The last time I was this disappointed with a Democratic leader took place
when, well, everyone else was annoyed also. Bill Clinton had taken the
country on a rather unpleasant roller coaster ride, and despite his
bewildering popularity, a lot of the electorate was pretty much over it.
Fast forward twelve years. Since my first election in that still-too-painful-
to-discuss 2000 race, I have consistently voted Democratic. Gore was
my choice the first time I voted for a president. In 2004, although I was
one of the many who "dated Dean and married Kerry", I still voted to put
the longtime Massachusetts senator in the White House. In 2008, I liked
the message and diversity of the young, charismatic Barack Obama--and
was pleased when he won the election.
Unfortunately, the President is losing me.
I want to clarify what that means, though. I still support President Obama.
I will never vote anyone into office whose platform remotely resembles
that of former President Bush's. Nevertheless, the Democrats in Congress
and the Administration have missed numerous chances to do the right
thing, and have instead focused on doing what is politically expedient. If
we were only playing politics, that would be admirable. The problem is that
the people who enthusiastically elected Illinois' junior senator expected
more than what they're getting. I'm talking about Liberals and Progressives;
those who almost took Obama's play book as something biblical.
I assume that we were an easy sell. Following the shady election in 2000,
we entered the Bush Administration already bitter and looking for revenge.
Pour out new wars, mix with an inadequate response to the biggest natural
disaster in U.S. history, add a sprinkle of the alienation of our World allies
and a generous serving of social Conservatism and voila!: a group, whom
after eight years--was glad that someone, anyone was paying attention to
them. When Conservative media outlets announced in barely-concealed
horror that Obama was the "most liberal member of the Senate", we, the
down-trodden squealed with delight. Finally--it was happening. Things were
going somewhere.
Not that they still can't. The President has two years left in his first term,
and a lot can happen in that time. But Barack Obama is allowing
Republicans, the very people who hated him to begin with, to define his
Presidency. In doing so, he is completely repulsing his Liberal base--the
people who stood behind him on his platform of a health care public option,
ending tax cuts for the wealthy and repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." He
has caved to Republicans on all of these issues. And it is getting old.
Mr. President, I'm not asking for you to become a Miracle Worker. We did
have hope that things would be different when you entered the majestic
Oval Office, but most of us who use reasoning skills understand that not
everyone was on board with your plans from the very start.
These days, Mr. President, all we ask for is bold leadership. Take the
Democratic Party, known for its tendency to self-destruct due to lack of
unity, and do what we elected you to do. Stick to your guns. And if, as a
result, you meet the fate of Jimmy Carter and go down in flames as a one-
term President, we'll stand behind you. We'll support you, Mr. President,
because you'll have been defeated pushing for the Change that you
inspired us to believe. But if you stay on your current path of making
convenient decisions and caring more about shrewd moves than integrity,
I'm afraid that I'll have to go shopping for someone else to believe in.
And I doubt I will be alone.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Reach Out, Touch Faith.
In October 1991, I was formally baptized into the Southern Baptist
faith in the same church that my ancestors helped to establish some
100 years prior. I was two months shy of being ten years old.
Baptism is the spiritual rite of passage for Protestants. However, at
that time, for me, it was like buying those L.A. Gear sneakers that lit
up when you walked: you did it because everyone else was doing it.
And by October 1991, I really wanted to be baptized. Just months
earlier, I was probably the first (perhaps only) person in the history
of the church to be sent BACK down the aisle (for those of you
heathens, that means that the preacher didn't think I understood
what I was doing when I made my 'profession of faith'.) And although
the preacher--a kind, charismatic man adored by the congregation--
was right, it earned him the permanent disdain of my God-fearing
father, who was both outraged and more than likely a little
embarrassed. Even though my second trip down that aisle was much
more productive, it, too, should have probably never been condoned.
The years that followed at that church largely sucked. My brother and
I always felt like outcasts there; we either weren't 'country' enough or
caught hell (bad pun) from others by not having the skills to 'give it all
we had for the Lord' on the church basketball/softball teams. An over-
bearing youth minister who didn't seem to like youth was hired and
faith in the same church that my ancestors helped to establish some
100 years prior. I was two months shy of being ten years old.
Baptism is the spiritual rite of passage for Protestants. However, at
that time, for me, it was like buying those L.A. Gear sneakers that lit
up when you walked: you did it because everyone else was doing it.
And by October 1991, I really wanted to be baptized. Just months
earlier, I was probably the first (perhaps only) person in the history
of the church to be sent BACK down the aisle (for those of you
heathens, that means that the preacher didn't think I understood
what I was doing when I made my 'profession of faith'.) And although
the preacher--a kind, charismatic man adored by the congregation--
was right, it earned him the permanent disdain of my God-fearing
father, who was both outraged and more than likely a little
embarrassed. Even though my second trip down that aisle was much
more productive, it, too, should have probably never been condoned.
The years that followed at that church largely sucked. My brother and
I always felt like outcasts there; we either weren't 'country' enough or
caught hell (bad pun) from others by not having the skills to 'give it all
we had for the Lord' on the church basketball/softball teams. An over-
bearing youth minister who didn't seem to like youth was hired and
brought my differences to light. He was prone to humiliating the youth
publicly, and he took those in the church that I had known my entire
life into his corner. Instead of feeling God's love, I felt shamed.
Disgusted with the situation, I stayed long enough to watch his
resignation one Sunday--and soon afterwards wrote my own letter of
resignation to the church. It was read aloud in a post-service business
meeting, much to my parents' mortification. At just barely fourteen
years of age, it was my first real demonstration of independence.
Within two Sundays, I had joined the church down the street; a
Disciples of Christ (Christian) congregation. To this day, I'm still not
sure which was the bigger blow to my parents: coming out as Gay or
leaving the Southern Baptist faith.
With the exception of a mentally unstable preacher's wife who threw
the entire youth group out of the church, my experience at the
Disciples of Christ was very welcoming and good for me --if only in a
life into his corner. Instead of feeling God's love, I felt shamed.
Disgusted with the situation, I stayed long enough to watch his
resignation one Sunday--and soon afterwards wrote my own letter of
resignation to the church. It was read aloud in a post-service business
meeting, much to my parents' mortification. At just barely fourteen
years of age, it was my first real demonstration of independence.
Within two Sundays, I had joined the church down the street; a
Disciples of Christ (Christian) congregation. To this day, I'm still not
sure which was the bigger blow to my parents: coming out as Gay or
leaving the Southern Baptist faith.
With the exception of a mentally unstable preacher's wife who threw
the entire youth group out of the church, my experience at the
Disciples of Christ was very welcoming and good for me --if only in a
spiritually transitional way. When I first arrived, I discovered that I
could put my musical talents to use for God, and through lessons
became the church's organist--the same position held by my
grandmother for over thirty-five years. (Interestingly enough,
although Granny played the organ at the Christian Church every
Sunday, she was a lifelong member of and regularly gave offerings to
Sunday, she was a lifelong member of and regularly gave offerings to
the Baptist Church.) Still, even after becoming heavily involved in the
youth and musical aspects of the congregation, something was missing.
The words of the hymns and prayers held little meaning for me. After
leaving Waddy upon graduation, I quietly began to explore other faiths.
In the years that followed, I went through an enlightening period in
which I developed a form of beliefs that included a Higher Power, but
did not include Jesus Christ or a particular religion. By 2004, I had
politely rejected the Christianity of my upbringing, but still knew that
there was something greater out there than myself; that something/
someone is watching over me. I became content with my conviction
that hell and heaven are trials and triumphs on Earth. I got comfort in
believing that my God doesn't hate, doesn't require fear and loves
unconditionally, and that a big part of who and what I define as God
--lies in me. I started taking positive points from a multitude of
--lies in me. I started taking positive points from a multitude of
religions/ spiritualities (Quaker, Unity, Taoism, etc.) and ultimately
found my way to the Unitarian Church, a creedless faith which
subscribes to the same multitude of religions--but not one over
another. In taking from the ideas/beliefs of multiple faiths, I have
found a place where I am contented, comforted and allowed to be
curious.
Taking beliefs from different spiritualities/religions works for me.
