considering the ways in which the meaning of these words continually evolves. I'm "conservative" when it comes to many economic issues, "liberal" on many social issues and "centrist" on various other issues. For instance, I strongly believe in a person's right to believe that the first woman was made from a man's rib, but I don't want my tax dollars to be spent on teaching that to children in our public science classrooms. I think it is more appropriate to teach the Bible in church sermons, Sunday school classes and in the home...which by the way are the places I learned about God growing up.

As for Republicans being "conservative," I'm not sure what that means anymore because the current administration and predominantly Republican congress doesn't seem fiscally conservative or responsible to me at all. In fact, one might say that they spend money like drunken sailors.

Well, if you've read this far, thank you for taking the time to read my response, and I hope you haven't puked =-) While I may be deluding myself, I hope that you are wrong that I am not open to ideas that are different from mine. Whenever I engage in public discourse, whether it's in someone's living room or here on this little slice of cyberspace, I think of myself as being a part of this giant forge in which we all heat, hammer and shape our thoughts. I believe in this process, even though most of the dents we each make in the communal metal are imperceptible.

I actively consume a variety of opinions each day from talk radio, friends & family, various blogs, newspapers, magazines and cable news shows. We live in an age where there are so many voices contributing to the public dialogue that it can sometimes seem like a meaningless cacophony, but, I consider this superfluity of opinion to be a quality problem that I'm happy to have. Furthermore, I am proud to live in a society that encourages such discourse. I don't agree with every opinion I read or hear, but each helps me to see an issue from a new perspective and helps me to test or temper my own.

Good luck in your search for a "match"!

Best, alita.

Now all I had to do is sit back and wait for the reactionary response that I was sure he'd send. But, much to my surprise, he sent me this in reply instead:

On 11/21/2005 05:05 pm PST, "AnotherConservativeGuy" wrote:
<>That is the problem with e-mail sometimes what I meant isn't how it is taken. I assure you I am not in the least angry. I just was giving you a little ribbing. Your profile comments may come across as angry to others  also, I assume you just don't want to have a relationship with some one who has a different world view. I can understand that. Except, I guess in reality I would say it isn't important what one believes just that they have thought it out and understand why they believe it.

<>I didn't say you came off as sleazy. It is that damn photo. It gives the wrong message. If I thought you were a sleaze I wouldn't have paused to write. Actually I find the other photos of you very attractive. You have deep eyes and what you wrote is very good.

<> I don't know you. I feel some honesty, (my opinion), should be taken as advice from someone who doesn't know ANYTHING about you and shouldn't be a reflection on your self image. You asked my perception was, not what the truth was.

<> It was a perception based on a very limited view. To be honest, now that I have been so rude and blunt, you have come back with a clarifying response that shows you are a well thought out woman with great depth of character. I feel terrible for being so rude. I just went back and read my e-mail.....Ouch that is an asshole e mail. Not the way I meant it.

<> You must understand cyber dating sites are not a good place to meet someone. One becomes grouped in with the rest of the people. I like to think this isn't true, but it has not been my experience. I think a better place to find companionship is doing what one loves to do. I personally have been trying to cancel my account but It seems difficult to do.

<> You know what, I just need to apologize. I jumped to several assumptions based on wrong perceptions. Thanks for writing me back.

<>—AnotherConservativeGuy

Wow...maybe my expectations are low, but I was impressed that he acknowledged fault and apologized. Maybe we can just get along. Well, the apology was nice, but at this point, I faced a dilemma. I really wanted to write about this exchange, but ethically I was conflicted about exposing him to ridicule after he turned out to be a stand up guy. After spending some time over the Thanksgiving holiday thinking about it, I decided to just let him know I was going to write about it and give him the chance to ask me not to. Following is the note I sent to him:

On 12/03/2005 05:46 pm PST, I wrote:
Dear: "AnotherConservativeGuy":

