Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

Politics – Socrates and Vegan Butthurt

December 22, 2009

“The gods have done me a great disfavor.  They have called me the smartest man in Athens.”  – Socrates (allegedly)

If there’s one piece of philosophy every human being should read and understand, it’s The Apologia, the first Socratic dialogue.

For those who never studied Plato, a quick sketch: the Apologia is Socrates “defending” himself in a trial in front of all of Athens.  The essential thrust of the Apologia is that the only thing we can be sure of is our ignorance; Socrates is the smartest man in Athens not because of his profound knowledge but because he knows he doesn’t know anything.  There is almost nothing that we know for certain, and much of our problems come when we claim otherwise.

I love the Apologia and try, in my own clumsy and not entirely successful way, to abide by its core message.  I don’t know everything, my opinions are not always right (although my friends and anybody who runs into me on the Internet could be forgiven for thinking I believe otherwise; like I said, clumsy and not entirely successful), and above all, I need to keep my mind open.

But oh Lord, it is hard sometimes.  So very, very hard.

Take veganism.  Personally, veganism isn’t for me.   Part of this is simply experience; I tried it for a week and quite frankly it was extremely unpleasant.  My mood was terrible, I was breaking wind constantly, and I felt absolutely miserable for a straight week.  I’m pretty sure the emotional problems would have just gotten worse.  Said experiment was enough to put me off tofu for good; I have zero interest in it as a foodstuff now.  I’ll eat it to be polite if I’m at a gathering, and I’ve had some good tofu dishes since, but I can’t eat it as a main course.

That said, just because it isn’t for me doesn’t mean it isn’t for other people.  I firmly believe, to be honest, that everybody’s got a diet that’s best for themI know plenty of well-adjusted vegans who I get along with.  I’m not the best at accomodating their needs sometimes, but at least I’m making an effort.  And likewise, they respect my choices.

This brings us to the vegans who make vegans look bad.  Yes, here we come to the political angle.  Or, more specifically, one political angle.  The “help, help, I’m being oppressed” routine, that in fact I just dealt with elsewhere on the Internet.

There’s little more sickening to me as a human being than the behavior of some aspects of the far left when it comes to minority chic.  I have a problem with political correctness in general because I feel that it’s a system largely constructed by white middle-and-upper-middle-class liberals to reassure themselves that they’re OK and they’re not racist.  In particular, I think considerations of class have been largely left out of the equation…but that’s another post.

It’s worth noting that the entire far left isn’t like this, but it is one of the far left’s main weaknesses; a godawful eagerness to fetishize minorities instead of treating them as people, or an attempt to claim some sort of minority status.  But nowhere, to me, is this more outrageous than vegans trying to pull this shit.

If we’re going in the strict sense of the word, sure, vegans are a minority.  But we’re not talking about numbers.  We’re talking about how society treats people.  And that’s where it doesn’t scale.

Whether black or gay or Latino or what have you, maltreatment in the hands of a society is almost inevitably about biology.  That’s the key injustice.  No, it’s not a good thing to force a person to undo a personal choice, or to block a personal choice from happening.  In fact, it’s scary and horrible.  But it’s considerably worse to say to a person, “Sure, we’ll treat you great if you’ll just change your biology.  Oh, you can’t?  TOO BAD!”

Almost inevitably, the self-righteous vegans lose track of this.  Part of making choices is living with the fact that not everybody approves of them, but to be quite honest, unless somebody’s actively trying to violate your human rights by force-feeding you beef, that should be a fairly simple thing to deal with.  But inevitably, they claim to oppressed because people are mean to them.

Where does Socrates come in?  Again, that knowledge that you have no knowledge.  I was born in Washington D.C. and lived there until I was ten, and spent summers in the South until I was eighteen or so, so my experience dealing with race growing up is substantially different from a lot of white people’s.  I was introduced to concepts like biracialism and Black Power fairly early on in my development.  My parents weren’t particularly political, but it was there in the environment.  Many of my schoolmates were black.  The power structure of the city I lived in was entirely black, reflecting the majority of people who lived there.  My mom and dad both had black coworkers and supervisors who I met regularly.

None of this is to claim profound racial sensitivity, however.  Quite the opposite.  If you ask me point-blank if I have a great understanding of the black experience in America, the answer is “no.”  Full stop.  I have a secondhand understanding.  I’ve read histories, I’ve been to important historical locations, I’ve thought hard about race in America, and have some pretty distinct opinions.