Believing in a literal interpretation of the Bible works for many. And
Taking beliefs from different spiritualities/religions works for me.
Believing in a literal interpretation of the Bible works for many. And
there are some who get through Life through meditation and other
spiritual exercises. I'll never be one to tell anyone which path they
should follow. I can only relay my own experience: at the end of the
day, the Earth's constant changes and my own struggles somehow
seem easier--simply because I believe in something.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Post-Election Kudos, Fails & 8 Hours of CNN
As a parent would say, "...and what have you learned from this?"
Well, I spent the night with Anderson Cooper. (Okay, calm down,
guys and girls--I'm really at Chuck's.) But he was my host for no
fewer than eight hours (sad, right?) of election night coverage--
and the silver fox did a job most worthy of the son of Gloria
Vanderbilt. Through him, Wolf Blitzer's stuttering and the comical
appearance of former Gov.Eliot "Hot Pants" Spitzer, I reaffirmed
that CNN is my preferred network and online election source. Yay.
KUDOS: Nevada voters finally recognized that Sharron Angle
absorbs comprehension of the issues like a pretzel.
Mr. Reid goes back to Washington.
FAIL: Arizona elects Ben Quayle (R)--son of former VP and
poor speller Dan Quayle to Congress. Really?
KUDOS: Big loser Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) gives the most gracious
concession speech ever, especially considering that she
is a two-term Senator. Here's to class.
FAIL: The morons at the NRA for placing an initiative on ballots
called the "Right To Hunt" in AZ, AR, SC and TN. (It passed
in all but Arizona.)
KUDOS: The people of Colorado for not seeing the need to "Define
Personhood" in their Constitution.
FAIL: The voters of my native Kentucky for electing Rand Paul--
and, to be fair, an equally big FAIL to Jack Conway's shitty
race that made me ashamed to be a supporter.
KUDOS: To Delaware voters who have sense: thank you for not
electing non-sensical Tea Partier Christine O'Donnell.
FAIL: Meg Whitman, the CEO who spent $150 million of her
own money--and lost. Epic. Fail.
KUDOS: The "We're More Progressive Than You Might Think" city
of Lexington, Kentucky who turned a new page in politics
by firmly electing the openly gay Jim Gray as Mayor.
FAIL: Don't Ask, Don't Tell. With the House and Senate fighting
and a weakened president, it's back to the ol' drawing
board for a legislative repeal.
KUDOS: To CNN's Election Center for having really cool maps,
graphs, polls and all sorts of nerdy things.
WTF?: The citizens of Rhode Island for 1) having a measure asking
voters if they want to change the state's official name from
"State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations" to just
"Rhode Island" 2) 78% of voters saying NO?! You want that
long ass name? Realllly? So much for brevity.
Live from in front of the big screen in the Man Cave, it's your political
correspondent, Matt Spencer, signing off and urging you to remember,
in the words of Lenny Kravitz, that "It Ain't Over Til It's Over."
Well, I spent the night with Anderson Cooper. (Okay, calm down,
guys and girls--I'm really at Chuck's.) But he was my host for no
fewer than eight hours (sad, right?) of election night coverage--
and the silver fox did a job most worthy of the son of Gloria
Vanderbilt. Through him, Wolf Blitzer's stuttering and the comical
appearance of former Gov.Eliot "Hot Pants" Spitzer, I reaffirmed
that CNN is my preferred network and online election source. Yay.
KUDOS: Nevada voters finally recognized that Sharron Angle
absorbs comprehension of the issues like a pretzel.
Mr. Reid goes back to Washington.
FAIL: Arizona elects Ben Quayle (R)--son of former VP and
poor speller Dan Quayle to Congress. Really?
KUDOS: Big loser Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) gives the most gracious
concession speech ever, especially considering that she
is a two-term Senator. Here's to class.
FAIL: The morons at the NRA for placing an initiative on ballots
called the "Right To Hunt" in AZ, AR, SC and TN. (It passed
in all but Arizona.)
KUDOS: The people of Colorado for not seeing the need to "Define
Personhood" in their Constitution.
FAIL: The voters of my native Kentucky for electing Rand Paul--
and, to be fair, an equally big FAIL to Jack Conway's shitty
race that made me ashamed to be a supporter.
KUDOS: To Delaware voters who have sense: thank you for not
electing non-sensical Tea Partier Christine O'Donnell.
FAIL: Meg Whitman, the CEO who spent $150 million of her
own money--and lost. Epic. Fail.
KUDOS: The "We're More Progressive Than You Might Think" city
of Lexington, Kentucky who turned a new page in politics
by firmly electing the openly gay Jim Gray as Mayor.
FAIL: Don't Ask, Don't Tell. With the House and Senate fighting
and a weakened president, it's back to the ol' drawing
board for a legislative repeal.
KUDOS: To CNN's Election Center for having really cool maps,
graphs, polls and all sorts of nerdy things.
WTF?: The citizens of Rhode Island for 1) having a measure asking
voters if they want to change the state's official name from
"State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations" to just
"Rhode Island" 2) 78% of voters saying NO?! You want that
long ass name? Realllly? So much for brevity.
Live from in front of the big screen in the Man Cave, it's your political
correspondent, Matt Spencer, signing off and urging you to remember,
in the words of Lenny Kravitz, that "It Ain't Over Til It's Over."
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
1994 Part II? Not quite.
There just wasn't enough time to predict the House races. It took long
enough to research 37 Senate and 37 Gubernatorial races and give
predictions; figuring out how 435 U.S. Representatives might fare
would have required taking a full day off work.
The magic number is 218, folks. Pre-election numbers show a total
makeup of 256 Democrats and 179 Republicans. The GOP has only
39 seats to win in Congress before they take over. This is, as of this
writing, totally do-able and totally expected. I predict a Republican
takeover in Congress and that Democrats will just barely hold on to
the Senate.
I'm at peace with the whole thing.
People aren't always ready for change. And as we've seen, many
people fear it. But change doesn't go away. We are changing for the
better. Even though a large, scared group of voters may succeed at
blocking liberal and progressive ideals, they will fail at blocking
progress itself. Happens every time.
Do I absolutely love the Democratic leadership these days? Hell no.
Do I feel like I, as a Gay Man, have been backed over with a bus and
hit with a 2X4 by the President of the United States? Yes. But am I
abandoning the ship altogether? Am I starting to see some kind of
Republican wisdom? Absolutely not.
I, for one, refuse to go back to the days when the word 'terror' was all
we heard from our chief executive. I will not stand silently by and
allow my country to be taken over by those who would have us fenced
in like cattle or reduced to second-class citizenship. I will not allow
the Palins, Gingriches, Bachmanns and Bushes of the World to tell me
I'm 'un-American' simply because I'm open to learning more from
and giving out big ol' doses of respect to other cultures.
My party loses tonight for sure. And the discouragement of Democrats
all over might prompt more than one happily smug Tea Partier to say,
"America--love it or leave it." My response would be a little something
like this:
"Well, I love America too. And I'm sure as hell not leaving it to you."
enough to research 37 Senate and 37 Gubernatorial races and give
predictions; figuring out how 435 U.S. Representatives might fare
would have required taking a full day off work.
The magic number is 218, folks. Pre-election numbers show a total
makeup of 256 Democrats and 179 Republicans. The GOP has only
39 seats to win in Congress before they take over. This is, as of this
writing, totally do-able and totally expected. I predict a Republican
takeover in Congress and that Democrats will just barely hold on to
the Senate.
I'm at peace with the whole thing.
People aren't always ready for change. And as we've seen, many
people fear it. But change doesn't go away. We are changing for the
better. Even though a large, scared group of voters may succeed at
blocking liberal and progressive ideals, they will fail at blocking
progress itself. Happens every time.
Do I absolutely love the Democratic leadership these days? Hell no.
Do I feel like I, as a Gay Man, have been backed over with a bus and
hit with a 2X4 by the President of the United States? Yes. But am I
abandoning the ship altogether? Am I starting to see some kind of
Republican wisdom? Absolutely not.