Sorry it took me so long to write you back, but I got tied up with family responsibilities over the holiday week. I just wanted to say thank you for your last note to me. Most men wouldn't have taken the time to admit they had been less than chivalrous, as you have. I recently posted on my blog (noetical.blogs.com/noet_all/2005/09/why_i_dont_date.html) a similar exchange with another Republican I met online. I was less than charitable to him in my commentary regarding the exchange, as he lacked the manners that you clearly have shown in your most recent response. While it would have been highly entertaining to make fun of you on my blog, I'm happy to know that liberals and conservatives can be civil to each other. With your blessing, I would like to post this exchange from beginning to end in order to show the contrast with the other...proving to all my flaming liberal friends that not all conservatives are dolts =-) Of course I would take out your name and all of the personal details that identify you. Let me know.

In the meantime, good luck in your search...as you can see from my profile, I don't live in your city anyway. I originally changed my settings for your city, as I was on the verge of moving there for a new job, but things have changed and I've taken a new job here instead. I'm sure you will find a great conservative girl with beautiful eyes someday soon.

Best, alita.

On 12/03/2005 06:23 pm PST, "AnotherConservativeGuy" wrote:
As I said at the begining of this exchange somewhere. My last girl friend was a very liberal american policy hateing, packistani. After talking to her I found we were closer in our ideas than we thought We just had different ideas on how to get there. Liberals think about conseritivesthe same as   we think of them. Most Republicans are just a little bit less talkitive about It. I hear liberal say discusting things about George Bush all the time in public. Why is that? I understand there is a lot of hate toward him and his policies.... But why do they have to voice their opinion in public all the time? Maybe people could focus less on politics and more on being good people.

I also have to admit, although it is no excuse, I was pretty drunk when I wrote that ass hole letter to you. I am verry sorry again. I am sure you are a great woman. I am sure it is my loss you are not moving here.

As far as meeting a nice woman with pretty eyes..... Who knows... I won't hold my breath......
—AnotherConservativeGuy

At the end of the day, I think this was a more interesting exchange than the other, because I gave this guy the opportunity to redeem himself. We're all human and, he's right, the inability to hear inflection in an email can make it an imperfect means of communication. While I still wouldn't date him, I'm glad not to hate him either. In the meantime, I should say I had a great time last night with a new guy I've been seeing. He's a flaming liberal who doesn't believe in God. Love that!

Why I Don't Date Republicans...

Hi Everyone!

Once again, it's time for me to write about the absurdities of my eDating adventures. This time, I've changed my charming suitor's name, in case he finds this post. I would like to avoid his wrath. By the way, this post includes some things written by him, which I've quoted exactly...spelling errors and all. I will call him "ConservativeGuy."

So this is a guy I first met at one of those "speed dating" things, so I actually have met him in the real world. A few days before meeting him, he also sent me a note at match.com, expressing interest in me. He was okay-looking, so after meeting him, I replied to his match.com email and sent him my contact info, but after a couple of short emails back and forth, nothing really happened. Our last exchange was on August 30th. Then on September 17th, we were matched up on eHarmony.com. (If you're thinking right now that I'm on too many of these stupid eDating sites...you're right...but that's another story =-)

Anyway, following is some of the information from his profile at eHarmony:

Match Name:  ConservativeGuy (name changed to protect the obnoxious)
Location:  Encino, California, United States
Occupation:  Investment Management
Height:  5' 10''
Age: 41
Ethnicity:  White, non-Hispanic
Match Created:  September 17, 2005
Last Communication:  September 18, 2005

The things ConservativeGuy can't live without are:

• Close relationships - family & friends
• A need to be a productive member of society
• Great sense of humor
• Helping others through volunteer work
• Having goals and ambitions

The most important thing ConservativeGuy is looking for in a person is:
Honest and open with a great sense of humor and a zest for life. She should have her own opinions (even if they differ from my own) and should be knowledgable and willing to discuss current events and the world around her.

