A lot of people that I really like to read have written about this already today, but it's poignant enough that I'm gonna write too. I've put links to other people's thoughts on the subject at the end of this so you can check them out, too.
When I was a kid, I used to watch Sportscenter on ESPN religiously. As soon as I got a TV in my room, and even before that, I watched Keith Olbermann and Dan Patrick recap the days athletic happenings every single night, mostly because these guys were hilarious and they made sports about so much more than box scores.
Eventually, Olbermann left ESPN to get a "real" news job, and I have watched his show on MSNBC sporadically for years, mostly because he's an unapologetic ultra-liberal badass and while sometimes he says stuff I don't agree with, you can always tell that he genuinely believes in what he's saying.
So, when all the blogs this morning started popping up with "Can you believe what Keith Olbermann said last night?!" I knew that it was going to be good. However, I had no idea it would be this powerful, this right on. I beg you to watch the whole thing, as it is exactly what the gay rights movement has been trying to figure out how to say for years.
Allies always ask me how they can be more involved, how they can make this issue one that they have ownership of. Well, Mr. Olbermann has just explained why it matters to everyone, and that every person is important in the campaign to increase understanding and acceptance.
Here are some other people's thoughts:
Information Access Avenger
Bitch, Ph.D.
Jezebel
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
Well if Melissa Etheridge Isn't Paying Taxes, Does that Mean None of Us Have To?
Election week provides far more blog-fodder than regular old Mondays, and I'm having trouble thinking of good things to write about. Actually, I don't have trouble thinking of ideas, I have trouble remembering ideas. I used to carry around a little composition book that I would write all sorts of things in. Perhaps I'll have to bring back that practice.
In other news, Melissa Etheridge has decided to stop paying her taxes until she's allowed to get married in California. I appreciate her tenacity, really I do, but is that really the best way to solve things? Not to mention, at the risk of getting all lawyer-y on you, it's not a legally supportable action, so really all that would happen is she'd end up in court for tax evasion, wasting even more tax payer money for a lawsuit that she knew full well wouldn't enact the ends she was looking for.
I realize that taxes are like our favorite thing as citizens of the United States to complain about, but I, for one, am happy to pay my taxes as long as I trust the person who's writing the checks. And, because that person has switched to someone who is presumably at least equally interested in social programs as he is with the wars we've created, I feel pretty good about the 15% tax that I will pay this year. I'll feel even better about the 35% I will pay if and when I start making $357,700 a year. I don't mean this to sound all liberally and holier-than-thou (although I'm aware of my propensity to come across that way), I just believe that sometimes people do have enough money and while the conservatives can scream from the rooftops about how this "redistribution" is code for socialism, I don't really care because it's gotta be better than what we've got now.
I'm a strong believer in the progressive tax system because I believe that the people at the top have a moral and legal responsibility to look after and provide for the people at the bottom. It has worked historically, and although there have obviously been major problems with some social services, the general idea that FDR set forth in his New Deals is one that continues to thrive, regardless of what the right tries to tell you.
In other news, Melissa Etheridge has decided to stop paying her taxes until she's allowed to get married in California. I appreciate her tenacity, really I do, but is that really the best way to solve things? Not to mention, at the risk of getting all lawyer-y on you, it's not a legally supportable action, so really all that would happen is she'd end up in court for tax evasion, wasting even more tax payer money for a lawsuit that she knew full well wouldn't enact the ends she was looking for.
I realize that taxes are like our favorite thing as citizens of the United States to complain about, but I, for one, am happy to pay my taxes as long as I trust the person who's writing the checks. And, because that person has switched to someone who is presumably at least equally interested in social programs as he is with the wars we've created, I feel pretty good about the 15% tax that I will pay this year. I'll feel even better about the 35% I will pay if and when I start making $357,700 a year. I don't mean this to sound all liberally and holier-than-thou (although I'm aware of my propensity to come across that way), I just believe that sometimes people do have enough money and while the conservatives can scream from the rooftops about how this "redistribution" is code for socialism, I don't really care because it's gotta be better than what we've got now.
I'm a strong believer in the progressive tax system because I believe that the people at the top have a moral and legal responsibility to look after and provide for the people at the bottom. It has worked historically, and although there have obviously been major problems with some social services, the general idea that FDR set forth in his New Deals is one that continues to thrive, regardless of what the right tries to tell you.
While they'll try to tell you that welfare just allows for lazy people to milk the system (or they just come right out and say what they mean, like this asswipe) the reality is that the vast majority of the people on welfare are just normal citizens who are down on their luck and need temporary support to get back on their feet. Does that mean that nobody is out to fuck over the welfare system? Of course not, but there's criminals in every system, and the obsession with demonizing anyone who asks for help has gotten wildly out of control.
They'll try to tell you that national healthcare is a bad thing because it takes the power away from individuals. However, Obama's healthcare plan doesn't change anything for those who are happy with their healthcare, it just provides it affordably for those who can't access it now. It's this twisting of information that's got everything all fucked up, and I'm excited for the opportunity for someone to finally set the country straight.
I realize that Melissa Etheridge probably didn't mean that she didn't care about poor people or children or anyone else who receives governmental funding (like, you know, EVERYONE) but not paying your taxes is not the way to fix things. Paying your taxes, funding your government so that it can function the way it's supposed to, is what will really help to change things.
I agree that things need to change, I'm just certain that there's a better way to do it.
They'll try to tell you that national healthcare is a bad thing because it takes the power away from individuals. However, Obama's healthcare plan doesn't change anything for those who are happy with their healthcare, it just provides it affordably for those who can't access it now. It's this twisting of information that's got everything all fucked up, and I'm excited for the opportunity for someone to finally set the country straight.
I realize that Melissa Etheridge probably didn't mean that she didn't care about poor people or children or anyone else who receives governmental funding (like, you know, EVERYONE) but not paying your taxes is not the way to fix things. Paying your taxes, funding your government so that it can function the way it's supposed to, is what will really help to change things.
I agree that things need to change, I'm just certain that there's a better way to do it.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Ralph Nader Sucks Too Much to Handle
Okay, I've been trying to keep to one large issue per day, but this is too ridiculous and overwhelmingly offensive to save until tomorrow.
As if I needed more of a reason to hate Ralph Nader. His altruistic facade that hides his egomaniacal self-importance has made me want to barf since he duped people into believing him in 2000. This just puts the proverbial nail in the coffin.
Feministe has posted about this Presidential "Hopeful" and all around Selfish Bastard releasing a statement, and then appearing on Fox News, in which he calls President-Obama an Uncle Tom.
Perhaps there was an important point he was trying to make somewhere in his racist bullshit, but it was completely lost in the midst of him trying to reason away his grotesque behavior. Plus, dude, when Fox News is calling you out for being racist, you've got some major problems. I'd like to join Feministe in joining in a resounding FUCK YOU NADER.
As if I needed more of a reason to hate Ralph Nader. His altruistic facade that hides his egomaniacal self-importance has made me want to barf since he duped people into believing him in 2000. This just puts the proverbial nail in the coffin.