I, for one, refuse to go back to the days when the word 'terror' was all
we heard from our chief executive. I will not stand silently by and
allow my country to be taken over by those who would have us fenced
in like cattle or reduced to second-class citizenship. I will not allow
the Palins, Gingriches, Bachmanns and Bushes of the World to tell me
I'm 'un-American' simply because I'm open to learning more from
and giving out big ol' doses of respect to other cultures.
My party loses tonight for sure. And the discouragement of Democrats
all over might prompt more than one happily smug Tea Partier to say,
"America--love it or leave it." My response would be a little something
like this:
"Well, I love America too. And I'm sure as hell not leaving it to you."
Monday, November 1, 2010
Governors Predictions
Alabama: Democrats ain't whistlin' Dixie anymore; State Rep. Robert
Bentley (R) defeats Ag Commissioner Ron Sparks (D)--55%-45%Alaska: Palin replacement Sean Parnell (R) elected in his own right
over former State Rep. Ethan Berkowitz (D)--59%-41%
Arizona: Don't-Cross-The-Border Gov. Jan Brewer (R) declares
victory over AZ Attorney General Terry Goddard (D)--54%-46%
Arkansas: Democrats hold on here as incumbent Gov. Mike Beebe
soundly defeats former State Sen. Jim Keet (R)--60%-40%
California: A HUGE personal loan doesn't help Meg Whitman (R), as she
narrowly loses to decades-ago Gov. Jerry Brown (D)--51%-49%
Colorado: Scary fanatical Tom Tancredo (ACP) barely loses out to
Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper (D), while campaign finance
offender Dan Maes (R) takes 3rd place--49%-44%-7%
offender Dan Maes (R) takes 3rd place--49%-44%-7%
Connecticut: Former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy (D) suffers defeat
by former Ambassador to Ireland Tom Foley (R)--50.8%-49.2%
Florida: In 2000-esque results, Florida CFO Alex Sink (D) beats out
Rick Scott (R), becoming FL's first woman governor--50.3%-49.7%
Georgia: Some voters can't forgive ex-Gov. Roy Barnes' (D) decision
to change the flag; he loses out to U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal (R), with
John Monds (L) in distant 3rd--51%-45%-4%Hawaii: Longtime U.S. Rep Neil Abercrombie (D) barely defeats
Lt. Governor Duke Aiona (R)--52%-48%
Idaho: Keith Allred (D) loses out to incumbent Gov. Butch Otter
(R) with an unsurprising margin--57%-43%
Illinois: Over the Blagejovich mess, Prairie State voters toss former
Lt. Gov (now Gov.) Pat Quinn (D) for State Sen. Bill Brady (R).
Green Party's Rich Whitney gets 3rd--49%-47%-4%Iowa: Hawkeye voters long for the past, returning popular 1983-99
Gov. Terry Branstad (R), ditching Gov. Chet Culver (D)--56%-44%
Kansas: Current Sen. Sam Brownback (R) leaves D.C. for the Gov's
Mansion, soundly defeating State Sen. Tom Holland (D)--61%-39%
Maine: A crowded race has State Sen. Libby Mitchell (D) falling into
3rd behind runner-up Eliot Cutler (I) and Waterville Mayor Paul
LePage (R)--39%-33%-28%Maryland: Incumbent Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) gives predecessor Bob Ehrlich (R) a second defeat--54%-46%
Massachusetts: MA Treasurer Tim Cahill (I) takes 3rd, while CharlieBaker (R) is runner-up to incumbent Gov. Deval Patrick--47%-44%-9%
Michigan: Hardest recession-hit state elects businessman Rick Snyder (R) over Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero--55%-45%
Minnesota: Ex-U.S. Senator Mark Dayton (DFL) elected narrowly overState Rep. Tom Emmer (R) and 3rd place Tom Horner (I)--45%-43%-12%
Nebraska: Popular Gov. Dave Heineman (R) wins in landslide victory
over attorney Mike Meister (D)--75%-25%Nevada: Rory Reid (D) wishes his last name wasn't so toxic, as Rory (son of Harry) is handily defeated by U.S. Judge Brian Sandoval (R)--58%-42%
New Hampshire: Incumbent Gov. John Lynch (D), never losing in pollsto attorney John Stephen (R), wins a second term--54%-46%
New Mexico: Lt. Governor Diane Denish (D) suffers defeat at the hands of
District Attorney Susana Martinez (R)--54%-46%New York: Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (D) wins handily over businessman Carl Paladino (R)--61%-39%
Ohio: Campaigning by Obama wont help incumbent Gov. Ted Strickland (D)as he suffers narrow loss to ex-U.S. Rep. John Kasich (R)--50.5%-49.5%
Oklahoma: U.S. Rep. Mary Fallin (R) leaves D.C. for Oklahoma City as she whoops Lt. Gov. Jari Askins (D)--61%-39%
Oregon: Ex-NBA'er Chris Dudley becomes state's first Republican gov in 20+ years when he defeats former Gov. John Kitzhaber (D)--51.7%-50.3%
Pennsylvania: Alleghany Co. Exec. Dan Onorato (D) is defeated by Penn. Attorney General Tom Corbett (R)--53%-47%
Rhode Island: Ex. U.S. Sen. Lincoln Chaffee (I) defeats John Robitaille (R)and Frank "shove it" Caprio (D) gets 3rd place--38%-35%-29%
South Carolina: Nasty race ends as State Rep. Nikki Haley (R) becomes SC's first woman gov, defeating State Sen. Vincent Sheheen (D)--53%-46%
South Dakota: Boring night in Pierre; Lt. Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R) over- whelmingly elected over State. Sen. Scott Heidepriem--57%-43%
Tennessee: Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam (R) soundly elected over Mike McWherter (D)--58%-42%
Texas: Former Houston Mayor Bill White (D) is defeated in his attempt to
unseat longest-serving Gov. Rick Perry (R)--55%-45%
Utah: Why do we even poll here? Current Gov. (and Mormon, imagine that)
Gary Herbert easily trumps Salt Lake Mayor Peter Corroon--62%-38%
Vermont: Quiet race ends as State Sen. Peter Shumlin (D) narrowly
edges out Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie (R)--52%-48%
Wisconsin: Not a good state for Democrats these days, as Milwaukee Mayor
Tom Barrett loses to County Exec. Scott Walker (R)--54%-46%
Wyoming: In another "why bother?" race, Democratic State Party Chair
Leslie Petersen loses big to ex-U.S. Attorney Matt Mead (R)--68%-32%
PREDICTION:
37 Gubernatorial races=
25 Republican Victories
12 Democratic Victories
CURRENT GOVERNORS BALANCE: 26 Democrats 23 Republicans 1 Independent
NEW GOVERNORS BALANCE: 18 Democrats 31 Republicans 1 Independent
Next: Very Few House Races/Concluding Thoughts
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Senate Predictions
Alabama: No sweat for long-time Sen. Richard Shelby (R), easily
defeating William Barnes (D)—70%-30%.
Alaska: Joe Miller (R) finishes 3rd due to sloppiness, giving a surprising
political comeback for incumbent Lisa Murkowski (Write-In); 2nd
place goes to Scott McAdams (D)--39%-33%-28%.
Arizona: Former Pres. candidate John McCain (R) wins an easy fifth
term over prettyboy Rodney Glassman (D)--62%-38%.
Arkansas: Incumbent Blanche Lincoln (D) will go down in flames against
John Boozman (R)--58%-42%.
California: Barbara Boxer (D) wins a fourth term in the toughest fight
of her political life against ex-CEO Carly Fiorina (R)--52%-48%.
Colorado: Incumbent Michael Bennet (D) suffers very tight loss to
Ken Buck (R). Watch for a recount here, folks.--50.6-50.4%.
Connecticut: Despite massive bucks spent, ex-WWE CEO Linda McMahon
(R) gets 'knocked out' by Richard Blumenthal (D)--56%-44%.
Delaware: The First State gets tired of the negative attention and elects
Chris Coons (D) over PR nightmare Christine O'Donnell (R)--55%-45%.
Florida: Gov. Charlie Crist (I) starts packing for nowhere, as he and 3rd
place Kendrick Meek (D) lose to Marco Rubio (R)—44%-36%-20%.