But that doesn’t mean I know what it’s like to be black in America, and barring some bizarre “Watermelon Man” scenario, I never will.  And I respect that.  I know that, on a very important fundamental level, I am ignorant of what it’s like to be black in America, and I always will be.

The thing is: I admit that.  The vegan who says “all prejudice is the same” and calling him a fucking asshole is the same as the suffering black people go through?  That guy needs to reread his Socrates.

I admit, I’ve offered my share of abuse to vegans, or at least the self-serious side of veganism.  But you know what?  It’s not prejudice or oppression.  I’m not advocating vegans be hanged, or deported, or be treated as second-class citizens.  I’m not saying vegans shouldn’t be allowed to get married or have kids.  I’m saying some of them, not all by a long shot, are self-righteous and far too self-satisfied white people who read “Invisible Man” once and think they know everything about racial oppression.

To be honest, whenever I see somebody on the far left do this, kind of a modern “but my best friends are black people!”, I feel a slow, painful naseua arising, a realization that even the people supposedly trying to help the oppressed think they get it and really, really don’t.  But, again, that’s another post.

Advertisements

Politics – Fun With the Locals

December 8, 2009

Since I beat on the GOP for being a bunch of obstructionist, sulky little children all the time, I thought it’d be fun to switch things up and whale on a few Democrats.  And what better Democrats to whale on than the Democrats I actually get to vote for?  Here’s why I chose Michael Capauano to take over for Ted Kennedy…namely, the rest of the field.

Marth Coakley – Kind of the chosen, partially because of her contacts, partially because of her gender.  Unfortunately, her gender can’t quite cover up her participation in the “Satanic child abuse” hysteria back in the ’80s, which basically left a bunch of innocent people chucked in the hole and which Coakley tries really hard never to bring up.

Is this minor?  No, I don’t think so.  This was and is a major misstep and a huge problem, and Coakley ducked responsibility.  Which bugs me.  So hell no.

Alan Khazei – the Dennis Kuchinich of this particular race.  I like Khazei as a person; he started some major public service organizations and ideas and as a philanthropist, he’s a great guy. 

Also, my grandmother is less politically naive than he is.  I mean, don’t get me wrong, I like the guy, but anybody trying to compare Obama as community organizer to Khazei as community organizer is comparing apples to Martians.  Khazei just has not deal with national office on the same level as the rest of the race.

Steven Pagliuca – Did I say I wasn’t going to beat on any Republicans?  I forgot about this asshole.

Say what you will about Khazei, at least the guy’s dealt with politics.  Pagliuca’s big achievements in life are all in business, and he’s beating that “I’m going to run government like a business!” bible Massachusetts residents know all too fucking well.  We’ll deal with precisely what’s wrong with that in a later post, but to be honest, no, I do not trust the owner of the Celtics with political office.  He’s about as qualified as a kumquat.

And then I discovered he’s a friend and co-worker of the worst politician in a generation, Mitt…fucking…Romney.  Look it up, they were and are parters and buddies over at Mitt’s little money-laundering scheme.  While I’m sure he’s not a catspaw for Mittens…OK, I can’t say that with a straight face.  Mittens put him up to this, I’m sure of it.  And it’s all a naked political move to try and give Mitt the Zit an edge in his latest bid for political power (Mitt is kind of like Gollum when it comes to the Presidency: “I WANTS IT, MY PRECIOUSSSSSS!”).

So, yeah, I took great pleasure in voting for Capuano.  Why?

Well, for one thing, he’s actually a decent politician.  He listens to his constituents.  For another, he’s had a lot of experience on the national level, being a Congressional rep.  And finally, neither the Christian Coalition or U.S. English, two groups I can’t stand, like him one little bit.  He pulled a 0% and an F from them, respectively.

So, if you’re reading this, and you’re in Massachusetts, and you’re a Democrat, and you actually give a shit, vote Capuano.

I might as well talk about the Republican primary while I’m here, if for no other reason than to mourn what might have been.

The Republican primary, early on, was shaping up to be a real comedy.  Andy Card, who you might remember as a Bush tumor in the press department, was threatening to run for Senate, probably as a form of self-immolation since the entire state would run screaming the other way.  Sadly, he realized this and didn’t run.  Aw.

Next there was Charlie Baker, head of non-profit health insurer Harvard Pilgrim Health Care.  Charlie realized everybody hated the health insurance industry and he’d have to quit his job, so no run for him.

That leaves us with two Republican challengers, Scott Brown and Jack Robinson.  Both are kind of great because they’d both give the national GOP a big steaming ulcer.