---

Well, he doesn't sound so bad, right? ...And I knew he wasn't ugly, so I was glad that almost immediately he sent me the following email from the eHarmony site:

From:  ConservativeGuy
To:  Alita
Subject:  Hi Again
Date:  17 September 2005 01:04 PM Pacific

In looking at your profile, I do believe we have communicated on another site.  If you want to chat just let me know....

—ConservativeGuy

---

So, I wrote him back...figured I'd give it one more shot:

From:  Alita
To:  ConservativeGuy
Subject:  Re: Hi Again
Date:  17 September 2005 08:09 PM Pacific

Hi again ConservativeGuy =-)

Yes, I'd love to chat. Feel free to write me or call me. My number is:  310-xxx-xxxx
My actual email address is: [email protected]

Best, alita.

---

Now before I go on, let me explain that eHarmony has everyone pick ten "Must Haves" and ten "Can't Stands" to share with their matches and I'm going to share mine here with you:

MY MUST HAVES:

Shared Politics...
      I must have someone who has political beliefs which are the same or similar to my own.
Autonomy...
      I must have a partner who will give me space to be my own person.
Intellect...
      I must have a partner who is bright and can share my understanding of the world as well as enjoy discussing important issues.
Sense of Humor...
      I must have someone who is sharp and can enjoy the humorous side of life.
Loyal...
      I must have someone I can count on to always support me.
Communicator...
      I must have someone who is good at talking and listening.
Emotionally Generous...
      I must have a partner who enjoys people and is generous with his or her compassion, attention, sympathies and love.
Curiosity...
      I must have a partner who is hungry for new information and knowledge and who strives to learn as much as possible.
Strong Character...
      I must have a partner who is honest and strong enough to do the right thing.
Chemistry...
      I must feel deeply in love with and attracted to my partner.

MY CAN'T STANDS:

Anger...
      I can't stand someone who can't manage their anger, who yells, or bottles it up inside.
Lying...
      I can't stand someone who lies to anyone-especially to me.
Rude...
      I can't stand someone who is belittling, impatient or hateful to people in any situation.
Petty...
      I can't stand someone who focuses on imperfection.
Judgmental...
      I can't stand someone who finds fault with everyone and everything.
Racist...
      I can't stand someone who believes that any particular ethnic group to which they belong is superior to the rest of humanity.
Infidelity...
      I can't stand someone who engages in sex outside a committed relationship.
Pessimism...
      I can't stand someone who always sees the glass as half empty.
Mean Spirited...
      I can't stand someone who has a devious nature and is mean to others.
Intolerance...
      While I understand that religious conviction is a positive trait, I can't stand someone who is self-righteous and feels that their particular faith is the only one that matters.

---

All of the choices are pretty basic, and his didn't vary from mine that much, but here are the ones he chose:

HIS MUST HAVES:

Intellect...
      I must have a partner who is bright and can share my understanding of the world as well as enjoy discussing important issues.
Sense of Humor...
      I must have someone who is sharp and can enjoy the humorous side of life.
Family...
      I must have someone who shares my desire to have or adopt children.
Responsible...
      My partner must be financially responsible.
Emotionally Generous...
      I must have a partner who enjoys people and is generous with his or her compassion, attention, sympathies and love.
Attractiveness...
      I must have a partner who is considered "very attractive" by most current standards.
Affectionate...
      I must have someone who is comfortable giving and receiving affection.
Sexually Knowledgeable...
      I must have someone who is mature and experienced as a potential sexual partner and is able to express himself/herself freely.
Strong Character...
      I must have a partner who is honest and strong enough to do the right thing.
Chemistry...
      I must feel deeply in love with and attracted to my partner.