Georgia: Incumbent Johnny Isakson (R) has folks wondering about
the reason for the race, crushing Mike Thurmond (D)--65%-35%.
Hawaii: Longest-serving Sen. Daniel Inouye (D) safely re-elected to
ninth term over Republican Campbell Cavasso (R)--59%-41%.
Idaho: Tom Sullivan (D) never had a chance against Mormon incumbent
Mike Crapo (R)--67%-33%.
Illinois: A very close race ends on a good note for Mark Kirk (R), barely
edging out IL Treasury Secretary Alexi Giannoulias (D)--51%-49%.
Indiana: Ex. Senator Dan Coats (R) is overwhelmingly welcomed back
by Hoosiers, defeating U.S. Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D)--60%-40%.
Iowa: Incumbent Chuck Grassley (R) is returned to the Senate by Iowans
against Roxanne Conlin (D)—57%-43%.
Kansas: Crickets chirping at the headquarters of Lisa Johnston (D), as she
is massacred by U.S. Rep. Jerry Moran (R)--64%-36%.
Kentucky: Nasty campaign ends as Tea Party scores a victory with
Rand Paul (R) over Attorney General Jack Conway (D)--54%-46%.
Louisiana: Scandalous or not, incumbent David Vitter (R) scores a
second term over U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon (D)--57%-43%.
Maryland: Satisfied voters return the feisty Barbara Mikulski (D) to
D.C. over Eric Wargotz (R) with a whopping--63%-37%.
Missouri: U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt (R) moves up the political ladder, as
Robin Carnahan (D) stays on as Missouri Sec. of State--53%-47%.
Nevada: In a very bizarre race, Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D)
barely wins over nut job Sharron Angle (R)--50.5%--49.5%.
New Hampshire: This quiet race has U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes (D) losing out
to former NH Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R). --56%-44%.
New York: Incumbent Chuck Schumer (D) wins an easy third term
over virtually unknown Jay Townsend (R)--66%-34%.
New York: Kirsten Gillibrand (D) keeps Hillary's old seat Female and
Democratic, with a wide win over ex-U.S. Rep Joe DioGuardi--57%-43%.
North Carolina: The underfunded Elaine Marshall (D) is passed over for
incumbent Sen. Richard Burr (R). --57%-43%.
North Dakota: Most popular U.S. Gov. John Hoeven (R) wins the
popularity contest by a landslide over Tracy Potter (D). – 71%-29%.
Ohio: The Buckeye State stays Republican as former Bush official Rob
Portman has decisive victory over Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher (D)—55%-45%.
Oklahoma: Tom Coburn (R) returns to the Senate over the laughable
Jim Rogers (D), who has no campaign website—76%-24%.
Oregon: Liberal Ron Wyden (D) stays comfortable, retaining his seat
against challenger Jim Huffman (R) –61%-39%.
Pennsylvania: This hot race ends with Pat Toomey (R) narrowly edging
out U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak (D)—51%-49%.
South Carolina: Jim DeMint (R) easily keeps his seat after the bizarre
candidacy of Alvin Greene (D)—76%-24%.
South Dakota: Incumbent John Thune (R) must be one hell of a senator,
considering he has zero Democratic opposition. Wow.
Utah: Mike Lee (R) has an easy victory over businessman Sam Granato (D)
in this safely Republican state—59%-41%.
Vermont: Unknown challenger Len Britton (R) is no match for Vermont’s
high-approval Sen. Patrick Leahy (D)—69%-31%.
Washington: Dino Rossi (R) fails again in his third state-wide election, but
gives incumbent Patty Murray (D) a run for her money—50.8%-49.2%.
West Virginia: Mountain State voters can’t let this one go GOP, electing the
popular Gov. Joe Manchin (D) over John Raese (R)—52%-48%.
Wisconsin: The Senate loses a liberal voice in Russ Feingold (D), as he goes
down against Tea Party-endorsed Ron Johnson (R)—53%-47%.
PREDICTION:
37 U.S. Senate races=
25 Republican Victories
12 Democratic Victories
CURRENT SENATE BALANCE: 59 Democrats 41 Republicans
NEW SENATE BALANCE: 52 Democrats 48 Republicans
Next: Governors Races
defeating William Barnes (D)—70%-30%.
Alaska: Joe Miller (R) finishes 3rd due to sloppiness, giving a surprising
political comeback for incumbent Lisa Murkowski (Write-In); 2nd
place goes to Scott McAdams (D)--39%-33%-28%.
Arizona: Former Pres. candidate John McCain (R) wins an easy fifth
term over prettyboy Rodney Glassman (D)--62%-38%.
Arkansas: Incumbent Blanche Lincoln (D) will go down in flames against
John Boozman (R)--58%-42%.
California: Barbara Boxer (D) wins a fourth term in the toughest fight
of her political life against ex-CEO Carly Fiorina (R)--52%-48%.
Colorado: Incumbent Michael Bennet (D) suffers very tight loss to
Ken Buck (R). Watch for a recount here, folks.--50.6-50.4%.
Connecticut: Despite massive bucks spent, ex-WWE CEO Linda McMahon
(R) gets 'knocked out' by Richard Blumenthal (D)--56%-44%.
Delaware: The First State gets tired of the negative attention and elects
Chris Coons (D) over PR nightmare Christine O'Donnell (R)--55%-45%.
Florida: Gov. Charlie Crist (I) starts packing for nowhere, as he and 3rd
place Kendrick Meek (D) lose to Marco Rubio (R)—44%-36%-20%.
Georgia: Incumbent Johnny Isakson (R) has folks wondering about
the reason for the race, crushing Mike Thurmond (D)--65%-35%.
Hawaii: Longest-serving Sen. Daniel Inouye (D) safely re-elected to
ninth term over Republican Campbell Cavasso (R)--59%-41%.
Idaho: Tom Sullivan (D) never had a chance against Mormon incumbent
Mike Crapo (R)--67%-33%.
Illinois: A very close race ends on a good note for Mark Kirk (R), barely
edging out IL Treasury Secretary Alexi Giannoulias (D)--51%-49%.
Indiana: Ex. Senator Dan Coats (R) is overwhelmingly welcomed back
by Hoosiers, defeating U.S. Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D)--60%-40%.
Iowa: Incumbent Chuck Grassley (R) is returned to the Senate by Iowans
against Roxanne Conlin (D)—57%-43%.
Kansas: Crickets chirping at the headquarters of Lisa Johnston (D), as she
is massacred by U.S. Rep. Jerry Moran (R)--64%-36%.
Kentucky: Nasty campaign ends as Tea Party scores a victory with
Rand Paul (R) over Attorney General Jack Conway (D)--54%-46%.
Louisiana: Scandalous or not, incumbent David Vitter (R) scores a
second term over U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon (D)--57%-43%.
Maryland: Satisfied voters return the feisty Barbara Mikulski (D) to
D.C. over Eric Wargotz (R) with a whopping--63%-37%.
Missouri: U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt (R) moves up the political ladder, as
Robin Carnahan (D) stays on as Missouri Sec. of State--53%-47%.
Nevada: In a very bizarre race, Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D)
barely wins over nut job Sharron Angle (R)--50.5%--49.5%.
New Hampshire: This quiet race has U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes (D) losing out
to former NH Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R). --56%-44%.
New York: Incumbent Chuck Schumer (D) wins an easy third term
over virtually unknown Jay Townsend (R)--66%-34%.
New York: Kirsten Gillibrand (D) keeps Hillary's old seat Female and
Democratic, with a wide win over ex-U.S. Rep Joe DioGuardi--57%-43%.
North Carolina: The underfunded Elaine Marshall (D) is passed over for
incumbent Sen. Richard Burr (R). --57%-43%.
North Dakota: Most popular U.S. Gov. John Hoeven (R) wins the
popularity contest by a landslide over Tracy Potter (D). – 71%-29%.
Ohio: The Buckeye State stays Republican as former Bush official Rob
Portman has decisive victory over Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher (D)—55%-45%.
Oklahoma: Tom Coburn (R) returns to the Senate over the laughable
Jim Rogers (D), who has no campaign website—76%-24%.
Oregon: Liberal Ron Wyden (D) stays comfortable, retaining his seat
against challenger Jim Huffman (R) –61%-39%.