Feministe has posted about this Presidential "Hopeful" and all around Selfish Bastard releasing a statement, and then appearing on Fox News, in which he calls President-Obama an Uncle Tom.
Perhaps there was an important point he was trying to make somewhere in his racist bullshit, but it was completely lost in the midst of him trying to reason away his grotesque behavior. Plus, dude, when Fox News is calling you out for being racist, you've got some major problems. I'd like to join Feministe in joining in a resounding FUCK YOU NADER.
This Just In! Obama has Erased Racism in the United States?
I've been having a hard time figuring out how to approach the race issue with this whole election. However, this dumbfuck has created a glorious segue to the way that feel about things:
“You know, if you were a slave in the old South, what did you get as a slave? You got free room and board, you got free money, and you got rewarded for having children because that was just, you know, tomorrow’s slave. … Can I ask a question? How’s that different from welfare? You get a free house, you get free food, and you get rewarded for having children. Oh, wait a minute, hold on a second. There is a difference: The slave had to work for it.” - Jim Quinn [hereinafter, Douchebag], on radio program The War Room with Quinn & Rose
Okay, let's break this down. First, Douchebag says that slaves should have been grateful for their station in life because, dammit, they got to eat and not live outdoors. Plus, they got to have children! Who whines about that?!
Next, Douchebag says that welfare is the same as slavery. That may or may not be a tenable argument, although I'm certain that Douchebag and I have very different reasons why. However, he goes on to reasons that it might actually be different because slaves had to work for their (non-existent) living.
Now, let's not get into the racial breakdown of who receives welfare because that missed the point completely. The point that has been clearly demonstrated through this Douchebag's ability to say such things and keep his job is that merely electing a Black [1] president does not magically fix race relations in this country.
I've been watching the 24-hour news cycle all week long, and while there are glowing aberrations (Oh how badly I want to be Rachel Maddow's friend...),the majority of what I've been hearing from white pundits is how great it is that we can finally move on from those pesky race problems and finally get to the business of fixing Uh-mer-i-cuh. But don't worry, you radical socialist liberals, they've always got the token Black person to throw in the "Um, guys? Maybe it's not the best thing to say we've moved past race in this country..." so that the whiteys can rebut with their "But we elected a Black dude!"
Let's get one thing clear: my views about racism fall to the very left of the political spectrum. I believe that racism is an institutionalized problem that affects every aspect of life in the United States. I believe in reparations, I believe in affirmative action, and I believe in funding social welfare programming which works towards understanding and inclusion of these issues. So, when I say that the whole idea that racism is "over" because we finally elected a Black president is offensive, it should come as no surprise.
Maybe the theory of color blind racism hasn't quite reached the mainstream. But, the idea that the ability of one person to "pull himself up by his bootstraps" means that every other member of the Black community should be able to as well only perpetuates the idea that all people in that community are the same. I keep hearing that "now Black students have a role model," and I don't want to negate the overwhelming importance of that fact. However, it does not mean that all the limitations placed on racial minorities have magically disappeared in a cloud of Obama greatness.
I'm excited that the issues of race have been brought more squarely to the front of politics in the United States because it's been a long time coming. However, we cannot use this as an excuse to declare victory on the race war and move along to other issues. Racism is still an issue in the United States, and will continue to be until we acknowledge their existence and begin to genuinely work towards its eradication. The possibilities have been greatly expanded, and for that I am truly enthusiastic, but please stop minimizing the issue by declaring that it can be completely remedied by one president's election.
[1]:I use the term "Black" to reference the color of President-Elect Obama's skin while not making a statement about his nationality or race. My use of the term "Black" is not meant to offend, but merely reference color of President-Elect Obama's skin as it is reflected in the current culture of the United States. Maybe we can get to the offensive nature of conservative "is he or isn't he" conversations another time...
“You know, if you were a slave in the old South, what did you get as a slave? You got free room and board, you got free money, and you got rewarded for having children because that was just, you know, tomorrow’s slave. … Can I ask a question? How’s that different from welfare? You get a free house, you get free food, and you get rewarded for having children. Oh, wait a minute, hold on a second. There is a difference: The slave had to work for it.” - Jim Quinn [hereinafter, Douchebag], on radio program The War Room with Quinn & Rose
Okay, let's break this down. First, Douchebag says that slaves should have been grateful for their station in life because, dammit, they got to eat and not live outdoors. Plus, they got to have children! Who whines about that?!
Next, Douchebag says that welfare is the same as slavery. That may or may not be a tenable argument, although I'm certain that Douchebag and I have very different reasons why. However, he goes on to reasons that it might actually be different because slaves had to work for their (non-existent) living.
Now, let's not get into the racial breakdown of who receives welfare because that missed the point completely. The point that has been clearly demonstrated through this Douchebag's ability to say such things and keep his job is that merely electing a Black [1] president does not magically fix race relations in this country.
I've been watching the 24-hour news cycle all week long, and while there are glowing aberrations (Oh how badly I want to be Rachel Maddow's friend...),the majority of what I've been hearing from white pundits is how great it is that we can finally move on from those pesky race problems and finally get to the business of fixing Uh-mer-i-cuh. But don't worry, you radical socialist liberals, they've always got the token Black person to throw in the "Um, guys? Maybe it's not the best thing to say we've moved past race in this country..." so that the whiteys can rebut with their "But we elected a Black dude!"
Let's get one thing clear: my views about racism fall to the very left of the political spectrum. I believe that racism is an institutionalized problem that affects every aspect of life in the United States. I believe in reparations, I believe in affirmative action, and I believe in funding social welfare programming which works towards understanding and inclusion of these issues. So, when I say that the whole idea that racism is "over" because we finally elected a Black president is offensive, it should come as no surprise.
Maybe the theory of color blind racism hasn't quite reached the mainstream. But, the idea that the ability of one person to "pull himself up by his bootstraps" means that every other member of the Black community should be able to as well only perpetuates the idea that all people in that community are the same. I keep hearing that "now Black students have a role model," and I don't want to negate the overwhelming importance of that fact. However, it does not mean that all the limitations placed on racial minorities have magically disappeared in a cloud of Obama greatness.
I'm excited that the issues of race have been brought more squarely to the front of politics in the United States because it's been a long time coming. However, we cannot use this as an excuse to declare victory on the race war and move along to other issues. Racism is still an issue in the United States, and will continue to be until we acknowledge their existence and begin to genuinely work towards its eradication. The possibilities have been greatly expanded, and for that I am truly enthusiastic, but please stop minimizing the issue by declaring that it can be completely remedied by one president's election.
[1]:
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Obama and Ellen's Rescue Plan
Two things to think about that have made today a little bit better than yesterday.
First:
Obama's mention of gay people in his acceptance speech is the one of the only times (certainly the only instance I've seen) where a major party candidate mentioned us in a major speech. His inclusion of our community opens the dialogue for things like Proposition 8 to never happen again, and allow me to work towards moving on from the hurt of its passing to a place where I can work for change.