HIS CAN'T STANDS:

Lying...
      I can't stand someone who lies to anyone-especially to me.
Rude...
      I can't stand someone who is belittling, impatient or hateful to people in any situation.
Racist...
      I can't stand someone who believes that any particular ethnic group to which they belong is superior to the rest of humanity.
Cheating...
      I can't stand someone who takes advantage of people.
Undependable...
      I can't stand someone who fails to come through and is unreliable.
Infidelity...
      I can't stand someone who engages in sex outside a committed relationship.
Mean Spirited...
      I can't stand someone who has a devious nature and is mean to others.
Intolerance...
      While I understand that religious conviction is a positive trait, I can't stand someone who is self-righteous and feels that their particular faith is the only one that matters.
Flirts...
      I can't stand someone who constantly flirts with the opposite sex.
Victim Mentality...
      While everyone has times of self-pity, I can't stand someone who continually sees himself/herself as a victim.

---

Okay, so he didn't write me at my email address and he didn't call me, but he sent me the following reply to me at eHarmony:

From:  ConservativeGuy
To:  Alita
Subject:  Re: Hi Again
Date:  18 September 2005 07:55 AM Pacific

Small world!  So I see shared politics is a "must have." Can you elaborate?

---

So I wrote back to him and elaborated:

From:  Alita
To:  ConservativeGuy
Subject:  Politics
Date:  18 September 2005 09:54 AM Pacific

Hi ConservativeGuy. Yes, it is a small world...at least the LA dating scene is small =-)

This is a new "must have" for me. It's not that I'm intolerant of other people's beliefs...and I don't need my partner and me to agree on EVERYTHING...but at least we should be coming at the issues with common assumptions. I find that it's much more interesting to discuss issues with someone who has a similar foundation...otherwise, the conversation never really progresses to the more complex and stagnates at the base of the argument. It's one thing to disagree on the solution, but if you disagree on the very nature of the problem, or even what that problem is, that can be a very frustrating wall to smash your head against.

I hope that makes sense. I think I'm better at answering this question verbally, so feel free to ask me again sometime on the phone.

If you're really interested in where I'm coming from politically and how I interact with those with whom I disagree, you can check out the following link:
Are We Still In Iraq?

So you mention that you like to volunteer. What are the local causes that you support? What do you care about, believe in?

Best, alita.

---

Still not quite sure of me, he sent the following message in response:

From:  ConservativeGuy
To:  Alita
Subject:  Re: Politics
Date:  18 September 2005 10:40 AM Pacific

Hi,

Scanned your website and your political statements.  While I am extremely conservative politically and more liberal socially, I certainly don't have an issue if someone has a different viewpoint than my own.  However, it is important to me that they have an opinion one way or another and also that they can back it up.

—ConservativeGuy

---

Not sure what that meant, I mean, what the fuck?! So you wanna talk or not? And here's the thing...for some reason, I wasn't thinking "actually, I think you're a dick and I don't want to talk to you...please lose my number." Instead, I sent the following message in response:

From:  Alita
To:  ConservativeGuy
Subject:  Re: Politics
Date:  18 September 2005 03:29 PM Pacific

Dear ConservativeGuy:

Well, since you scanned my statements, you know that I *do* have opinions; and I hope you've concluded that I can at least argue their merits. So when you say that you're "extremely conservative politically," what do you mean by that? In general, I consider myself a "liberal," but my politics are not "liberal" down the line, as I take each issue as its own question, which you probably do as well.

I'm conservative when it comes to many economic issues, but I'm not sure what that means anymore because the current "conservative" administration doesn't seem fiscally conservative or responsible to me at all. In fact, I think they spend money like drunken sailors.

I admit that being "extremely conservative politically" has come to mean a few things to me that it might not mean to you, as being "more liberal socially" is incompatible with my understanding of extremely conservative political beliefs. The public conservative agenda has evolved dramatically in recent years in a way that I have found disturbing. Most of my issues with the current state of conservative politics are tied to the extent to which the Christian Right has become more powerful and influential in issues of public policy. For instance, I don't have an issue with someone who believes that dinosaurs and people co-existed and that the first woman was made from a man's rib, but I don't want my tax dollars to be spent on teaching that to children in our public science classrooms.

