Nadine, Can You Hear Me Now?

By special request, here is the end rant to this week’s episode of

This American Election.

I have a friend back in my hometown and she’ll call me from time to time, during which we always talk politics. Let’s call her Nadine.

Nadine was a luke-warm Obama supporter in 2008 but now thinks he’s kinda crazy and might bring the economy and the nation to utter collapse during a second term. But here’s the thing: she’s not voting for Romney. She’s going to vote third party. Her state is going red already, doncha know. She called last night to wish us a happy anniversary and maybe that wasn’t the best time to unload on her, but then I didn’t bring it up this time, again. Here she goes on and on about how worried she is that Obama is going to SOMEHOW pull this out and what a disaster that would be, and I’m once again explaining to her that Romney has the record and is an extraordinary opportunity for Americans to get a) a man with the right skills and expertise for the moment and b) is a demonstrably good and moral man. This is not a lesser-of-two-evils choice.

And what she says to me, I couldn’t believe it. She says, “Well, convince me. I want to change my mind.” That’s when I went off on her. I told her that she was not remotely interested in changing her mind, that she wasn’t even using that mind and that change was not possible for an organ that had atrophied. I told her if she really wanted to change her mind she would have already, that there was plenty of information out there that fully demonstrated the distance between Obama and Romney–and it is vast. If she’s not aware of it by now, that’s just willful ignorance. She could do the legwork herself. We’d already been down this road too many times. She’s aware of it based on our conversations, yet she’s not smart enough to add a couple of single digit numbers together to come up with the obvious and correct answer?

No, I told her, what you’re interested in, Nadine, is purity. It’s not about what you think; it’s about what everyone else will think of you. And considering what she thinks of Barack Obama, that is the most cowardly, illogical, selfish political stance I have ever seen. Worse than Obots in 2008. She’s not smart enough to use the greatest gift our founders bequeathed to us: the secret ballot.

When politics comes down to purity, fashion, red-state versus blue-state bragging rights, and caring what everyone else thinks instead of doing the right thing based on what you think, I’d suggest we already have the government we deserve. And we might be destined for more of it. That is unacceptable to me, and that’s why I went off on her. I’ve known her for years and like a lot of people I know, she has to be pried from her preconceived notions with a healthy dose of unflowery truth. I must say, she took it well. We’ll see what she does. We’re still talking to each  other, which is more than I can say for most of my Obot friends from 2008.

I mention it here because it occurs to me that there are a few people listening who could also stand to hear it. I absolutely believe that everyone owns their vote, but I also believe that this great country was founded on a willingness of people to share disparate ideas through the vehicles of rhetoric and dialogue so they become known to each other. People own their votes, but they also own their voice. I just used mine.


15 comments on “Nadine, Can You Hear Me Now?

  1. Anthony says:

    Worth a thousand words


  2. yttik says:

    Great cartoon! 🙂

    Good rant, Lola. I have a short fuse for people who tell me Obama is awful, but they can’t really do anything about it because what will people think of them, it’s not cool to not like Obama, they don’t like Republicans, etc, etc.

    Look, America is going off a fricken cliff. You know it, you see it, but you can’t do anything about it because of your taste preferences, your political purity, your guilt?? It is selfish, it is illogical, and it’s putting your potential uncomfortable feelings above the needs of millions of people who live in this country.

    What also pisses me off is the people who complain to me that they’re afraid Romney might be worse. Listen, I have two new dependents, half the income I did four years ago, no retirement savings, and I’m raising chickens in my backyard. This IS worse. We’ve arrived at worse! Worse started hitting two years ago.

  3. sam says:


  4. 1539days says:

    And this is why polling is more important than it ever should be. Except for maybe Fox News, no media outlet has a daily poll they refer to every day. No, they do polls, but they make a big deal only out of the polls with “interesting” results. All these +10 to +20 percent Democrat oversamples are designed to make a clear win by Romney into a horse race. Eventually the uninformed (not the undecideds) might decide that “Obama is going to win anyway” and either vote third party or stay home. That is a part of the Obama election strategy, voter depression instead of voter oppression.

    This is why I take the opportunity to say “Obama’s going to lose anyway.” Even if someone doesn’t respond, now they hear that not only do I support Romney, I actually think he’s the one who will win. If they challenge me, I’m also loaded for bear. Even though Romney has maybe 53% of the likely vote already, there is a huge deficit in confidence among Romney voters. They still think Obama is going to do anything to win. Even Jack Welsh thinks this. Dammit, he CAN’T do what it takes to win. Only we as Romney supporters can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

    If I have to, I will talk every leaner off the ledge.

    • Anna Belle says:

      If I have to, I will talk every leaner off the ledge.

      That’s the ticket! 🙂

    • I say to them: Of course, Obama will do everything in his power to win. He and has acolytes have too much to lose. BUT, that’s why we have to vote. If they didn’t need our votes, they wouldn’t be doing everything in their power to win.

      Sometimes this gets through their thick heads.

  5. boutis says:

    What a great and righteous rant Anna Belle!

    I am not a Republican. I personally like Romney (and Ann!) but I am not in agreement with his stated policies for a number of things because I will probably always at heart be a liberal. But I would vote for any sane Republican to get Obama out of office. I will also vote for any sane Republican for almost any office to clean out the Democratic party to rid it of the Obama enablers or to make it go away so that something else can take its place. This does not mean I will vote Republican in the future if there is a viable, honest, moderate to liberal party that espouses small “d” democratic principles in the future.