If Obama has taught us anything, it is that normal people really can make a difference, and his election has reminded me that these anti-gay measures are not the same as those in 2004 because at that time, there was no prospect for a fundamental shift in political ideals. Now, regardless of how much change we're able to actually pass, I can rest assured that my president respects my humanity and believes in my contribution to society.
Caveat: I realize that Obama doesn't support marriage equality at an optimal level. However, as we've seen, chances are good that if he would have come out as pro-marriage, he would have had a harder time getting elected. I'm all for political pragmatism, and I think Obama has earned the benefit of the doubt.
Second reason today is better than yesterday:
Ellen understands my hurt, and agrees with my resolve. I say that as if I asked her while talking on the phone this morning (oh my god, how awesome would that be?!) but really I just read her statement:
"Watching the returns on election night was an amazing experience. Barack Obama is our new president. Change is here. I, like millions of Americans, felt like we had taken a giant step towards equality. We were watching history.
This morning, when it was clear that Proposition 8 had passed in California, I can’t explain the feeling I had. I was saddened beyond belief. Here we just had a giant step towards equality and then on the very next day, we took a giant step away.
I believe one day a 'ban on gay marriage' will sound totally ridiculous. In the meantime, I will continue to speak out for equality for all of us."
Okay, so I know that I love her at a level that is unnatural, but for some reason everything sounds a bit more hopeful when Ellen says it. I'm ready to work for the things that I want to see, and I'm excited at how many people sent supportive words yesterday to remind me of what's at stake.
Tomorrow, we talk about something light, like puppies or peacock babies. Even I can't stay downtrodden for this long.
First:
Obama's mention of gay people in his acceptance speech is the one of the only times (certainly the only instance I've seen) where a major party candidate mentioned us in a major speech. His inclusion of our community opens the dialogue for things like Proposition 8 to never happen again, and allow me to work towards moving on from the hurt of its passing to a place where I can work for change.
If Obama has taught us anything, it is that normal people really can make a difference, and his election has reminded me that these anti-gay measures are not the same as those in 2004 because at that time, there was no prospect for a fundamental shift in political ideals. Now, regardless of how much change we're able to actually pass, I can rest assured that my president respects my humanity and believes in my contribution to society.
Caveat: I realize that Obama doesn't support marriage equality at an optimal level. However, as we've seen, chances are good that if he would have come out as pro-marriage, he would have had a harder time getting elected. I'm all for political pragmatism, and I think Obama has earned the benefit of the doubt.
Second reason today is better than yesterday:
Ellen understands my hurt, and agrees with my resolve. I say that as if I asked her while talking on the phone this morning (oh my god, how awesome would that be?!) but really I just read her statement:
"Watching the returns on election night was an amazing experience. Barack Obama is our new president. Change is here. I, like millions of Americans, felt like we had taken a giant step towards equality. We were watching history.
This morning, when it was clear that Proposition 8 had passed in California, I can’t explain the feeling I had. I was saddened beyond belief. Here we just had a giant step towards equality and then on the very next day, we took a giant step away.
I believe one day a 'ban on gay marriage' will sound totally ridiculous. In the meantime, I will continue to speak out for equality for all of us."
Okay, so I know that I love her at a level that is unnatural, but for some reason everything sounds a bit more hopeful when Ellen says it. I'm ready to work for the things that I want to see, and I'm excited at how many people sent supportive words yesterday to remind me of what's at stake.
Tomorrow, we talk about something light, like puppies or peacock babies. Even I can't stay downtrodden for this long.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
An Open Letter to the Anti-Gay Majority
Dear Anti-Gay Legislation Supporter,
I am a lesbian. I am a citizen of the United States. Yesterday, you chose to pass 4 measures which severely limit the rights of me and my friends based solely on the people we love. In California, Florida, and Arizona, you passed propositions which make marriage unavailable to gay and lesbian citizens. In Arkansas, you passed a measure which would make me and my partner of 4 years adopting children in need of a home illegal. While it may be easy for you to vote for such things, I think it is important for you to understand just what effect your vote has.
The discrimination in my life began early, and continues each day. From the time when I was told to go to the boys bathroom as an 8 year old, to the time when I was 23 and was refused service for looking too masculine in South Dakota, to my constant wondering now about how much to disclose about my personal life in job interviews, I am tired of living in a world where it is perfectly acceptable to treat people as second class citizens.
Today, I have had to take numerous breaks to the bathroom in order to cry privately before returning to study. I have had to come to grips with the fact that a democracy in which I believe so strongly chose to legislate hate. You may think that your actions have little effect on actual people, but there are millions of people just like me for whom your decisions matter greatly. While you may not realize it, we are your neighbors, your teachers, your government officials, your friends, and your family. You think you don't know us, but people like me reside everywhere and I will no longer allow myself to live in a world where such overt hatred is allowed to prosper.
Perhaps most disheartening, anti-gay legislation supporter, is who you are. In California, nearly a quarter of you are women. Another quarter of you have at least a bachelor's degree. Of the African-Americans polled, seventy percent of you voted for discrimination. Nearly thirty percent of you identify as a democrat or independent. You had the chance to help eradicate hate in your state, yet you chose to support a measure which only solidified discrimination.
So, anti-gay legislation supporter, you can go fuck yourself. While I am overwhelmingly sad over the decision you've made, I will no longer allow you to disguise discrimination as sound public policy. Change is seeping from everything I see in this post-Bush society, and today is the day that your backwards and offensive views are no longer allowed to prosper.
I encourage and welcome the support of others in this enormous task, even those who previously voted for such measures. Hate should not be a legislated value, and I look forward to fighting against that notion until everyone in the United States is truly equal.
Sincerely,
ChangeAgent
I am a lesbian. I am a citizen of the United States. Yesterday, you chose to pass 4 measures which severely limit the rights of me and my friends based solely on the people we love. In California, Florida, and Arizona, you passed propositions which make marriage unavailable to gay and lesbian citizens. In Arkansas, you passed a measure which would make me and my partner of 4 years adopting children in need of a home illegal. While it may be easy for you to vote for such things, I think it is important for you to understand just what effect your vote has.
The discrimination in my life began early, and continues each day. From the time when I was told to go to the boys bathroom as an 8 year old, to the time when I was 23 and was refused service for looking too masculine in South Dakota, to my constant wondering now about how much to disclose about my personal life in job interviews, I am tired of living in a world where it is perfectly acceptable to treat people as second class citizens.
Today, I have had to take numerous breaks to the bathroom in order to cry privately before returning to study. I have had to come to grips with the fact that a democracy in which I believe so strongly chose to legislate hate. You may think that your actions have little effect on actual people, but there are millions of people just like me for whom your decisions matter greatly. While you may not realize it, we are your neighbors, your teachers, your government officials, your friends, and your family. You think you don't know us, but people like me reside everywhere and I will no longer allow myself to live in a world where such overt hatred is allowed to prosper.