I've never considered myself a libertarian, although I know many of my views are consistent with classically liberal principles. I took this online survey called "World's Smallest Political Quiz." According to that, my answers say that the best way to describe my political views is libertarian. I scored 90% on personal issues and 70% on economic issues. (It's a funny little quiz; you should check it out at http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that for me it's more about sharing fundamental values rather than ideology. Hope that all makes sense and isn't too much information. =-)

Best, alita.

---

Okay, now first of all, someone show me where in ANY of these emails I've identified as a "Democrat." Then explain to me which part of my responses were hostile and aggressive. If you can do that, then maybe I will understand why this guy felt justified to send me this response:

From:  ConservativeGuy
To:  Alita
Subject:  Hi Again
Date:  18 September 2005 05:09 PM Pacific

Hi,

I have been a Republican as long as I can remember because I suscribe to their fundamental belielf that putting the power and capital in the hands of people is much preferable to the government running affairs (which without exception are far more costly and less effective). Also, the recent election proved that Democrats are out of touch with the core values of the American public (religion, faith, etc which do matter to most Americans).  The fact of the matter is that the Democratic party has not been viable in the last 30 years with the exception of Clinton who lied to the American people, performed criminal acts (pardoning Rich), yet still had the christma to get away with it.  The Democrats do not stand for anything except for opposing those things that the Reblicans believe in (see comments of recent congressional hearings). And, if the best candidate they can come up with in 2004 is John Kerry (and Edwards who could not even win his home state) then they are in serious trouble. This is not a viable party in its current state and there is not a single candidate currently that could prevail in 2008 today.

—ConservativeGuy

---

While I wrote several responses to him in my head, after a few daze of not writing back to him, I got the following message about him from eHarmony:

Match Closed: One of the hardest things about any new relationship is deciding when or if you should continue forward in a relationship. ConservativeGuy has decided to permanently close communication with you at this point for the following reason or reasons:

• I don't feel that the chemistry is there.
• I think the difference in our values is too great.

---

Okay, where to start? First of all, no shit the difference in our values is too great. ...but what an idiotic way to respond to my considered explanation of my beliefs. He might as well have said, "yeah, well you're a poopie head." Whatever.

I hate it when Republicans talk about things that the last election "proved" about "most Americans." The truth is, "most Americans" did not vote for Bush, even if you don't take into account the fact that there were many "irregularities" reported (as detailed here in Wikipedia.) The number of votes that were officially counted for Bush was somewhere around 62,040,606. According to the census reports from July 2004, there were about 220,377,406 Americans over the age of 18 at the time. That means that only 28% of adult Americans voted for him. In what world is that MOST? At best, the election proved that MOST adult Americans don't vote...which is another thing that bothers me, but don't get me started.

As for the Bush administration "putting the power and capital in the hands of people," that may be true...if you mean the "People's Republic of China," who make an obscene amount of money from the interest on their stake in our government. As of this summer, that stake had grown to $242 billion and that's before the Katrina pots of gold have been factored in (which are going in part to pay for no-bid contracts that have gone to some of the same companies that have been getting rich from the war in Iraq.) According to an article in the Washington Post last week, "Foreign holdings of U.S. government debt exceeded $2.03 trillion in July, meaning that every man, woman and child in the United States owes foreign investors $6,846."

Well, in re-reading this before posting it, I realize that it sounds much more angry than I intended. The truth is that I found this exchange to be highly amusing because this guy so clearly lacked the ability or will to do what he said he wants others to do, i.e. "back up" his opinion. While it was fun to watch him become aggressive and obnoxious so quickly, this exchange has confirmed my suspicion that I just can't date someone with substantially divergent political beliefs.

And that my friends, is why I don't date Republicans. =-)