Dating and Politics Don't Always Mix

Well, I had my last eHarmony meeting Wednesday night, and boy was it a doozy. It started out well, which was a pleasant surprise. He looked like his picture, he didn't appear to be short (but he was sitting down when I arrived), he was on time, and I didn't see any Miatas or Cameros in the parking lot. I order a beer and he a second vodka and something (I would have thought tonic or soda, but I think it was seven up or sprite). Conversation is easy. We grew up not to far from one another, so we enjoy a bit of reminiscing. He is my older sister's age, so we discuss people we both know, etc. He has nice eyes and a good smile. I start to think that I may have actually met a good guy on eHarmony. We laugh a lot about all sorts of stuff -- the people around us, life, work, etc. Time flies. I nursed my beer and then switched to water. We talk about our offices, and he mentions reducing energy consumption, etc. I'm excited -- not only is he attractive and funny, he is also a left winger! Now, I don't want anyone to mistakenly think this guy is perfect. He says 'coon' instead of raccoon, and he lives a bit further out than he said he did, but the conversation is great, so his 'county' ways aren't a big deal.

At some point I realize he has been knocking back vodka and clear liquid at the same rate as I've been drinking water. Maybe even faster. Huh. I try not to judge, but I am always a little concerned when someone drinks what to me seems like a lot - and doesn't appear at all affected. I have two uncles who are non-practicing alcoholics and my mother's father basically killed himself due to his drinking. I have no desire to have that in my life, but I feel like perhaps I am jumping to conclusions. For all I know, the drinks are really weak.

But I don't even have to worry about his potential drinking problem because he soon tells me that he doesn't believe in global warming. WHAT? He goes on to say that there are 'just as many scientists who say it isn't true'. That is, quite simply, not true, and I inform him that I am aware of some of those scientists, and that what they are purporting is bad science. He disagrees and continues to spout nonsense. I tell him he is crazy, but at this point the deal has still not been broken. That is until he tells me that Obama is a terrorist. He informs me of this after I tell him that in my opinion Obama will be the next president of the United States. I ask him why he believes this, and he explains that Obama's preacher said something about 'white devils'. I try to get him to help me understand how that makes Obama a terrorist, but he doesn't.

At this point, I am blown away, but the conversation is still surprisingly interesting, so I don't just walk out. I like a good political discussion anyway. He then tells me what the most important issue is for him. Low and behold it is the same as mine: abortion, but, not surprisingly, we are on different sides of the fence. His reasons are ridiculous, and once again he presents me with faulty logic. I think it is fine for people to have varying view points, but nothing bothers me more than faulty logic. Oh, did I mention he continually used the term 'pro-abortion' instead of 'pro-choice'? He kept saying I was pro-abortion, and I kept replying that I was quite clearly not pro-abortion. I like babies. I think babies should get to be born, but I think the alternative to legalized abortion is a far worse choice.

I could go on and tell you all about his thoughts on the death penalty, and how I surely, being pro-abortion and all, thought the death penalty should be illegal, but I won't. Instead I'll leave you with this lovely bit of logic: he explained that an aborted fetus (or newborn, as he liked to call them), might grow up to be the next female president. In the next sentence he said that abortion was okay in the case of rape. I then suggested that that fetus might also, having been allowed to live, become the next female president as well. He declined to comment.