Perhaps most disheartening, anti-gay legislation supporter, is who you are. In California, nearly a quarter of you are women. Another quarter of you have at least a bachelor's degree. Of the African-Americans polled, seventy percent of you voted for discrimination. Nearly thirty percent of you identify as a democrat or independent. You had the chance to help eradicate hate in your state, yet you chose to support a measure which only solidified discrimination.
So, anti-gay legislation supporter, you can go fuck yourself. While I am overwhelmingly sad over the decision you've made, I will no longer allow you to disguise discrimination as sound public policy. Change is seeping from everything I see in this post-Bush society, and today is the day that your backwards and offensive views are no longer allowed to prosper.
I encourage and welcome the support of others in this enormous task, even those who previously voted for such measures. Hate should not be a legislated value, and I look forward to fighting against that notion until everyone in the United States is truly equal.
Sincerely,
ChangeAgent
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Today is the best day in a long time
Wow.
I wish I had more time and sobriety to explain how I'm feeling right now but suffice it to at that this is one if the most exciting and important events that I've witnessed in my life.
I believe in democracy and I believe in Barack Obama. Thank goodness that they came together today.
More on this historic event tomorro.
I wish I had more time and sobriety to explain how I'm feeling right now but suffice it to at that this is one if the most exciting and important events that I've witnessed in my life.
I believe in democracy and I believe in Barack Obama. Thank goodness that they came together today.
More on this historic event tomorro.
Monday, November 3, 2008
A Girl's Guide to Voting (As Long as that Girl is Me)
Since it's the day before the election, I've decided to compile a handy voter guide for people who a) live in Precinct 13, Ward 3 and/or b) people who have the exact same political views as I do. I realize how helpful this will be for all, so I'd like to graciously thank you in advance. ;)
I looked up my sample ballot at the Star Tribune, which has an awesome site telling you where your polling place is and everyone who's on the ballot. Just make sure you don't put the name of your street in the "House #" box because it took me three attempts to figure that out.
Anyways, I thought I'd go through each contested race and explain why I'm voting for who I'm voting for, half for your benefit, half so I can decide exactly why I'm going the way I am. I'll start with the bottom of the ballot and make you wait until the end for the biggies. Otherwise, how do I keep your interest piqued?
Soil and Water Supervisor, Seat 3
Do people really know about these candidates? It's kind of surprising that there are three challengers to the incumbent for this seat, considering I don't really know what this person does (I mean, they supervise soil and water, I get it). However, when you go to that Strib site, you can click on all the candidates to get a little bio, which rules. In doing so, I realized that the incumbent, although a woman, is not who I will be voting for. Anyone who lists "fiscal conservativism" as their most important issue is going to have a hard time getting my vote. So instead, I'm voting for Mara Magnuson Humphrey. She's endorsed by the DFL, plus her most important issue is the protection of natural resources, so she's the one for me.
Soil and Water Supervisor, Seat 2
Again, who gets to be soil and water supervisor isn't exactly my most important issue this campaign, but I believe in the system so I believe that these seats are important to making sure Ramsey County (and thus, Minnesota) maintains the right view on natural resources. This race was a bit harder to choose on its face, as there are no women running, but I'm voting for David Bogue. He has a degree in Environmental studies, and he lists some great issues (including decreasing runoff of surface contaminants and improving groundwater) as important. Plus, the other guy with a profile, Nick Quade, was a state delegate for Ron Paul, which is an automatic disqualification for all votes cast by me.
2nd District Court, Seat 21
This race is a really difficult choice for me because both candidates are great. It's between Gail Chang Bohr and Howard Orenstein, and I'm voting for Gail Chang Bohr. If I'm being honest, her gender is probably what pushed me over the edge, but I don't usually like to use that as a sole determining factor. She is the Executive Director of Children's Law Center of Minnesota, and used to be a social worker, so in my house that's a enough to get my vote. However, Orenstein got pretty much all the DFL bigwig endorsements, which is also a good thing in my book, so read their profiles and decide for yourself what's most important.
Minnesota House, District 64B
This is an easy one, as I've met both candidates. I'm voting for Rep. Michael Paymar because he's genuinely cares about Minnesota and the district, and has proven that fact by his years of service in the Minnesota House. Plus, Emory Dively was really rude to me personally during my days at St. Kate's. I realize that my district is distinctly democratic, so the candidate knows they have little chance of winning, but he treated me as though my (and a group of other college students I was with) vote didn't matter to him, and that was a major turnoff. Rep. Paymar is a nice guy with great experience and a genuine interest in the lives of his constituents and I'm excited to get to vote for him.
United States House of Representatives, District 4
The choices get easier and easier for me as we move up the ballot, but this one is kind of ridiculously easy. There are some decisions that Rep. Betty McCollum makes that I don't agree with (for example, her stance on music/video game censorship really bugs me), but in the end I am a die-hard Betty! advocate. I'm voting for Rep. Betty McCollum because she has proven through action that she cares about all members of the community, not merely those in the DFL. Really, though, I'm voting for Betty because she's a Katie (read: she went to the College of St. Catherine) and has lived the lifethat I am striving to create for myself. She came back to St. Kate's a number of times while I was the Senate President there, and the way she talks to students makes her both a fantastic advocate for the area and just an all around great person. Plus, who's even heard of this Matthews guy?
Constitutional Amendment: Increase state sales tax by 0.375% to pay for environmental and cultural programs
This has been by far the most difficult decision for me this election season. We talked about this amendment extensively in my caucus during primary season, and my team decided that it was not a good idea. Still, i've decided that I'm voting YES because although I don't necessarily agree with the manner in which the money is being obtained, I believe strongly in the programs and services that it's going to.
My main concern is that sales tax, by definition, is recessive, which means that people with less money end up paying more of their income. In one informational pamphlet I read, it was estimated that the increase would cost Minnesota families about $1 a week, which doesn't seem like much, but when you only get $200 a month in food stamps and WIC benefits, each dollar is extremely important. Sales taxes are not the right way of getting money to pay for things, and a constitutional amendment is a particularly extreme way to go about raising funds. HOWEVER, after learning that the money will be spent specifically on programs that assist the low-income community in accessing the arts and environmental resources, I changed my No vote to Yes. I would love to hear more reasons for or against this amendment, because this is really the only issue in which my mind is not completely made up.
MN Appeals Court Judge, Seat 16
Here, I'm voting for Hon. Terri J. Stoneburner because she's the incumbent, she's been a judge for 18 years, and her opponent has given no legitimate reason to vote against her. Plus, as I said, I'm always going to err on the side of the woman, so without a reason to vote for the other guy, Hon. Stoneburner wins it for me.
MN Supreme Court Associate Justice, Seat 4
Both candidates here seem as though they would be good for the Court, but I'm voting for Hon. Lorie Skjerven Gildea . My sister got to hear her speak, and said she had some really great things to say. Plus, retired MN Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz endorsed her, and I respect Hon. Blatz immensely, so Gildea it is.