Pennsylvania: This hot race ends with Pat Toomey (R) narrowly edging
out U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak (D)—51%-49%.
South Carolina: Jim DeMint (R) easily keeps his seat after the bizarre
candidacy of Alvin Greene (D)—76%-24%.
South Dakota: Incumbent John Thune (R) must be one hell of a senator,
considering he has zero Democratic opposition. Wow.
Utah: Mike Lee (R) has an easy victory over businessman Sam Granato (D)
in this safely Republican state—59%-41%.
Vermont: Unknown challenger Len Britton (R) is no match for Vermont’s
high-approval Sen. Patrick Leahy (D)—69%-31%.
Washington: Dino Rossi (R) fails again in his third state-wide election, but
gives incumbent Patty Murray (D) a run for her money—50.8%-49.2%.
West Virginia: Mountain State voters can’t let this one go GOP, electing the
popular Gov. Joe Manchin (D) over John Raese (R)—52%-48%.
Wisconsin: The Senate loses a liberal voice in Russ Feingold (D), as he goes
down against Tea Party-endorsed Ron Johnson (R)—53%-47%.
PREDICTION:
37 U.S. Senate races=
25 Republican Victories
12 Democratic Victories
CURRENT SENATE BALANCE: 59 Democrats 41 Republicans
NEW SENATE BALANCE: 52 Democrats 48 Republicans
Next: Governors Races
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Predictions, Probabilities and Perfect Weather
As I age and become more attuned to politics and my own well-
being, I will attempt to spare myself epic disappointment on
Tuesday, November 2nd, by issuing my first-ever predictions
for a mid-term election. It's better this way.
It should be noted first and foremost that I am probably not in
the best frame of mind to make these guesses, despite how
educated they may be. As a political junkie in 2010, I have found
myself surrounded by one of the most mean-spirited campaign
bloodbaths I have ever seen (and my first presidential election
was Bush vs. Gore!) Getting to this point has been brutal for just
about everyone: the voter, the media (who do you think spends
so much time spinning this crap?!) and I'm sure--the candidates
themselves. Yet, I personally have a difficult time preparing
myself for the 'night of nights' due to my growing disenchantment
with the Democratic Party.
Since climbing back to the top of the Congressional mountain in
'06, Democratic performance has been very disappointing, from
the Party's lack of balls while George W. Bush lived out his lame-
duck existence to not being able to properly explain a health care
bill that actually holds promise for the country. If that weren't
enough, our Democratic leaders in Congress and--yes--our very
own President, continues to nibble (if not bite) the hand that feeds
them. As a Gay Liberal, I am very disappointed that the judicial
verdict of repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has been appealed by
the Obama Administration--the very group of people who not only
supported, but promised the repeal of the ridiculous law. While the
issue of DADT pales greatly in comparison to the economy, it is just
one more testimony of how Democrats have offended not only their
progressive members, but countless moderates as well, by appearing
weak and off-message. The whole thing makes me sick. Still, I'll vote
Democratic on Tuesday. And I'll do so because although Tea Party/
Republican candidates make some sense when complaining about
the lack of Democratic strength, their complaints certainly don't
imply any new ideas. The "Party of NO" is still alive and well, and I'm
not about to trade progress (however small) for moral pandering and
a return to the blatant arrogance and lack of domestic investment of
the Bush era. I'm resentful but not stupid: the grass is no greener on
the other side. With the Republican Party's environmental stances,
I'd be surprised if there was grass at all.
My predictions will be found in the next few entries. I wont attempt
to predict most House campaign (there are 435 of them!) but the
Senate and Governors races will be captured. I have developed these
guesses from MONTHS of viewing polls, campaign ads and reading
about the candidates. The biggest factor in my predictions, though,
has little to do with funds raised or polls, but more to do with the
political ideology and mood of the state and/or district. Projected
winning candidates will appear in bold form; margins appearing in
red (of course). These guesses have a 99-100% margin of error. ;)
Enjoy.
Get out to the polls on Tuesday, November 2nd, a day forecasted as
being 'partly cloudy.'
Oh, the irony.
being, I will attempt to spare myself epic disappointment on
Tuesday, November 2nd, by issuing my first-ever predictions
for a mid-term election. It's better this way.
It should be noted first and foremost that I am probably not in
the best frame of mind to make these guesses, despite how
educated they may be. As a political junkie in 2010, I have found
myself surrounded by one of the most mean-spirited campaign
bloodbaths I have ever seen (and my first presidential election
was Bush vs. Gore!) Getting to this point has been brutal for just
about everyone: the voter, the media (who do you think spends
so much time spinning this crap?!) and I'm sure--the candidates
themselves. Yet, I personally have a difficult time preparing
myself for the 'night of nights' due to my growing disenchantment
with the Democratic Party.
Since climbing back to the top of the Congressional mountain in
'06, Democratic performance has been very disappointing, from
the Party's lack of balls while George W. Bush lived out his lame-
duck existence to not being able to properly explain a health care
bill that actually holds promise for the country. If that weren't
enough, our Democratic leaders in Congress and--yes--our very
own President, continues to nibble (if not bite) the hand that feeds
them. As a Gay Liberal, I am very disappointed that the judicial
verdict of repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has been appealed by
the Obama Administration--the very group of people who not only
supported, but promised the repeal of the ridiculous law. While the
issue of DADT pales greatly in comparison to the economy, it is just
one more testimony of how Democrats have offended not only their
progressive members, but countless moderates as well, by appearing
weak and off-message. The whole thing makes me sick. Still, I'll vote
Democratic on Tuesday. And I'll do so because although Tea Party/
Republican candidates make some sense when complaining about
the lack of Democratic strength, their complaints certainly don't
imply any new ideas. The "Party of NO" is still alive and well, and I'm
not about to trade progress (however small) for moral pandering and
a return to the blatant arrogance and lack of domestic investment of
the Bush era. I'm resentful but not stupid: the grass is no greener on
the other side. With the Republican Party's environmental stances,
I'd be surprised if there was grass at all.
My predictions will be found in the next few entries. I wont attempt
to predict most House campaign (there are 435 of them!) but the
Senate and Governors races will be captured. I have developed these
guesses from MONTHS of viewing polls, campaign ads and reading
about the candidates. The biggest factor in my predictions, though,
has little to do with funds raised or polls, but more to do with the
political ideology and mood of the state and/or district. Projected
winning candidates will appear in bold form; margins appearing in
red (of course). These guesses have a 99-100% margin of error. ;)
Enjoy.
Get out to the polls on Tuesday, November 2nd, a day forecasted as
being 'partly cloudy.'
Oh, the irony.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Really?!
Wow. I am absolutely in shock over this.
And to think that around 40% of Delaware voters support a candidate
who actually didn't know what the First Amendment is, claiming that
"Senators don't have to memorize the Constitution."
No, Christine, but they should know it.
Just to reiterate what kind of candidates that the Tea Party deems
worthy to serve in positions of power and influence, take a very
frightening scroll through the mind of someone who just might
represent the Silver State come November.
And just how frightening are these Tea Party candidates? You
tell me:
--A governor-turned-VP-nominee-turned-FOX News-pundit
whose experience in foreign affairs didn't exist outside of Wasilla.
--A 'self-certified opthalmologist' who thinks that civil rights laws
were a mistake and minimalizes a drug problem in a drug-ridden state.
--A candidate who claimed to having taken classes at Princeton, had to
admit to a) having never graduated and b) "dating a witch on a satanic
altar."
--A politician who doesn't know where the 9/11 attackers came from and
who verbalized to the class that a classroom of Latino students "looked
more Asian to me."
I need some Pepto Bismol.
And to think that around 40% of Delaware voters support a candidate
who actually didn't know what the First Amendment is, claiming that
"Senators don't have to memorize the Constitution."
No, Christine, but they should know it.
Just to reiterate what kind of candidates that the Tea Party deems
worthy to serve in positions of power and influence, take a very
frightening scroll through the mind of someone who just might
represent the Silver State come November.
And just how frightening are these Tea Party candidates? You
tell me:
--A governor-turned-VP-nominee-turned-FOX News-pundit
whose experience in foreign affairs didn't exist outside of Wasilla.