Brown’s fairly moderate, pretty much what you’d expect from a Rotarian from Wrentham.  That said, the guy’s shown spine occasionally in the past, and I could see him giving the nationals a rash really, really fast.  But that’s nothing compared to Robinson.

Oh man, Robinson, where to begin with Robinson.  I love this guy for the Senate just for all the shit he’d stir up.  He’s probably the single most relentless tax/deficit hawk in the state, for one thing.  You just don’t GET more fiscally conservative than this guy.  But then there are his social views.

Basically, when it comes to social views, he’s so far to the left I think Michael Steele would read just one of his opinions and barf.

He has no chance, of course.  Even if he wins the primary, I’ll be surprised if the Democratic candidate doesn’t reduce the Republican candidate’s headquarters to a smoking crater.  It’s a liberal state and there’s a strong Democratic machine.

But, oh man, if he somehow does get to office?  C-SPAN will be a whole lot more fun.

Politics – Huckabee’s Cop Killer Problem

November 30, 2009

You may have heard that four police officers were murdered in a coffee shop in Washington state over the weekend. It turns out that the “person of interest” in those killings has a pretty extensive record in Arkansas, and that potential candidate Mike Huckabee, who I’m decidedly not a fan of, commuted his sentence. But it’s worth noting why, and as much as one might like to, why Huckabee doesn’t deserve the lion’s share of the blame.

At the time, the man in question, Maurice Clemmons, had been in jail for eleven years at that point, and had been in jail since he was seventeen. Clemmons was the victim of a truly horrible sentence: sixty years for armed robbery. If you do the math, Clemmons would literally have spent his entire life behind bars, and he might as well have been sentenced to life for a non-capital crime.

Of course Huckabee commuted his sentence. Faced with the idea of a man having his entire life taken away basically because the judge was feeling unpleasant that day, wouldn’t you? Especially in light of Huckabee’s religious convictions (as I said, I don’t like the man’s politics, but his religious convictions do seem sincere), it’s not hard to see why he took pity. And, even if Clemmons is a monster, good for him. Compassion has to be a central part of governance, and we should respect anyone who shows it while in office.

Of course, Clemmons violated parole and was back in jail in fairly short order, but apparently got out long enough to go to Washington State, where he continued to break the law, but with increasing severity.

Here is, to me, the really outrageous part: Clemmons was facing five other felony charges in Washington state, including child rape. And the state, for some inexplicable reason, let him out on bond. That’s especially horrifying because pedophiles tend to be repeat offenders; let them out and they WILL do it again. In other words, there was no way this wasn’t going to end badly.

True, Arkansas probably should have had Clemmons committed for mental illness well before he got to Washington state: that’s Arkansas’ failure. But five felonies? Including child rape? Jesus Christ.

Let’s put the blame where it’s due: the system clearly failed to spot a serious problem. Clemmons is clearly mentally unbalanced and should have been put away. But Huckabee was just one part of a much longer chain. It makes more sense to call out the people who released a child rapist on bond.

Politics – Take the RNC’s Facebook Quiz!

November 24, 2009

(1) Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill

(Ed. note: IT’S A TARP!!!)

(2) Market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare

(Ed. note: I thought it was socialist. At least be consistent, guys. )

(3) Market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation

(Ed. note: So…what you’re saying is no reforms, really.

(4) Workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check

(Ed. note: I notice there’s nothing about anti-intimidation laws in there.)

(5) Legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants

(Ed. note: Yeah, sending their non-criminal relatives back to their homes and separating families. That’ll work wonders for the Latino vote.)

(6) Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges

(Ed. note: Step 1: Troop Surges! Step 2: ??? Step 3: Victory!)

(7) Containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat

(Ed. note: This line does not scan to “Barbara Ann”. Rewrite.)

(8) Retention of the Defense of Marriage Act

(Ed. note: You know what supporting DOMA really says about you, right?)

(9) Protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion

(Ed. note: Funny, I thought I was already on health care rationing, you know, the kind where you pay a lot of money and get jack shit for it.)

(10) The right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership

(Ed. note: Wait, has Obama even bothered with guns so far?)

What, you ask, is this comical list of statements? Why, it’s (allegedly) a test that the far right of the RNC wants all the candidates to take, the “Resolution on Reagan’s Unity Principle for Support of Candidates” (of course they dragged out the corpse of Reagan), although it could also be a very, very cruel joke. Supposedly this was introduced by a committeeman on the RNC in response to the, ah, contentious NY-23 race, where Sarah Palin and the party’s far-right wing campaigned hard for their man…and ate big heapin’ helpin’s of pavement, which the moderates told them, repeatedly, would happen and they didn’t listen.