MN Supreme Court Associate Justice, Seat 3
Here seems like as good a place as any to voice my disdain for the voting for judges system we have in the great state of Minnesota. In this race, I'm voting for Hon. Paul H. Anderson because I've met him and he's really nice, plus his voting record is one of a fair and impartial guy who cares deeply for justice. But, it totally bugs me that he has to run in the first place, as he's been on the Court since 1994. He's a competent, impartial judge who deserves to keep his seat. Plus he went to Macalester, so my family would hate me if I voted against him.
United States Senate
This race is perhaps the most important one that Minnesotans have to vote for. Forgive me for my bluntness, but Norm Coleman is a total tool and the thought of him continuing as the Senior Senator from Minnesota makes me want to barf. Although it took me a second to get as excited about Al Franken as I am now, I caucused for him in the primaries and have heard him speak three times now. I'm voting for Al Franken because he's passionate about grassroots change in a way that I haven't seen since Sen. Paul Wellstone. He excites the people into believing in the political process, and anyone that knows me knows that I'm passionate about such things too. If you want to hear just how excited I am about Al, you can go on over to MPR and give it a listen. However, if I can convince you Minnesotans of one thing throughout this entire diatribe, let it be that Al Franken is exactly what this state needs.
United States President
It wont come as much of a surprise after this here rant that I'm voting for Sen. Barack Obama in tomorrow's presidential election. Besides the fact that I pretty much hate every single policy stance that Sen. John McCain holds, his entire demeanor throughout this election process only cemented my disdain for him as a candidate. There has been much talk about things not related to policy (his refusal to combat the racist comments coming from his supporters, his support for fabricated tales of terrorism in the Obama campaign, his inability to say S's correctly, his neck skin...) however I am much more interested in the actual reasons that Obama is better for the United States than McCain.
A short rundown:
- He's better on economic policy (unless you're a facist free-market libertarian, in which case you better be voting for Bob Barr because McCain ain't so free market either)
- He's WAYYYYYYYYY better on women's issues. If you want a more in depth analysis of that, go here
- He's better on foreign policy, and chose a running mate that can at least decipher who is and is not the President of France
- He cares about health care and the ability of low income people to access it
- He doesn't hate gay people
- He's a dreamboat.
Okay, this has got to be the longest post I've ever written, but it's doubtful that I have ever been as excited to vote as I am for tomorrow's big day. Even if you disagree with every single thing I've written, PLEASEPLEASEPLEASE go vote because otherwise all those fucking political ads were for naught and that seems like a big waste. There are a lot of candidates that I care about that I won't get to vote for (the joy that will ensue if Elwin Tinklenber wins the 6th District is unreal) so make sure to do your own research at the Strib website above.
I'm such a political science nerd that I doubt I'll sleep at all tonight.
P.S. - I have never had as much trouble posting a blog as I did today, so if you've read parts of this throughout the day, I appreciate your tenacity in accessing the whole thing. Happy voting!
I looked up my sample ballot at the Star Tribune, which has an awesome site telling you where your polling place is and everyone who's on the ballot. Just make sure you don't put the name of your street in the "House #" box because it took me three attempts to figure that out.
Anyways, I thought I'd go through each contested race and explain why I'm voting for who I'm voting for, half for your benefit, half so I can decide exactly why I'm going the way I am. I'll start with the bottom of the ballot and make you wait until the end for the biggies. Otherwise, how do I keep your interest piqued?
Soil and Water Supervisor, Seat 3
Do people really know about these candidates? It's kind of surprising that there are three challengers to the incumbent for this seat, considering I don't really know what this person does (I mean, they supervise soil and water, I get it). However, when you go to that Strib site, you can click on all the candidates to get a little bio, which rules. In doing so, I realized that the incumbent, although a woman, is not who I will be voting for. Anyone who lists "fiscal conservativism" as their most important issue is going to have a hard time getting my vote. So instead, I'm voting for Mara Magnuson Humphrey. She's endorsed by the DFL, plus her most important issue is the protection of natural resources, so she's the one for me.
Soil and Water Supervisor, Seat 2
Again, who gets to be soil and water supervisor isn't exactly my most important issue this campaign, but I believe in the system so I believe that these seats are important to making sure Ramsey County (and thus, Minnesota) maintains the right view on natural resources. This race was a bit harder to choose on its face, as there are no women running, but I'm voting for David Bogue. He has a degree in Environmental studies, and he lists some great issues (including decreasing runoff of surface contaminants and improving groundwater) as important. Plus, the other guy with a profile, Nick Quade, was a state delegate for Ron Paul, which is an automatic disqualification for all votes cast by me.
2nd District Court, Seat 21
This race is a really difficult choice for me because both candidates are great. It's between Gail Chang Bohr and Howard Orenstein, and I'm voting for Gail Chang Bohr. If I'm being honest, her gender is probably what pushed me over the edge, but I don't usually like to use that as a sole determining factor. She is the Executive Director of Children's Law Center of Minnesota, and used to be a social worker, so in my house that's a enough to get my vote. However, Orenstein got pretty much all the DFL bigwig endorsements, which is also a good thing in my book, so read their profiles and decide for yourself what's most important.
Minnesota House, District 64B
This is an easy one, as I've met both candidates. I'm voting for Rep. Michael Paymar because he's genuinely cares about Minnesota and the district, and has proven that fact by his years of service in the Minnesota House. Plus, Emory Dively was really rude to me personally during my days at St. Kate's. I realize that my district is distinctly democratic, so the candidate knows they have little chance of winning, but he treated me as though my (and a group of other college students I was with) vote didn't matter to him, and that was a major turnoff. Rep. Paymar is a nice guy with great experience and a genuine interest in the lives of his constituents and I'm excited to get to vote for him.
United States House of Representatives, District 4
The choices get easier and easier for me as we move up the ballot, but this one is kind of ridiculously easy. There are some decisions that Rep. Betty McCollum makes that I don't agree with (for example, her stance on music/video game censorship really bugs me), but in the end I am a die-hard Betty! advocate. I'm voting for Rep. Betty McCollum because she has proven through action that she cares about all members of the community, not merely those in the DFL. Really, though, I'm voting for Betty because she's a Katie (read: she went to the College of St. Catherine) and has lived the lifethat I am striving to create for myself. She came back to St. Kate's a number of times while I was the Senate President there, and the way she talks to students makes her both a fantastic advocate for the area and just an all around great person. Plus, who's even heard of this Matthews guy?
Constitutional Amendment: Increase state sales tax by 0.375% to pay for environmental and cultural programs
This has been by far the most difficult decision for me this election season. We talked about this amendment extensively in my caucus during primary season, and my team decided that it was not a good idea. Still, i've decided that I'm voting YES because although I don't necessarily agree with the manner in which the money is being obtained, I believe strongly in the programs and services that it's going to.
My main concern is that sales tax, by definition, is recessive, which means that people with less money end up paying more of their income. In one informational pamphlet I read, it was estimated that the increase would cost Minnesota families about $1 a week, which doesn't seem like much, but when you only get $200 a month in food stamps and WIC benefits, each dollar is extremely important. Sales taxes are not the right way of getting money to pay for things, and a constitutional amendment is a particularly extreme way to go about raising funds. HOWEVER, after learning that the money will be spent specifically on programs that assist the low-income community in accessing the arts and environmental resources, I changed my No vote to Yes. I would love to hear more reasons for or against this amendment, because this is really the only issue in which my mind is not completely made up.