--A 'self-certified opthalmologist' who thinks that civil rights laws
were a mistake and minimalizes a drug problem in a drug-ridden state.
--A candidate who claimed to having taken classes at Princeton, had to
admit to a) having never graduated and b) "dating a witch on a satanic
altar."
--A politician who doesn't know where the 9/11 attackers came from and
who verbalized to the class that a classroom of Latino students "looked
more Asian to me."
I need some Pepto Bismol.
Bert and Ernie.
In 1915, Republican Edwin Morrow and Democrat Augustus
Stanley both wanted to be Kentucky's next governor. They
campaigned vigorously in the stump-speaking fashion of the
day, and the barbs that the candidates threw at each other
were brutal; often vicious. Legend has it that Stanley actually
got drunk at one of their debates. He threw up while Morrow
was speaking, saying afterwards that "Ed Morrow just makes
me sick to my stomach!" Referring to Democratic corruption,
Morrow once commented that by electing Stanley, the State
would be attempting to "clean house with a dirty broom."
You would think that, just like today's politicians, they
probably couldn't stand the sight of each other. Still, for all
of the mileage that the media probably got out of making these
candidates seem adversarial, the reality was rather ironic:
It wasn't true at all.
For all of their political differences, Morrow and Stanley
were surprisingly close friends. While campaigning, each
would deliver firey attacks against the other--and would then
meet for dinner after the debates. Once, they were even
spotted helping each other walk down a street after a 'spirited'
evening. They traveled to the same rallies together. The
politicians continued to be friends until Morrow's death 20
years later. Both were ex-governors by that time, Morrow
having succeeded Stanley in his own right.
Bipartisan friendships like these aren't archaic--they're just
uncommon. Senator Richard Lugar, a conservative Indiana
Republican and Senator Patrick Leahy, a liberal Vermont
Democrat, have been colleagues and good friends for over
thirty-five years. They have visited each others' homes and
one story tells that their children live within 100 yards of
each other with their families and share a playground. In
addition to the comraderie, they have written various bills
together.
As Kentucky has recently made headlines with the nasty
developments in its U.S. Senate race, I wonder how Jack
Conway and Rand Paul could serve themselves and society
by taking notice and learning from stories like these?
Couldn't we all?
Stanley both wanted to be Kentucky's next governor. They
campaigned vigorously in the stump-speaking fashion of the
day, and the barbs that the candidates threw at each other
were brutal; often vicious. Legend has it that Stanley actually
got drunk at one of their debates. He threw up while Morrow
was speaking, saying afterwards that "Ed Morrow just makes
me sick to my stomach!" Referring to Democratic corruption,
Morrow once commented that by electing Stanley, the State
would be attempting to "clean house with a dirty broom."
You would think that, just like today's politicians, they
probably couldn't stand the sight of each other. Still, for all
of the mileage that the media probably got out of making these
candidates seem adversarial, the reality was rather ironic:
It wasn't true at all.
For all of their political differences, Morrow and Stanley
were surprisingly close friends. While campaigning, each
would deliver firey attacks against the other--and would then
meet for dinner after the debates. Once, they were even
spotted helping each other walk down a street after a 'spirited'
evening. They traveled to the same rallies together. The
politicians continued to be friends until Morrow's death 20
years later. Both were ex-governors by that time, Morrow
having succeeded Stanley in his own right.
Bipartisan friendships like these aren't archaic--they're just
uncommon. Senator Richard Lugar, a conservative Indiana
Republican and Senator Patrick Leahy, a liberal Vermont
Democrat, have been colleagues and good friends for over
thirty-five years. They have visited each others' homes and
one story tells that their children live within 100 yards of
each other with their families and share a playground. In
addition to the comraderie, they have written various bills
together.
As Kentucky has recently made headlines with the nasty
developments in its U.S. Senate race, I wonder how Jack
Conway and Rand Paul could serve themselves and society
by taking notice and learning from stories like these?
Couldn't we all?
Monday, October 18, 2010
Debating for the Love of Kentucky - Part II
Like guests at a wedding, debate attendees in Bigelow Hall at
UofL's Miller IT building were seated on different sides of the
aisle. In this case, most Conway supporters sat to the left of
the podium while the pro-Paul faction held forth from the
right (coincidental? I think not.)
The tension in the room was knife-worthy. I found it telling
that as the room filled to a standing-only capacity, people
looked for seats in their respective 'camps'--instead of seats
that were merely available. In time, the reason for the tension
came striding down the aisle in the form of Attorney General
Conway and Dr. Paul. Both seemed barely able to hold their
disdain for the other.
Jack Conway, appearing his usual-confident self, delivered a
standard opening statement, peppered with a recap of Rand
Paul's blunders and made a direct, as-humble-as-Jack-can-get
plea for our votes. What followed was something out of the
Twilight Zone.
Appearing borderline-disheveled, Dr. Paul wasted no time on
niceties and verbally went for Conway's throat. Although Dr.
Paul clearly showed that he was agitated at what he perceived
as Conway's attacks on his Christian faith, the Republican's
comments came out of nowhere. I got the impression that most
people either hadn't seen these ads or thought that Dr. Paul got
a little too hot-headed a little too quickly.
Unfortunately, the opening statements set the tone for the
debate. The audience's frustration at the personal attacks
was evidenced by a loud voice four rows behind me, yelling,
"Talk about the ISSUES!" Though I didn't care for the random
sound blast, I was inclined to agree.
When he wasn't sounding like a broken record when reciting
Rand Paul's college misbehavior, Democrat Conway went into
the same mode when discussing his record. Although it was
painful to hear repeatedly, Conway was obviously proud of his
record as Attorney General. When his answers didn't involve
character attacks, Conway came across as competent and
knowledgeable on the issues. He undoubtedlyscored a few
points with seniors and veterans, masking the usual political
pandering with half-genuine-sounding ideas, such the need for
a veterans nursing home in Central Kentucky.
Dr. Paul spent much of the evening in whine-mode. From
using the "have you no decency?" line from the McCarthy
era, to contemptously addressing how Conway attacked
his beliefs on Social Security, Paul opened himself up to a
direct "Do you believe this or not?" question from a one of
the moderators. Dr. Paul's wordiness and whining about
being attacked completely evaded any kind of simple answer.
Near the end of the debate, Paul's admonishings to Conway to
"be a man" and to "grow up" finally got to the Attorney General.
Gripping the edge of the podium hard, Conway replied that as
Attorney General, he " is always amused to get a lecture on law
from a self-certified opthamologist." Good one.
Jack Conway comes across as smug. He is a well-educated
"city boy" who seems to have little time for challenges to his
positions--but he'll get my vote. Because even if AG Conway
shows more than just a dash of arrogance, Rand Paul's lack of
a correctly-conveyed platform and his style of shooting-off-
the-hip make him appear dangerously inexperienced. As a
member of the crowd who knows that Conway definitely isn't
a Kentucky "good ol' boy", I still walked away believing that
Conway's positions were clear and that he knew enough to
represent the Commonwealth appropriately. I couldn't say
the same for Dr. Paul, who tapped so much into the sound-
bite of restoring America to the way it was that he didn't seem
to have much of a plan for its future.
The closing statements denoted the hostility in the room when,
after Conway's broken-record speech of reiterating his positions
and Dr. Paul's weaknesses, Rand Paul announced that he would
not shake Jack Conway's hand. The doctor proceeded to walk
right past the Attorney General and off the stage.
This was a calculated move to garner support from the perceived-
enraged Christian voter. Instead, it likely backfired on Dr. Paul,
showcasing him as a whiny candidate who couldn't stand the heat,
lacking as much in class as he does in credentials.
UofL's Miller IT building were seated on different sides of the
aisle. In this case, most Conway supporters sat to the left of
the podium while the pro-Paul faction held forth from the
right (coincidental? I think not.)
The tension in the room was knife-worthy. I found it telling
that as the room filled to a standing-only capacity, people
looked for seats in their respective 'camps'--instead of seats
that were merely available. In time, the reason for the tension
came striding down the aisle in the form of Attorney General
Conway and Dr. Paul. Both seemed barely able to hold their
disdain for the other.