The idea would be that if a candidate DIDN’T pass this test, they would be denied support and funding. In other words, it should really be called the “Fuck You Olympia Snowe” amendment. Because that’s what the GOP needs, now more than ever: to alienate everybody who ISN’T on the far right, especially when Obama’s still got decent approval ratings.

The main problem is that even if this thing doesn’t get implemented (and I kind of doubt it will), it’ll probably become a meme. Rabid far-right clowns will start demanding all their senators and Congressmen answer what amounts to a Facebook quiz instead of actually doing things.

As for my impressions of the list…what’s the best way to put this?

To be honest, what this reminds me of more than anything is those ads for the Droid trying to trash the iPhone. It’s focused on Obama to a degree that’s actually kind of weird for a party that fulminated at length about how he was some big fat celebrity instead of a politician. And, honestly, if your opening salvo is, “Well, he’s so big and popular and all but WE’RE BETTER!”, you’ve already lost regardless of how true that is (protip: You’re substantially worse).

But what gets me most about it is how you can’t just politely disagree with Obama, or want to work with Obama but or agree with his goals but disagree with his methods of achieving them. You have to be resolutely AGAINST. It’s continuing a policy of sulking and doing nothing, basically hoping against hope Obama will derail himself and they can ride to victory.

Let’s review: they just lost a Congressional seat, making gaining any sort of foothold in Congress one seat harder. Five Senators are retiring. Arlen Specter has already quit the party. Olympia Snowe probably won’t bail on the GOP, but I just do not see Maine accepting somebody else and she has an incredibly strong local base. And, most importantly, all the people who want this kind of thing are not actually elected officials but rather committeemen, talk radio loudmouths, and clueless quitters with books to sell and TV appearances to grub for.

If this passes, which I doubt, it’ll make 2010…highly interesting, that’s for sure.

Politics – Sarah Impalin’

November 16, 2009

Can I just say, now that the election is well over and Barack Obama is President of the United States, that I really don’t give a shit about Sarah Palin and wish she’d go the fuck away already?

I’m sure she has a great career ahead of her as a faux voice of the masses for the GOP. But that’s all she’s got ahead of her. The idea of this woman as any sort of political force is a joke. Granted, this isn’t going to stop the GOP from clinging to her in desperation because she’s about as popular as the 2012 field gets right at the moment, but the elections are about three very long years away, plenty of time for someone else to snatch away the spotlight. Of course, for the GOP, there might not be anybody else…and that’s very bad news.

The truth is, Palin pretty much destroyed her hopes of any sort of national seat during the 2008 elections. I remember being surprised and interested, and then promptly deflated once I discovered she was basically such a setback she’d reverse suffrage. Although honestly I have a different perspective on Troopergate than most people (considering the trooper in question threatened her sister and her father, I don’t respect her actions but I can respect her reasons), the rest of it, especially the complete hash she made of her governorship and her mayoralty are appalling. Her antics on the campaign trail didn’t help much, as she came off as basically every angry talk radio dimwit ever to have graced the airwaves. There is a reason Rush Limbaugh, for all his alleged popularity, has never run for public office (well, before the drug addiction came along), and Palin learned why the hard way. She was a millstone around John McCain’s neck, and that along with the McCain campaign’s general incompetence took him out more effectively than Obama’s campaign could have dreamed.

The problem with Palin was she was peddling the same tired “Real America is in the small towns instead of those sinful cities” horseshit, and nobody, not even a good chunk of the small towns, was buying. Part of the reason her book tour is going to locations like Rochester instead of major cities (no offense to the charming town of Rochester, NY, of course, but it’s not exactly jumpin’ in the publishing world) is because her publisher knows Palin would be driven out of any major city on a rail.

Of course, shit that doesn’t sell politically can sell like gangbusters on the page: selling a million books isn’t nearly as difficult as getting the voting public to vote for you. So the GOP will misinterpret her sales as interest, because, basically, they’re desperate.