MN Appeals Court Judge, Seat 16
Here, I'm voting for Hon. Terri J. Stoneburner because she's the incumbent, she's been a judge for 18 years, and her opponent has given no legitimate reason to vote against her. Plus, as I said, I'm always going to err on the side of the woman, so without a reason to vote for the other guy, Hon. Stoneburner wins it for me.
MN Supreme Court Associate Justice, Seat 4
Both candidates here seem as though they would be good for the Court, but I'm voting for Hon. Lorie Skjerven Gildea . My sister got to hear her speak, and said she had some really great things to say. Plus, retired MN Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz endorsed her, and I respect Hon. Blatz immensely, so Gildea it is.
MN Supreme Court Associate Justice, Seat 3
Here seems like as good a place as any to voice my disdain for the voting for judges system we have in the great state of Minnesota. In this race, I'm voting for Hon. Paul H. Anderson because I've met him and he's really nice, plus his voting record is one of a fair and impartial guy who cares deeply for justice. But, it totally bugs me that he has to run in the first place, as he's been on the Court since 1994. He's a competent, impartial judge who deserves to keep his seat. Plus he went to Macalester, so my family would hate me if I voted against him.
United States Senate
This race is perhaps the most important one that Minnesotans have to vote for. Forgive me for my bluntness, but Norm Coleman is a total tool and the thought of him continuing as the Senior Senator from Minnesota makes me want to barf. Although it took me a second to get as excited about Al Franken as I am now, I caucused for him in the primaries and have heard him speak three times now. I'm voting for Al Franken because he's passionate about grassroots change in a way that I haven't seen since Sen. Paul Wellstone. He excites the people into believing in the political process, and anyone that knows me knows that I'm passionate about such things too. If you want to hear just how excited I am about Al, you can go on over to MPR and give it a listen. However, if I can convince you Minnesotans of one thing throughout this entire diatribe, let it be that Al Franken is exactly what this state needs.
United States President
It wont come as much of a surprise after this here rant that I'm voting for Sen. Barack Obama in tomorrow's presidential election. Besides the fact that I pretty much hate every single policy stance that Sen. John McCain holds, his entire demeanor throughout this election process only cemented my disdain for him as a candidate. There has been much talk about things not related to policy (his refusal to combat the racist comments coming from his supporters, his support for fabricated tales of terrorism in the Obama campaign, his inability to say S's correctly, his neck skin...) however I am much more interested in the actual reasons that Obama is better for the United States than McCain.
A short rundown:
- He's better on economic policy (unless you're a facist free-market libertarian, in which case you better be voting for Bob Barr because McCain ain't so free market either)
- He's WAYYYYYYYYY better on women's issues. If you want a more in depth analysis of that, go here
- He's better on foreign policy, and chose a running mate that can at least decipher who is and is not the President of France
- He cares about health care and the ability of low income people to access it
- He doesn't hate gay people
- He's a dreamboat.
Okay, this has got to be the longest post I've ever written, but it's doubtful that I have ever been as excited to vote as I am for tomorrow's big day. Even if you disagree with every single thing I've written, PLEASEPLEASEPLEASE go vote because otherwise all those fucking political ads were for naught and that seems like a big waste. There are a lot of candidates that I care about that I won't get to vote for (the joy that will ensue if Elwin Tinklenber wins the 6th District is unreal) so make sure to do your own research at the Strib website above.
I'm such a political science nerd that I doubt I'll sleep at all tonight.
P.S. - I have never had as much trouble posting a blog as I did today, so if you've read parts of this throughout the day, I appreciate your tenacity in accessing the whole thing. Happy voting!
Friday, October 31, 2008
Al Franken and ice cream? Count me in!
Ug. Law school has me all sorts of busy so the blog has fallen to the wayside. In order to thwart that problem, I've decided to join National Blog Posting Month (NaBloPoMo). My sister does it every year, and it's just a blog sharing event where you have to post every day for the entire month of November. I encourage you to join, too, as it's pretty fun and forces you to think about things and write them down. Good, good times.
In other news, the most exciting show will soon be on Showtime. Written by Diablo Cody? Starring Toni Collette? Produced by Steven Spielberg? (Okay, he's not as exciting as the first two, but whatevs). It promises to be AWESOME. Too bad I don't have Showtime...
You know what's fun? The election. I try not to think about it that much, but let's be honest. It consumes my thoughts. I went to a Franken rally the other day, and ended up on MPR, a fact that I find way more exciting than need be. I'm still pretty worried Franken actually winning, but the more I hear from him (and talk to his awesome wife, Franni), the more excited I am about him as a candidate, and his dedication to the legacy of Paul Wellstone. Plus, Norm Coleman is just gross on so many levels that it's not difficult to rally against him.
I really think that the Dean Barkley component of the Senate race will end up helping Al, more than they're even counting on. You heard it here first: if Barkley gets more than 17% of the vote, Franken wins. Man, I hope I'm right.
In related voting news, I'm totally in favor of places offering free stuff for voters. Both Krispy Kreme and Ben and Jerry's are offering free goodness, and although I don't think I'll be able to find a store for either, I like the idea of rewarding people for the civic duty. I mean, if there are people that don't really care about voting, but really love ice cream and doughnuts, why not push them over the voting edge by giving it free?
Okay. Prepare to live because this witty repartee will be continuing every single day for the next month. You're welcome!
In other news, the most exciting show will soon be on Showtime. Written by Diablo Cody? Starring Toni Collette? Produced by Steven Spielberg? (Okay, he's not as exciting as the first two, but whatevs). It promises to be AWESOME. Too bad I don't have Showtime...
You know what's fun? The election. I try not to think about it that much, but let's be honest. It consumes my thoughts. I went to a Franken rally the other day, and ended up on MPR, a fact that I find way more exciting than need be. I'm still pretty worried Franken actually winning, but the more I hear from him (and talk to his awesome wife, Franni), the more excited I am about him as a candidate, and his dedication to the legacy of Paul Wellstone. Plus, Norm Coleman is just gross on so many levels that it's not difficult to rally against him.
I really think that the Dean Barkley component of the Senate race will end up helping Al, more than they're even counting on. You heard it here first: if Barkley gets more than 17% of the vote, Franken wins. Man, I hope I'm right.
In related voting news, I'm totally in favor of places offering free stuff for voters. Both Krispy Kreme and Ben and Jerry's are offering free goodness, and although I don't think I'll be able to find a store for either, I like the idea of rewarding people for the civic duty. I mean, if there are people that don't really care about voting, but really love ice cream and doughnuts, why not push them over the voting edge by giving it free?
Okay. Prepare to live because this witty repartee will be continuing every single day for the next month. You're welcome!
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Gays on TV: No Girls Allowed!