Jack Conway, appearing his usual-confident self, delivered a
standard opening statement, peppered with a recap of Rand
Paul's blunders and made a direct, as-humble-as-Jack-can-get
plea for our votes. What followed was something out of the
Twilight Zone.
Appearing borderline-disheveled, Dr. Paul wasted no time on
niceties and verbally went for Conway's throat. Although Dr.
Paul clearly showed that he was agitated at what he perceived
as Conway's attacks on his Christian faith, the Republican's
comments came out of nowhere. I got the impression that most
people either hadn't seen these ads or thought that Dr. Paul got
a little too hot-headed a little too quickly.
Unfortunately, the opening statements set the tone for the
debate. The audience's frustration at the personal attacks
was evidenced by a loud voice four rows behind me, yelling,
"Talk about the ISSUES!" Though I didn't care for the random
sound blast, I was inclined to agree.
When he wasn't sounding like a broken record when reciting
Rand Paul's college misbehavior, Democrat Conway went into
the same mode when discussing his record. Although it was
painful to hear repeatedly, Conway was obviously proud of his
record as Attorney General. When his answers didn't involve
character attacks, Conway came across as competent and
knowledgeable on the issues. He undoubtedlyscored a few
points with seniors and veterans, masking the usual political
pandering with half-genuine-sounding ideas, such the need for
a veterans nursing home in Central Kentucky.
Dr. Paul spent much of the evening in whine-mode. From
using the "have you no decency?" line from the McCarthy
era, to contemptously addressing how Conway attacked
his beliefs on Social Security, Paul opened himself up to a
direct "Do you believe this or not?" question from a one of
the moderators. Dr. Paul's wordiness and whining about
being attacked completely evaded any kind of simple answer.
Near the end of the debate, Paul's admonishings to Conway to
"be a man" and to "grow up" finally got to the Attorney General.
Gripping the edge of the podium hard, Conway replied that as
Attorney General, he " is always amused to get a lecture on law
from a self-certified opthamologist." Good one.
Jack Conway comes across as smug. He is a well-educated
"city boy" who seems to have little time for challenges to his
positions--but he'll get my vote. Because even if AG Conway
shows more than just a dash of arrogance, Rand Paul's lack of
a correctly-conveyed platform and his style of shooting-off-
the-hip make him appear dangerously inexperienced. As a
member of the crowd who knows that Conway definitely isn't
a Kentucky "good ol' boy", I still walked away believing that
Conway's positions were clear and that he knew enough to
represent the Commonwealth appropriately. I couldn't say
the same for Dr. Paul, who tapped so much into the sound-
bite of restoring America to the way it was that he didn't seem
to have much of a plan for its future.
The closing statements denoted the hostility in the room when,
after Conway's broken-record speech of reiterating his positions
and Dr. Paul's weaknesses, Rand Paul announced that he would
not shake Jack Conway's hand. The doctor proceeded to walk
right past the Attorney General and off the stage.
This was a calculated move to garner support from the perceived-
enraged Christian voter. Instead, it likely backfired on Dr. Paul,
showcasing him as a whiny candidate who couldn't stand the heat,
lacking as much in class as he does in credentials.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Debating for the Love of Kentucky - Part I
The moderator asked his question clearly: "Tell us how you would help alleviate
Kentucky's dependency on coal, Mr. Lally." The candidate's response, however,
was something out of Mars. Lally, the Republican Congressional candidate, began
a spirited diatribe about the number of power poles on Bardstown Road. He was
getting fired up (characteristically, it seems) about this ' serious problem' when
there was a murmur from a group of his supporters:
"Coal! COAAAL."
The MC shushed the crowd, but everyone figured it out. And then it hit center
stage: the political newcomer sheepishly realized that the moderator hadn't
asked him about POLES--but rather COAL, Kentucky's one-time reigning industry.
Such a hearing malfunction could happen to anyone. I'll give Todd Lally a break
on that one, considering that he's an Air Force National Guard pilot. I'm sure he's
watching clips of that priceless moment today and thinking to himself, "Damned
loud engines."
It is difficult to determine who won last night's debate. Even though incumbent
liberal Democrat John Yarmuth sings my tune, I fairly admit that both candidates
displayed qualities worthy of any voter's attention. Yarmuth, prone to rambling,
also had a slight tendency to stutter. And while he played constant defense (being
placed there by both challenger Lally and the American public), the Congressman
was by no means a wallflower. When Lally implied that Congress was responsible
for the second-year lack of increase in Social Security payments, Yarmuth was
quick (and justified) to call the Republican's comments "ignorant and irresponsible",
as Congress has nothing to do with Social Security payment structure. Immediately,
Lally looked down. I got the impression of a father chastising a wreckless child. In
this case, the 'child's' brief showcase of guilt was surprising for a politician.
Todd Lally showed a Dick Cheney-esque zeal as a bulldog, chasing Yarmuth on
topics ranging from the national debt to health care reform and the Middle East.
His first couple of attempts to directly question the Democratic incumbent were
bold; Lally definitely tapped in to some of that Tea Party rage and attempted to
make John Yarmuth appear like Satan's right-hand man. Unfortunately, Lally
made frequent use of this tactic, which didn't exactly conform to rules of the
debate. Yarmuth did appear like a deer-in-the-headlights on a couple of occasions,
but as the debate continued, he used political saavy in waiting for the moderator
to approve Lally's question/attack before answering. This bought time for Yarmuth
to make the most sensical use of the last word, thus making Lally to look like a
dangerously-misinformed bully.
Lally spoke of being a native Louisvillian, but really spent much of the hour
trying to tie Congressman Yarmuth to "Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco-agenda", a
phrase that he used three times. His simple answer regarding the distracting issue
of abortion rights: "Only to protect the life of the mother." was well-received by
supporters, especially in comparison to Yarmuth's clear but wordy explanation
of his pro-choice stance and respect for the views on both sides. Lally's passionate
views on U.S.-Afghanistan involvement and his personal reflections of combat
definitely helped him with that segment of the Republican voter.
Still, an objective listener would have felt that John Yarmuth was more focused on
bettering Louisville. For all of Todd Lally's firm direct challenges ("Have you
been to Iraq, Congressman??") ("Some stimulus--do you feel stimulated!?"), his
commanding voice, passion and appeal to many voters, he offered few, if any
solutions to these complex, vast issues. I left the debate feeling more confident in
my opinion that Congressman Yarmuth should keep his job.
Before the concluding speeches, Lally and Yarmuth touched on the seemingly-
lifelong Louisville problem of new bridges. Although rambling, Yarmuth asserted
that he would not intervene with the design and decisions of the Bridges Project.
Lally, however, couldn't answer quietly. His points were concise, but he tapped
into that Tea Party rage a bit too much, saying that the bridges should be designed
'without the need for poles'.
Come on, Todd. You Tea Partiers may not want any type of tolls, but building bridges
without supports?
Even Queen Sarah wouldn't dare...
Kentucky's dependency on coal, Mr. Lally." The candidate's response, however,
was something out of Mars. Lally, the Republican Congressional candidate, began
a spirited diatribe about the number of power poles on Bardstown Road. He was
getting fired up (characteristically, it seems) about this ' serious problem' when
there was a murmur from a group of his supporters:
"Coal! COAAAL."
The MC shushed the crowd, but everyone figured it out. And then it hit center
stage: the political newcomer sheepishly realized that the moderator hadn't
asked him about POLES--but rather COAL, Kentucky's one-time reigning industry.
Such a hearing malfunction could happen to anyone. I'll give Todd Lally a break
on that one, considering that he's an Air Force National Guard pilot. I'm sure he's
watching clips of that priceless moment today and thinking to himself, "Damned
loud engines."
It is difficult to determine who won last night's debate. Even though incumbent
liberal Democrat John Yarmuth sings my tune, I fairly admit that both candidates
displayed qualities worthy of any voter's attention. Yarmuth, prone to rambling,
also had a slight tendency to stutter. And while he played constant defense (being
placed there by both challenger Lally and the American public), the Congressman
was by no means a wallflower. When Lally implied that Congress was responsible
for the second-year lack of increase in Social Security payments, Yarmuth was
quick (and justified) to call the Republican's comments "ignorant and irresponsible",
as Congress has nothing to do with Social Security payment structure. Immediately,
Lally looked down. I got the impression of a father chastising a wreckless child. In
this case, the 'child's' brief showcase of guilt was surprising for a politician.
