Sen. Barbara Boxer

This woman amazes me. I wonder how californians feel about her...they did elect her. Anyway, I was listening to npr here in wisconsin and caught her being interviewd by the boston affiliate. She said some interesting things.

First, she lambasted Pres. Bush for misleading America. She said he "cherry picked intelligence." She said Bush should at least apologize to the American people. Then she said she would never judge another senator and say he or she should apologize for their roles in supporting the war in Iraq when it first started.

Secondly, she said she is prochoice because she doesn't want the government breathing down women's backs. They should have the ability to make the choice that fits their personal morals, and religion, the best. I don't necessarily have a problem with that stance...but the government breathing down their backs?? Actually she said "Roe v. Wade was a very moderate decision ... the constitution provides for the basic right to privacy ... this decision keeps the government off women's backs."

And I say, so if Roe v. Wade was overturned, the government is in women's lives??? Like I said, I see, and maybe agree with, her point about pro-choice versus pro-life, but the logic is flawed. No Roe v. Wade would keep the government out just the same, only the end result would be different--many orphans versus abortions.

Anyway, I found her interview very enlightening. She's an eloquent speaker that I enjoyed listening to, but some things were just too funny to not share.

Finally, she said she would always vote her conscience, even if it was against party lines. I respect that. But I was wondering what she would do if her conscience was different from what her constituents want. This question is the heart of republican government. Does the representative vote the will of the majority of his or her constituents, or vote his or her own personal belief?? I bet every leader on capital hill would answer that one differently, but it's a great question.