Okay, so GLAAD put out a press release today to applaud the major TV networks (read: CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, and the CW) for a higher level of inclusion. Let's move quickly past the fact that we're supposed to stand up and clap when representation raises to a whopping 2.6% onto the actual meat of the statistics.
It took me a second to find out who this 2.6% actually included, which is 16 people appearing on a total of 12 shows. I attempted to compile a list from the hodge-podge that GLAAD lists, but that proved harder than it may seem. Suffice it to say, one thing is glaringly obvious: lesbians are not welcome on network television.
Now, I wrote my thesis in college about this very topic, so its not like the absence of lesbians, particularly butch lesbians, in the media is some breaking news that's flying across the wire. But, when I have to read press releases lauding the entertainment industry for having a couple white gay dudes on their primetime roster, it gives me permission to rant about gender theory and equality for like one fucking second.
Now, don't get me wrong, there are a couple of women-dating-women counted in GLAAD's number. And don't you dare think for one second that I mean to discount them because of some bisexual-loathing sentiment that is all too rampant in the lesbian community (a blog for another time, certainly). Bisexual women are what I live for; they are a vital part of the community if only because otherwise I would have no one to date.
BUT, of the 16 main and supporting characters counted in GLAAD's glorification of network television, less than a third are women. And, from what I can see, there are exactly ZERO self-proclaimed lesbians. All are either overtly labeled as bisexual by show bios, or are said to be "known to have sexual trysts with women" or some other objectifying quip. All of the women are super femme-y, super hot and very sexualized, which rings far more of an attempt to attract male viewers than it does of LGBT inclusion.
In other news, Lindsay Lohan came out, which is so totally awesome. I couldn't tell you why I enjoy her, but I feel like she'd have been my super crazy fun friend if we'd met at the bar 3 years ago.
It took me a second to find out who this 2.6% actually included, which is 16 people appearing on a total of 12 shows. I attempted to compile a list from the hodge-podge that GLAAD lists, but that proved harder than it may seem. Suffice it to say, one thing is glaringly obvious: lesbians are not welcome on network television.
Now, I wrote my thesis in college about this very topic, so its not like the absence of lesbians, particularly butch lesbians, in the media is some breaking news that's flying across the wire. But, when I have to read press releases lauding the entertainment industry for having a couple white gay dudes on their primetime roster, it gives me permission to rant about gender theory and equality for like one fucking second.
Now, don't get me wrong, there are a couple of women-dating-women counted in GLAAD's number. And don't you dare think for one second that I mean to discount them because of some bisexual-loathing sentiment that is all too rampant in the lesbian community (a blog for another time, certainly). Bisexual women are what I live for; they are a vital part of the community if only because otherwise I would have no one to date.
BUT, of the 16 main and supporting characters counted in GLAAD's glorification of network television, less than a third are women. And, from what I can see, there are exactly ZERO self-proclaimed lesbians. All are either overtly labeled as bisexual by show bios, or are said to be "known to have sexual trysts with women" or some other objectifying quip. All of the women are super femme-y, super hot and very sexualized, which rings far more of an attempt to attract male viewers than it does of LGBT inclusion.
In other news, Lindsay Lohan came out, which is so totally awesome. I couldn't tell you why I enjoy her, but I feel like she'd have been my super crazy fun friend if we'd met at the bar 3 years ago.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
That man will trick you with his thoughts
My friend Adam has just alerted me to the funniest website I've seen in a while. Perhaps I only find it to be so hilarious because I like practically everything on the list. Ah well.
I've been wicked sick since last week, but have started to feel better. Seriously, though, I thought I was going to die on Saturday. Plus, this big huge writing project for law school was due, so the stress was at an all time high. But, paper's been turned in and things are looking up.
I need a car so badly. Its gotten sort of out of hand. I need a job, which I could only get to by driving. Its a circular problem that has gotten quite tired in the last few months.
Its a big day for primaries, and I have to at least comment on the way these primaries have been going. I just get so frustrated with the way people are making Obama into some kind of hero. Of course this will all be construed as me hating the guy, which I don't, but its just frustrating that the candidate with great speeches but few tangible ideas has garnered so much support from liberals. Its just so hypocritical the way that some people will preach about taking care of the working class, keeping traditional democratic values at the forefront, but then support a person who seems to care little about this group. Clinton is the far better choice for working class people, which is probably why she has been so strong amongst those voters. Rich people, however, LOVE Obama. He's like a rich man's wet dream. You can pretend to be really liberal while still getting to keep all of that hard earned money. Stupid.
Whatever. Maybe there will be some amazing turn of events tonight and my hope for the world will be restored.
I've been wicked sick since last week, but have started to feel better. Seriously, though, I thought I was going to die on Saturday. Plus, this big huge writing project for law school was due, so the stress was at an all time high. But, paper's been turned in and things are looking up.
I need a car so badly. Its gotten sort of out of hand. I need a job, which I could only get to by driving. Its a circular problem that has gotten quite tired in the last few months.
Its a big day for primaries, and I have to at least comment on the way these primaries have been going. I just get so frustrated with the way people are making Obama into some kind of hero. Of course this will all be construed as me hating the guy, which I don't, but its just frustrating that the candidate with great speeches but few tangible ideas has garnered so much support from liberals. Its just so hypocritical the way that some people will preach about taking care of the working class, keeping traditional democratic values at the forefront, but then support a person who seems to care little about this group. Clinton is the far better choice for working class people, which is probably why she has been so strong amongst those voters. Rich people, however, LOVE Obama. He's like a rich man's wet dream. You can pretend to be really liberal while still getting to keep all of that hard earned money. Stupid.
Whatever. Maybe there will be some amazing turn of events tonight and my hope for the world will be restored.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Shame about it
So I didn't know it, but apparently I had my settings to where comments were closed to non-blogspotters. So, I fixed it. So, you know, comment away.
My previous post has caused my little Google smart advertisement thingy to now link people to an extremely conservative website. Its right over there -> if you want to check it out.
I think its hilarious.
Because I feel like (even though I'm arguing with myself about these things, apparently) the obvious link from my arguments against yOmama are to say Bad Liberal! and shove me away from anything having to do with the Party. But my whole problem is that he's not my kind of guy, and if I'm being honest I think he's getting a free pass on a lot of issues because he is a person of color, which I think only serves to hinder anti-racist action.
But, we can move on. For now.
I'm on John Edwards' email list, and apparently its his birthday on Sunday. His wife (who I think is brilliant) wrote today's email, promising that if I donated to the campaign that I would receive her (or perhaps his, I can't remember which) Granny's Pecan Pie recipe as a special birthday week perk.
How cute is that?
Little John is from North Carolina, after all.
Apparently, there's also a link to a video in which Johnny's aids attempt to make said pie, with dismal results. Obviously, men are not good at such things. We'll have to leave the cookin' up to the women-folk.
Whatever. I'd rather talk about The Sopranos.
If you don't watch this show, you are depriving yourself one of the simple pleasures of life. By simple, I mean extremely violent and perhaps derogatory toward Italian Americans. Still, this shit is exciting, and it sucks you right in.
