April 11, 2008
April 9, 2008
That's kind of funny. There are three senators who serve in Congress with Joe Lieberman who are running for president right now. You would think at least one of them would defend the integrity of American politics by demanding that their esteemed colleague publicly apologize for knowingly lying and slandering a rival's campaign staffer.
But again, that's just not how Washington works, is it.
Well no shit
Forgive the pretentious incredulity here, but does this truly surprise anyone?
Lieberman's constant presence at McCain's side fuels speculation that he would join a McCain administration. Yet he already has talked with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid about his future in the caucus.
Would Lieberman, 66, a four-term Connecticut senator, be stripped of his committee chairmanship and seniority if Democrats no longer had to rely on a self-described "Independent Democrat" for their one-vote majority?
"I can tell you Sen. Reid had talked to me a few times and said he knows there will be talk if we get more than 51 Democrats next year," Lieberman said. "As far as he is concerned, I will retain my seniority, etc., no matter how many Democrats there are next year."
Reid's spokesman, Jim Manley, confirmed Lieberman's account.
Essentially, I guess it's worth noting that the fix is in well before the election so we aren't disappointed in January. But yes, let's be clear here: Joe Lieberman is sitting pretty. The Democrats didn't lift a finger when he was kicked out of his own primary, they're not going to kick him out of his position even as a traitor within his his own sort-of-not-really-part-of-anymore party, and if John McCain wins the election and appoints Lieberman to a cabinet position, Democrats will join Republicans in approving the nomination unanimously. Because that is how Washington works.
Look, Michelle Malkin is also a millionaire. There are certain things you have to accept instead of letting your outright hatred manifest into a tumor in the front of your skull.
April 8, 2008
The cake is a lie
I guess this is why I'd suck at actual politics. I really, truly do not understand how Mark Penn could possibly have any involvement with the Clinton campaign in any capacity at this point.
This isn't a like some kind of riddle, where we figure out how Penn can be part of the campaign but not, umm, part of the campaign. Yesterday we were told he was fired. Today we are told he was not. And yet, he should be. He was being paid by the Columbian government to help promote a trade deal that another client who was paying him was actively opposing. I'm at a loss for snark here. Seriously- what the hell?
The story that's been developing over the last few days about a polygamist compound in Texas is one of those articles that I really wish would be read by friends, family, and other left-leaning bloggers who make the occasional stance about how awesome it would be if we just legalized prostitution, polygamy, etc.
There's always this caveat when people make libertarian platitudes towards sexual culture, as if saying "as long as everyone wants to, it's great" means that it will actually happen. My point is, it doesn't. The problem with polygamy as a culture in America is pretty much the same problem with Communism as a political philosophy: it's an awesome theory that doesn't practically work because powerful people like to remain powerful and aren't actually interested in being equal with people as much as they are interested in, umm, not.
In most circumstances, as we're seeing in Texas, the application of polygamy in America entails quasi-religious old men justifying their desire to rape groups of girls. It offends me when people defend the concept of gay marriage by saying "well I think ALL marriage should be legal if people want it: gays, groups, blah blah blah." Gay marriage is an issue because it's two people who want to have an equal partnership with each other. Polygamy isn't about equality. It's about classifying the women in the "marriage" as livestock.
I'm not saying there aren't legitimate arguments about addressing the religious and conservative stranglehold on sexual mores in American society. What I am saying, though, is that there's a huge difference between the left/libertarian idealism of sexual liberty in America and the reality of its actual application by people who do not exactly have sexual equality in mind. The magical fantasy world of happy, enfranchised polygamists projects the reality of the culture about as well as a frat boy in a pimp costume for Halloween projects the reality of prostitution.
April 7, 2008
Watching a debate about Rev. Wright during the Hardball/Countdown block on MSNBC was the most bizarre experience in recent memory of cable punditry. I suppose getting Pat Buchanan's opinion on Wright sort of makes sense, if only that if anyone knows racism, it's Pat Buchanan.
And so there's the mind-borfing irony of the situation. Pat Buchanan actually is a legitimate political correspondent. He has decades of Washington experience, extensive connections, a history in electoral politics, and a high degree of actual intelligence. He is also, however, a complete goddamn racist. So the network that pays Keith Olbermann also pays a guy who's outrageous, awful opinions about certain subjects they ignore to focus on his opinions on other subjects. Huh. Life's funny that way, in the way that this happens everywhere at all times, always. Christ.
In a fit of morbid serendipity, I need to acknowledge something of a gruesome coincidence that occurred today. While this strip was made well in advance, I like everyone else learned this afternoon of the passing of actor Charlton Heston. Heston's conservative views in the later years of his life, primarily of course his odious patronage to the most extreme cult-level religion of gun worship, is sadly the legacy that many people my age will know of him, and not a decades-spanning career in Hollywood that will rightfully mark him in history as a god of the craft. Heston was a man who has done so much important work in one field despite actions that I find highly objectionable in another. And as his late years succumbed to dementia many of those final actions, such as those most famously seen in Bowling for Columbine, were found by many to be beyond outrageous.
I image there's a parallel you might draw from that. I least I hope you do.