I have a confession. Hopefully I will not regret this.

Last spring, one of our assignments for a statistics class was to do this implicit association test. (Go ahead, try it! It is interesting! There is a new poll out for the 2008 Election!) We were analyzing an article on facial features, and the professor wanted us to learn a little bit more about our own implicit associations. I went to the website and took some of the tests, not really knowing what to expect: we plan to adopt children from other countries who do not look like us; I spend a LOT of time researching anti-racist parenting practices, experiences of discrimination and racism, and my own personal beliefs.

I did not realize how much I’d learn about my own implicit associations.

I took several of the tests. As I had expected (and, frankly, hoped) I did not have any huge hangups on race or gender (phew). But I did have one major preference: I strongly preferred Democrats over Republicans.

Like apparently, I cannot stand Republicans. Really. I could be rated as having a “slight”, “moderate”, or “strong” preference for Democrats; I had a “strong” preference. Which is a little disconcerting for me.

I’ve mulled this over at various points in the last several months. I think part of the issue is my sincere belief, as a Christian, that George Bush is a horrible president who cavalierly risked American and Iraqi lives in a gratuitous and unnecessary war, and to say that this upsets me is a gross minimization. The IAT used pictures of Donald Rumsfeld (architect of the war), George Bush (moron who agreed to war, whether he really played a huge role in the plans or not), Dick Cheney (who is the spawn of Satan), and Colin Powell (who I really loved prior to his speech at the UN, and I had some hurt feelings over his role in this war, too). I think the fact that the test used *these* specific individuals probably skewed my personal results dramatically.

And, in fact, it’s funny – I worked for the Republican party in 1995-1996, when Newt Gingrich was the Speaker leading the “Republican Revolution“. I was a House page (yes, like the famed Foley targets), and I certainly, gleefully, excitedly drank that Kool-Aid…I cursed the evil President Clinton and I fervently believed that it was the Republicans that drove home a balanced budget. (In fact, our checkbook is still encased in a “Balance the Budget” plastic thingy that I saved from that era. Oh, oh, oh, how times have changed). But perhaps that is what is driving my recent hatred of conservatives in general: they say they are pro-Iraq war, yet their platform (until recently) rallied against “nation-building”. It is under a Republican president that our deficit reaches unprecedented levels after a period of surplus. And I took the test a while back, so this wasn’t relevant then, but it is now: It was Reagan who first came up with the EITC (the only way to make more money on taxes than you actually pay – aka a redistributive program – aka sharing the wealth), and there is nothing more socialist than $700 billion in taxes invested in private banks.

In short: hypocrisy, anyone?

But at the same time, I am a little uncomfortable with this…this disgust with any group of people. I’m not prejudiced – I have lots of friends who are Republican! However, I find myself getting really, really, really mad at those who support Republicans in this race! And (this is so terrible – really, it is, and I am praying that this part of me goes away) – I find myself challenging the Christianity of those single-issue voters* (*not the ones who are anti-death penalty, pro-social services, and support life from conception to death – those are not included in this list) – whose pro-life views I see as being limited to one’s life between one’s conception and birth – without regard for the lives that struggle in the period of time after birth. If we care so much about life, why don’t we try to take care of the youngest citizens we do have? What does it say about our society when our foster care system is in shambles? That we have millions of kids going to bed hungry every night? That we fail to provide health care for breast-feeding mothers after three months post-partum? Where is the pro-life in that?!? And, what’s more: What would Jesus say about that?


And as an update:

–We are betting on Obama breaking 340 electoral votes. If I win, I get two Grey’s Anatomy viewings with DB WIDE AWAKE and dinner out at a non-chain restaurant. If he wins, he gets to eat at Chilis with margaritas and as many tortilla chips as he wants without me complaining about how he is eating too much.

I know you’re jealous – oh, the exciting life we lead.

–AND…my internet fights. So Crazy Woman wrote back yesterday: at first, she sent out a hodgepodge of thoughtless commentary (peppered with the occasional “Are you INSANE?” and “Are you NUTS?” – yes, definitely directed to me), and it was quite the entertaining (if unnerving) read. Then she sent out an “oops, didn’t mean to send out my rough draft! Stay tuned for the final!” email, to which I quickly shot off a personal reply – “no need to send the final – I think we all got the picture. May God bless you, and thank Him that we live in a country with free speech, huh?”

Then we got the final draft – a slightly more coherent ramble, complete with some personal attacks on me and copious Republican (and, stunningly, Bush defense) propaganda.

I’m now sitting on a few responses. My poor mother (who lives in the neighborhood with these folks – really, I do not know why I received this, since I have never actually lived in this neighborhood…EVER…unless you count Christmas holidays) would have preferred me to never get into this debate, and is hoping that I do not respond at all. However, the level of personal attack was such that I feel like I should say SOMEthing….right?