Right now the 2012 field, even if Obama stays at about 50% popularity, does not look good. Tim Pawlenty? Sure, let’s put a doughy, not-terribly-distinguished white guy up against the black guy. That’ll end well. Mitt Romney? 2012 might be Mitt’s candidacy year, but the GOP somehow has to ignore the fact that a quarter of their base won’t vote for him because he’s a Mormon, and Mitt is not exactly masterful with the press, or voters who don’t like him, or anybody who asks him about anything off script. He’s not called an android behind his back for nothing. Newt Gingrich? Who wants him? And, of course, Palin. Although part of me wants to see a John Boehner run. Why? Because his name is boner (he insists it’s pronounced “boy-ner”, which somehow sounds even more like a gay porn alias), and it would be the biggest landslide in history for Obama.

It would be one thing if the GOP had any moderates it weren’t currently shitting on. Olympia Snowe is no doubt enjoying her free rock salt sent to Maine (this is why I love RedState; it’s run by idiots), but if the RNC wasn’t ready to murder her politically before, after her support of the health care bill, it’ll be trying hard to do so. Arlen Specter was never interested and he’s ill and a Democrat now anyway. Chaffee was thrown out of office and had no love of the RNC even before they hung him out to dry. But there’s just nobody left. They’ve either been voted out of office, they’ve switched parties, or they’ve quit.

Like I said: it’s a long three years. Maybe the GOP will find a worthy challenger within its ranks after the 2010 elections…but I doubt it. No, instead, I’m fairly sure that come 2012, we’ll have Sarah Palin to kick around again. Better the devil you know, I suppose.

Politics – Why Neither Side Did Well In the 2009 Elections

November 5, 2009

Elections don’t tell us much about the future; anybody trying to handicap the 2010 elections based on two governor’s races and a Congressional seat vote is going to come up dry. Anything can happen in a year, and it’s more often close events than distant ones. Obama had a very well-run campaign, but John McCain made the mistake of saying “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” right when it was going to hell.

That said, the elections CAN tell us roughly what people are thinking right now, and right now? They’re pissed at everybody.

New Jersey frankly wasn’t a surprise. Corzine was deeply unpopular and his opponent smartly realized that this was a state race, not a national one. And as Jersey is deeply Democratic, I have a sneaking suspicion that Chris Christie is going to wind up making the GOP very, very unhappy in fairly short order, once they issue him marching orders and he decides he likes his job over political suicide. I spent twelve years in Vermont, and witnessed the transition from a Democratic governor (Howard Dean) to a Republican one, and Jim Douglas didn’t exact ring in major changes, either.

As for Virginia: no incumbent, conservative state. We call this a “chip shot.” Mark Warner was always an anomaly, and the win in Virginia is less than surprising.

Should the DNC be troubled? Well, yeah. Losing two governor’s races is never a good thing. So they should be worried. But, then, so should the GOP.

What Republicans aren’t talking about is the hilarious results of NY-23: namely, a Democrat beat the “Conservative Party” candidate GOP luminaries pressed hard for by a five-point margin, and they just lost a seat in the House. What was that about “momentum” again?

The winner, Bill Owens, is hardly a pot-smokin’ hippie: he is by all accounts quite conservative, and his district is fairly conservative as well. On the other hand, they voted overwhelmingly for Obama in the last election, which is why the GOP stumped so hard for the seat and poured a ton of money into Hoffman. After all, this was about conservative ideals in a conservative district with an outgoing Republican in the seat, easy freakin’ win. And the polls were going their way, as well. This way, they could say, “Look! The moderates are sick of Obama!”

Personally, the only thing that surprised me was the margin being so narrow: the “Conservative Party” candidate, Doug Hoffman, has all the charisma of a wad of gum on your shoe. I have no idea what the local issues are in NY-23, but then again, neither did Hoffman. He was a crappy candidate, and he got clocked.

In short, the GOP was just told, AGAIN, “We don’t want what you’re selling. Give us something else.”

In other words: the GOP’s voters aren’t happy with the GOP, yet Obama’s gains in conservative country are, unsurprisingly, not permanent. What does this mean for 2010?

I dunno. But that lost seat is going to make “retaking Congress” that much harder.

Politics – Why Does the Far Left Want Obama To Act Like Bush?

November 4, 2009

So I open the collection of AP feeds and bad editing that is the Metro today and am greeted with a two-page spread about Obama’s first 365 days in office. Of course, it isn’t 365 days of him in POWER. That’ll come January 20th, 2010. But we expect this kind of inaccuracy from the Metro.

The lead article was all about some of my fellow liberals being deeply, deeply disappointed that he’s trying to build consensus instead of taking huge steps. After all, America’s ready for that! They’ve talked to all their friends, so America must be ready for that! Let’s do it! Let’s ram through legislation with no regard whatsoever for the opposition!

