tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429305915843274151.post2140348966453872903..comments2008-10-03T15:04:33.630-04:00Markhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13534096073937573676noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429305915843274151.post-51904199492169855202008-10-03T15:04:00.000-04:002008-10-03T15:04:00.000-04:00I have been a member of the Libertarian Party for close to twenty years, have served as the Chair of Tulare County’s Libertarian Party, and have even run for Congress and for the office of State Controller on the Libertarian ticket. Needless to say, I have generally supported Libertarian candidates throughout the years.<BR/>This Presidential election, however, that’s changed: McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his running-mate has convinced me that I have to support Barach Obama. There are several reasons for this. Primarily is the very-real possibility that McCain could die while in his first term-of-office, leaving Sarah Palin as our first woman President. Now, don’t get me wrong: I am a woman, and I think it would be great if we had a woman President. However, I firmly believe that it shouldn’t be Sarah Palin. <BR/>Palin believes that the Bible is the literal word of God; that creationism is “the truth” and evolution just some cockamamie scam; and she would be willing to try to force that belief onto everyone else through whatever means. She thinks that creationism should be taught in our public schools (alongside evolutionary theory, if not in place of); she does not support the Constitution, which clearly provides for the separation of church and state, and states that no religious test be given to office-holders. She aims for a Christian government rather than the religion-free government that the Founding Fathers so wisely set up.<BR/>The concept is scary. It is even more scary after having watched the vice-presidential debate last night. Palin came across, this time, as being a reasonable, thoughtful individual. Clearly her prep sessions went well. This was a different Sarah Palin than we’d seen before. She came off more focused, more rational, more knowledgeable than ever before. But just because the Republicans got her well-prepared for the debate, this doesn’t mean that her fundamental beliefs have changed. <BR/>Her appeal to the “average Joe” notwithstanding, does the average person really want to throw out a thousand years of science and knowledge and return to Medieval ways of thought? And do we really want an “average” person one heartbeat away from the presidency?Pam Pescosolidonoreply@blogger.com