The subjects which politics brings up tend to be very emotional.  Of course that is on purpose, but it is easy to fall into the trap.  The trap?  Why to make the subjects about moral issues.  No matter what your personal morals are, they are morals which are to be held “sacred.”  This incorrectly takes the political discussion from governance issues to moral issues.  Compromise in relation to governance issues is a matter of fact, even though the process may be extremely frustrating.  The most vivid example I can think of (no doubt being American brought this to the forefront in my mind) is of the American founding fathers hashing out the US Constitution while stuck in Philadelphia.  No one was completely happy with the final result and Benjamin Franklin summed up the feelings, "There are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them." (source)  A product of compromise that seems to have held up fairly well.  Compromise in relation to morals is an unacceptable thing.  I (relative I) am correct and those that believe different are wrong.  Not much to work with for middle ground, eh?  The “discussions” turn from how best to govern to a the equivalent of a third grade argument.  “Did”  “Did not” “Did” ad nauseum…  So how do we get away from it?  I don’t know, but we must work on minimizing it so that real discussions can happen.  I think that Richard Dreyfuss put it best, “We owe ourselves…to relearn the tools of reason, logic, clarity, dissent, civility, and debate. And those things are the non-partisan basis of  democracy and without them you can kiss this thing (democracy) goodbye.” (video source)  I, myself, am struggling to learn these skills. 

I seemed to get sidetracked.  Have you ever noticed how easy it is to get sidetracked when it is dark out, nearly silent, and you have that gently breeze coming in off the water?  I love nights like these.  Very easy to let the imagination run wild on these nights.  Umm.. where was I? 

There has been a slew of news items on Palin.  There seems to be multiple ethical questions/investigations.  They are only investigations at this point, but they seem to have at least some merit at this time.  She has lied about the “bridge to nowhere” and gets caught in, shall we call them, “contradictions” which need “clarification.”  So she lies and used her office for personal matters.  Sadly, this puts her on par with the other politicians in my opinion.  So that is not my huge concern because my ethical expectations of politicians is very low.  My concern is how many times that she utters the phrase, “is God’s will.”  I was raised in a very strong Roman Catholic household.  I don’t attend church often anymore because I find some church actions hypocritical, but my dad doesn’t care: “Just read the Bible,” he says and I do.  Having also attended several Jesuit schools, I feel that I am fairly versed in the subject.  I have yet to see how it is “God’s will” that Palin builds a pipeline in Alaska and that we invaded Iraq.  (935 false statements leading up to Iraq war and excerpt from Vincent Bugliosi's new book)  I have watched video of Palin claiming that at least those two examples above were “God’s will.” (video source)  This may have just been pandering to the church she was speaking to, but I don’t know.  And I doubt in the short time before the election that I will see an interview that delves into this subject.  This scares me.  It scares me because it is a fundamentalist attitude that makes what actions she feels she wants to take into actions that are now “God’s will” of which there are no questions… you either agree or are wrong. (Seems I didn’t get so sidetracked after all!  Oh Mr. Subconscious, you are a sneaky one!)  Now I don’t know if that is how she truly feels, but I don’t think I will find out before the election.  I would rather not take the chance when the John McCain is 72 years old and has had four separate operations to remove melanoma, “an invasive form of skin cancer that claims the lives of up to 34% of those diagnosed within 10 years”, in 1993, 2000x2, 2003. (source)  If Palin is a fundamentalist, I don’t want her anywhere near making huge national decisions or having the nuclear codes.  Again, I don’t know if I am right, but this has made my change my vote from a third party candidate to Obama.  Because I don’t want to take a chance.