Which leaves me wondering: are these people completely fucking insane? Or just assholes?

I wasn’t a fan of Bush for many reasons, but one of the key ones was his reply to any criticism of his policies, no matter how trenchant, relevant, or correct it turned out to be, was “shut up, ya faggot”, and then forcing the law through. Bush’s essential disinterest in weighing his options left us two brushfire wars, a massive deficit, and a broken economy.

Obama will steamroll people when he needs to. His chief of staff might as well have “Caterpillar” tattooed on his face; Obama appointed an arm-twister to that role for a distinct reason. And he hasn’t exactly not put any legislation through; witness the expansion of federal hate crimes laws which just went through, or his stimulus plan, or, Christ, pretty much any legislation. Obama hasn’t been lazy about getting bills out the door.

But he’s also making a sincere effort to include as many people as possible, and there’s a reason for that. Obama’s not going to cater to the far right, but he will aim straight for the middle. There was another article claiming the Republican Party has found its feet. Unlikely, to be blunt. Obama’s approval rating may not be at the 60% it was, it’s at a dreaded…52%. Over his last four years, that was an approval rating Bush could only dream of.

Part of this is just Harry Reid (theme song: “If I Only Had Some Balls…”) and Nancy Pelosi are taking a good chunk of the abuse for him. But another part is that he is trying to at least make people feel like he’s listening to them.

It helps that his opponents are weak and getting weaker. Just recently, the GOP hit numbers it thought it wouldn’t see again in approval: 36%. In other words, people still disapprove of them as much as they did in 2007.

But all that evaporates the moment Obama says “fuck you, we’re doing things my way.” He knows he was elected precisely because people were tired of that. And, to be honest, I’d rather have a President who builds consensus and pisses off self-righteous douchebags than a President who steamrolls everyone who disagrees. After all, we live in a democracy, and it’s nice when a President is democratic as well as Democratic.

Politics – Vote Local

November 3, 2009

There are a lot of reasons I could provide you to participate in your local elections today. Whoever is in power locally helps build the structure nationally. Local politicians have the most effect on your life. It’s good to get involved in your community.

But the best reason is: local politics are hilarious.

Seriously, you do not know comedy until you have seen two grown men fight tooth and nail for the right to be on…the school board. This is especially funny if you’ve ever been to a school board meeting. It’s like a PTA meeting with political activists. Nobody in their right mind wants to be on the school board except for bragging rights.

So vote in your local elections. They do this crap, so we don’t have to.

Politics – Memo To Teabaggers

October 23, 2009

OK, guys, let’s just clear something up here, once and for all:

1) I respect that you have political disagreements with Obama.

2) You, of course, should exercise your Constitutional rights as you see fit.

3) I understand that you disagree with the direction this country is taking.

All that said, whenever I see you try to pair a black man with a symbol of racism and genocide, especially since most of you are pasty honky motherfuckers like me, it makes me want to haul off and give you a good shot in the nuts.

More than that, let me just emphasize that to any thinking person, the comparison makes no sense and therefore makes you look like a fucking clown. Why should I respect somebody who lacks the basic arguing skill to do anymore than say “Well…well…well, he’s LIKE HITLER!”

No he isn’t. Leaving out the whole gassing-Jews thing, nowhere close. Not even Bush was anywhere close to Hitler and he wanted a police state. Even with Rick Santorum, who believes there is no Constitutional right to privacy, in the GOP (thankfully not holding elected office; there’s pure nightmare fuel), I’m not willing to compare them to fascists. We’re just talking about a whole other level here.

The real irony is that there’s been a lot of fulminating about how Obama is, pretty successfully, marginalizing his opponents. Well, Jesus Christ, the self-appointed face of the opposition almost makes it impossible for him not to just by existing. If anything, the best way to do it is just by trying to work with them; when they throw hissies and act like children, it makes the decision, for most Americans square in the middle, all too easy.

So I guess what I’m really saying is, thanks, teabaggers. I like Obama, and the way you’re protesting, you’re going to keep make him looking good for a long, long time.

Politics – Obama and States’ Rights When It Comes to Weed, Man

October 19, 2009

Well isn’t this just all sorts of interesting:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MEDICAL_MARIJUANA?SITE=WTMJ&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-10-19-06-22-23

If you want an example of why I argue Obama’s middle-of-the-road, this is it. Actually legally speaking, this makes a lot of sense. It respects state laws while still going after larger drug dealers. Probably a little flawed, but interesting nonetheless.