    In this election I view voting third party as a means to avoid addressing the problems in both parties (more so the Democratic one but Libertarians are doing it also with the Republican party) and our political system as a whole. It is a passive and cowardly act by those who want to dump the responsibility on someone make decisions for them but maintain the illusion that they are doing something. In dated parlance it is a cop out They are no different that people who do not register to vote or those who sit on their ass at home instead of voting and make someone else decide for them. There are no viable third parties in this election. Voting for one is an empty and symbolic gesture of the passive aggressive. Screw them.

    • Anna Belle says:

      Good rant yourself, there, Boutis! Even if people don’t like Romney because they are liberal, the reason to vote for him is there, and you said it. Clean out the Dem party of the Obama faction. That’s reason enough, unless they just want this strand of stupidity to exist in the party for the rest of their lives. A third party vote will just communicate to Dems that their their cooties meme works. It won’t communicate any sort of disagreement or displeasure.

  6. votermom says:

    Hey Anna Belle, I am midway thru Mitt’s book. This guy is scary smart.

  7. Great rant!

    I’m sure you’ve seen the article by Buzz Bissinger at the Daily Beast as to why he is voting for Romney. I left this remark {]:

    A well-reasoned and it seems heart-wrenching decision that many Liberal Dems like myself are in the process of making.

    It was clearly obvious that not only was Obama not prepared, he seemed to have *contempt* for the debate process. He reminded me of the kid who shows up to a job interview expecting the job because s/he believes that s/he is the most qualified for it. Romney on the other hand showed up to the job interview ready to prove to me why he deserved it. He had prepared for it. He had examples and answers to the queries I used to ascertain his qualifications, and after that interview has the documentation and work record to verify my initial impressions.

    IMO, that there is a lot of talk about Romney’s handlers and his lying to the American public, yada yada. Well, first Romney does not have *handlers* Romney has colleagues. I take the word of Jane Edmonds the Liberal Dem woman who actually had worked with Romney when he was Mass Gov. Why would such a woman support a candidate whose ideology differs from hers? Because in her words Romney meets with others who do not share his ideology and *listens* to their input and utilizes their suggestions if they pass his common sense business approach. He respects the opinion and work record of another. In essence, Jane Edmonds has seen Romney in Action. And that is why she ultimately went to the Republican National Convention to voice that support and appears in campaign ads. On the other hand what are Obama’s actions? Obama has NOT had a meeting with his JOBS Committee since January. Obama does not as a matter of course meet with his Presidential Daily Briefing staff to ask questions and gain that input. Remember those things we Liberals used to care about when George Bush was president? Obama makes the “executive decision” to go on The View and David Letterman instead of meeting with foreign leaders during a time of crisis. Obama’s Admin first told us that there was no indication that Libya was a terrorist act on the anniversary of 9/11, then upon further reflection of about a week admits that it was. Romney took a huge risk in informing the American public about the terrorist attack — an executive decision that took guts based upon the facts he had at hand. Obama went to the UN still arguing it was a video. Perhaps if Obama had met with Middle East leaders he would have learned differently and saved the US the embarrassment.

    Obama continually decides and acts upon kicking the ball down the field to deal with another day. Its his MO, then blames others for doing things that he doesn’t agree with. A leader ensures that he has a clearly articulated policy reiterated continuously so there is no room for error.

    Romney has proved that he has done those things that lead to a more successful organization and working environment that we expect in a successful job applicant and most definitely in a LEADER: Romney met with colleagues and meets with his staff on a regular basis– as he said in the debate, every Monday morning he met with other administrative officials in Mass and kept a tight ship, so I can only conclude he WILL actually meet with his staff for input on a regular basis and attend his PDBs, and as a result come up with bipartisan solutions that Congress, the Executive Branch and the American people can get behind. Obama, although he contends that he will once again fight for me– a member of the Lower Middle Class who rose up from poverty– I doubt he will DO it in action as evidenced by his record during the last 4 years and his constant campaigning which is not needed as an Incumbent if one has a solid working record to use as evidence for that work progress. Obama instead fought for his legacy — Obamacare– without bipartisan input in lieu of pursuing a JOBS program. The only thing that Obama said he would do in re jobs was to convert the empty factories to new green ones, something that I was 100% in support of because it made sense to get empty factories up and running in dormant urban areas; But instead of a sound policy thought up with other leaders, Obama WASTED billions of taxpayer dollars to green companies (Solyndra) and other cronies. And unlike any other problem solver/solution-oriented individual would — does not account for that waste, but merely justifies it as a part of the green jobs experiment that did not pan out, much like those bumps in the road in the Middle East. However Obama offers no solution to this problem, or how Americans can recuperate their losses on the BILLIONS that were lost that as Romney so skillfully pointed out in REBUTTAL could have been better spent on other jobs — like hiring teachers — because the evidence of Solyndra-like companies being “most likely to fail” were as obvious as “the biggest kiss to Wall Street” bailouts of banks that were “too big to fail” under Obama’s economic policies.

    As for Obama’s main stimulus for future jobs– jobs retraining and more education …. this will mainly provide jobs for educators but not the vast majority of people who need it. As 1 out of 2 recent grads are finding out: One can have all the education in the world but it essentially becomes meaningless if there are NO jobs. The rocket engineer’s wife who told Obama this during a town hall meeting was told that her husband didn’t have *enough* education so he was ineligible for the plethora of engineer positions that were given to India and others under Obama’s trade agreements.

    Obama’s the candidate that anybody who has been in the position of evaluating a jobs performance comes to realize is JUST NOT WORKING OUT & MUST BE LET GO BEFORE HE DOES WORSE.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s