You think Phil will off Tony? Its a good thing he went to sleep with that automatic weapon. Never know what's lurking. I'm pretty sad about Bobby, he was my favorite character since his driving days. Killed by the model trains...how poetic. David Chase is a schmaltzy television genius.
I hope he makes a show about the lesbian mafia next.
My previous post has caused my little Google smart advertisement thingy to now link people to an extremely conservative website. Its right over there -> if you want to check it out.
I think its hilarious.
Because I feel like (even though I'm arguing with myself about these things, apparently) the obvious link from my arguments against yOmama are to say Bad Liberal! and shove me away from anything having to do with the Party. But my whole problem is that he's not my kind of guy, and if I'm being honest I think he's getting a free pass on a lot of issues because he is a person of color, which I think only serves to hinder anti-racist action.
But, we can move on. For now.
I'm on John Edwards' email list, and apparently its his birthday on Sunday. His wife (who I think is brilliant) wrote today's email, promising that if I donated to the campaign that I would receive her (or perhaps his, I can't remember which) Granny's Pecan Pie recipe as a special birthday week perk.
How cute is that?
Little John is from North Carolina, after all.
Apparently, there's also a link to a video in which Johnny's aids attempt to make said pie, with dismal results. Obviously, men are not good at such things. We'll have to leave the cookin' up to the women-folk.
Whatever. I'd rather talk about The Sopranos.
If you don't watch this show, you are depriving yourself one of the simple pleasures of life. By simple, I mean extremely violent and perhaps derogatory toward Italian Americans. Still, this shit is exciting, and it sucks you right in.
You think Phil will off Tony? Its a good thing he went to sleep with that automatic weapon. Never know what's lurking. I'm pretty sad about Bobby, he was my favorite character since his driving days. Killed by the model trains...how poetic. David Chase is a schmaltzy television genius.
I hope he makes a show about the lesbian mafia next.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
What good is a cynic with no better plan?
Anyone watch the Democratic debate on Sunday night?
Yeah, me either. It was during the Sopranos, after all. More on those crazy gangsters another time.
Even though I didn't, you know, watch them, I have caught most of the debate action on YouTube, and the massive amount of commentaries done since then and I have a few comments of my own.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again (and again). I truly believe that Barak Obama is just an eeensy bit full of shit. For all this rockstar cred that just magically fell into his lap, I have seen very little actually backing it up.
Now, I'm a big fan of nicknames, so please know that when I refer to him as yOmama, it’s out of love for the Party, not hate for the dude. I really do think he's a good guy. A good Senator. A good basketball player. A great father, I would imagine. Just not the best person to be the next President of the United States.
Why, you ask?
Well, I'd be happy to oblige.
First, and probably on the average voters' minds the most, is the Iraqi War. yOmama insists on saying, over and over again, that he has been against the War from the start. Yet, he was not even elected to Congress until 2004. It’s a pretty easy place to be sitting when every other candidate in the race, save Dennis Kucinich, either voted for it or wasn't in Congress. I mean, I don't know how much foreign policy was being hashed out in the Illinois State Senate. Just sayin'.
Next, he said this really annoying thing about immigration on CNN one day. I can't find that exact interview, but here's him explaining his stance at a town hall meeting. http://youtube.com/watch?v=wxZdEJdh8ss
Now, you may be tricked. That's my whole problem with yOmama. He's a great public speaker, and he is brilliant at presenting his views in a way that hides his actual intentions. He starts out by saying that immigrants are extremely important, that virtually every American is an immigrant unless they're Native, blahblaahblaaaaah.
This all sounds great.
Empowering!
But wait for step 3.
That's when he explains that he is most certainly not for amnesty, and illegal immigrants that want to start on the "path" to being a legal citizen will have to pay fines, learn English, and wait close to ten years before being legal.
What, Mr. Senator, are they to do until then?
Now, there are other issues, certainly. The gay thing is sticky (heh.) because none of the candidates are where I'd like them to be. But, when he says, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been," it makes me laugh in my head. Leave it to the states? What, you're a Republican now? Convenient time to believe in states' rights...
My point is this. I feel like Obama gets this eternal free pass as the most liberal legitimate candidate, and I just don't think this is true.
None of the candidates are left enough for me (at least the ones that have a chance of getting nominated), but Obama has this knack of agreeing with whomever he is speaking to.
I don't want a yes-person.
I don't want someone who figured out the trick to the game.
I want a genuine person whose ideas will change the way that politics are being played in this country.
Is that really too much to ask?
Yeah, me either. It was during the Sopranos, after all. More on those crazy gangsters another time.
Even though I didn't, you know, watch them, I have caught most of the debate action on YouTube, and the massive amount of commentaries done since then and I have a few comments of my own.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again (and again). I truly believe that Barak Obama is just an eeensy bit full of shit. For all this rockstar cred that just magically fell into his lap, I have seen very little actually backing it up.
Now, I'm a big fan of nicknames, so please know that when I refer to him as yOmama, it’s out of love for the Party, not hate for the dude. I really do think he's a good guy. A good Senator. A good basketball player. A great father, I would imagine. Just not the best person to be the next President of the United States.
Why, you ask?
Well, I'd be happy to oblige.
First, and probably on the average voters' minds the most, is the Iraqi War. yOmama insists on saying, over and over again, that he has been against the War from the start. Yet, he was not even elected to Congress until 2004. It’s a pretty easy place to be sitting when every other candidate in the race, save Dennis Kucinich, either voted for it or wasn't in Congress. I mean, I don't know how much foreign policy was being hashed out in the Illinois State Senate. Just sayin'.
Next, he said this really annoying thing about immigration on CNN one day. I can't find that exact interview, but here's him explaining his stance at a town hall meeting. http://youtube.com/watch?v=wxZdEJdh8ss
Now, you may be tricked. That's my whole problem with yOmama. He's a great public speaker, and he is brilliant at presenting his views in a way that hides his actual intentions. He starts out by saying that immigrants are extremely important, that virtually every American is an immigrant unless they're Native, blahblaahblaaaaah.
This all sounds great.
Empowering!
But wait for step 3.
That's when he explains that he is most certainly not for amnesty, and illegal immigrants that want to start on the "path" to being a legal citizen will have to pay fines, learn English, and wait close to ten years before being legal.
What, Mr. Senator, are they to do until then?
Now, there are other issues, certainly. The gay thing is sticky (heh.) because none of the candidates are where I'd like them to be. But, when he says, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been," it makes me laugh in my head. Leave it to the states? What, you're a Republican now? Convenient time to believe in states' rights...
My point is this. I feel like Obama gets this eternal free pass as the most liberal legitimate candidate, and I just don't think this is true.
None of the candidates are left enough for me (at least the ones that have a chance of getting nominated), but Obama has this knack of agreeing with whomever he is speaking to.
I don't want a yes-person.
I don't want someone who figured out the trick to the game.
I want a genuine person whose ideas will change the way that politics are being played in this country.
Is that really too much to ask?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