Todd Lally showed a Dick Cheney-esque zeal as a bulldog, chasing Yarmuth on
topics ranging from the national debt to health care reform and the Middle East.
His first couple of attempts to directly question the Democratic incumbent were
bold; Lally definitely tapped in to some of that Tea Party rage and attempted to
make John Yarmuth appear like Satan's right-hand man. Unfortunately, Lally
made frequent use of this tactic, which didn't exactly conform to rules of the
debate. Yarmuth did appear like a deer-in-the-headlights on a couple of occasions,
but as the debate continued, he used political saavy in waiting for the moderator
to approve Lally's question/attack before answering. This bought time for Yarmuth
to make the most sensical use of the last word, thus making Lally to look like a
dangerously-misinformed bully.
Lally spoke of being a native Louisvillian, but really spent much of the hour
trying to tie Congressman Yarmuth to "Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco-agenda", a
phrase that he used three times. His simple answer regarding the distracting issue
of abortion rights: "Only to protect the life of the mother." was well-received by
supporters, especially in comparison to Yarmuth's clear but wordy explanation
of his pro-choice stance and respect for the views on both sides. Lally's passionate
views on U.S.-Afghanistan involvement and his personal reflections of combat
definitely helped him with that segment of the Republican voter.
Still, an objective listener would have felt that John Yarmuth was more focused on
bettering Louisville. For all of Todd Lally's firm direct challenges ("Have you
been to Iraq, Congressman??") ("Some stimulus--do you feel stimulated!?"), his
commanding voice, passion and appeal to many voters, he offered few, if any
solutions to these complex, vast issues. I left the debate feeling more confident in
my opinion that Congressman Yarmuth should keep his job.
Before the concluding speeches, Lally and Yarmuth touched on the seemingly-
lifelong Louisville problem of new bridges. Although rambling, Yarmuth asserted
that he would not intervene with the design and decisions of the Bridges Project.
Lally, however, couldn't answer quietly. His points were concise, but he tapped
into that Tea Party rage a bit too much, saying that the bridges should be designed
'without the need for poles'.
Come on, Todd. You Tea Partiers may not want any type of tolls, but building bridges
without supports?
Even Queen Sarah wouldn't dare...
Friday, October 1, 2010
Free Speech, Meg, Sarah and Dairy Queen.
October, already, huh? I would've liked to have started holiday shopping already,
but I also would've liked to have weighed 190 lbs. last month. Priorities, people.
Mine these days are new brakes and a better fall/winter (and spring and summer)
wardrobe. *sigh*
I found a rather interesting article today. What to say about a Christian Assistant-
Attorney General (AAG) who goes after a Gay college (University of Michigan)
student body president? For starters, I think that this high-ranking State official
is likely more interested in men's briefs than briefs of the legal variety. HELLO!?
It's one thing if the Big Man on Campus was part of a criminal investigation, but
no...AAG Shirvell is waging his own, personal campaign against the guy on his
own, personal blog. Seriously: "Chris Armstrong Watch". Realllly?! He's a college
kid, and you're a government official in a state with one of the highest crime rates
in the country. Shouldn't you be working on that?? While I think that the AAG is
probably guilty of harassment, I'm not so sure that he should be fired from his job.
Before you call me a traitor to equal rights and the "liberal agenda", hear me out:
Andrew Shirvell's comments are protected under the free speech clause--and he
hasn't used his office (that we know of) to go after the kid. I'd say that the Assistant
AG's real problem is that the closet can handle only so many law books. (You liked
that, didnt you? :))
Meg Whitman. Wow. She spends $119 million of her own money to become Governor
of California (why in the Hell would anyone want that job?!) and now she's probably
lost the race because she started preaching about only hiring legal workers. As tends
to happen when people get 'preachy' the skeleton came flying out in the form of an
illegal housekeeper, part of Ms. Whitman's "extended family" for nine years. I'm not
sure whether to feel sorry for Meg and her stupidity in spending that much money
on something so insane, or to point and say she had it coming. Even if opponent
Jerry Brown says something incredibly off (which is as common as a speed limit
sign), I think that California will wind up with a Democratic governor (there's the
silver lining.)
In another exciting article , Sarah Palin received a nice salute from the Republican
Party when a poll discovered that she and Mitt "I'm-Mormon-And-You-Can-Handle
-It" Romney are formidable candidates for President in 2012. To that news, I say
that when former-Governor and reigning Captain Scary, SarahPalin begins her
exploratory campaign, that I will also declare my own campaign in exploring the
laws of Canadian citizenship. Or hell, Argentina. I don't care...
Lastly, I like Dairy Queen and its chicken strip baskets.
You simply cannot go wrong.
but I also would've liked to have weighed 190 lbs. last month. Priorities, people.
Mine these days are new brakes and a better fall/winter (and spring and summer)
wardrobe. *sigh*
I found a rather interesting article today. What to say about a Christian Assistant-
Attorney General (AAG) who goes after a Gay college (University of Michigan)
student body president? For starters, I think that this high-ranking State official
is likely more interested in men's briefs than briefs of the legal variety. HELLO!?
It's one thing if the Big Man on Campus was part of a criminal investigation, but
no...AAG Shirvell is waging his own, personal campaign against the guy on his
own, personal blog. Seriously: "Chris Armstrong Watch". Realllly?! He's a college
kid, and you're a government official in a state with one of the highest crime rates
in the country. Shouldn't you be working on that?? While I think that the AAG is
probably guilty of harassment, I'm not so sure that he should be fired from his job.
Before you call me a traitor to equal rights and the "liberal agenda", hear me out:
Andrew Shirvell's comments are protected under the free speech clause--and he
hasn't used his office (that we know of) to go after the kid. I'd say that the Assistant
AG's real problem is that the closet can handle only so many law books. (You liked
that, didnt you? :))
Meg Whitman. Wow. She spends $119 million of her own money to become Governor
of California (why in the Hell would anyone want that job?!) and now she's probably
lost the race because she started preaching about only hiring legal workers. As tends
to happen when people get 'preachy' the skeleton came flying out in the form of an
illegal housekeeper, part of Ms. Whitman's "extended family" for nine years. I'm not
sure whether to feel sorry for Meg and her stupidity in spending that much money
on something so insane, or to point and say she had it coming. Even if opponent
Jerry Brown says something incredibly off (which is as common as a speed limit
sign), I think that California will wind up with a Democratic governor (there's the
silver lining.)
In another exciting article , Sarah Palin received a nice salute from the Republican
Party when a poll discovered that she and Mitt "I'm-Mormon-And-You-Can-Handle
-It" Romney are formidable candidates for President in 2012. To that news, I say
that when former-Governor and reigning Captain Scary, SarahPalin begins her
exploratory campaign, that I will also declare my own campaign in exploring the
laws of Canadian citizenship. Or hell, Argentina. I don't care...
Lastly, I like Dairy Queen and its chicken strip baskets.
You simply cannot go wrong.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Notown.
Less than two weeks ago, I picked up a page-turning
unauthorized biography of Diana Ross ("Call Her Miss
Ross") in a Georgetown, Kentucky antique shop for a
whopping $1.
The book, which dealt largely with "The Supremes",
touched on some of my favorite reading material when
it mentioned the story of Florence Ballard: riches to
rags. People say that they like "rags to riches" stories,
but I believe that they would rather read just the
opposite. I find these downfalls, collapses and sudden
(or gradual) drifts into obscurity just fascinating.
Therefore, it was no surprise when I turned my
attention from the obviously successfuly, obviously
bi-polar Diana to poor (literally) Flo Ballard and the
city that made and broke her. What I discovered was
nothing short of astonishing, sad and transfixing.
Who surives in this?
I've just returned from beautiful Portland and its
larger yet somehow-still-attractive sister of Seattle.
I've seen the beauty in San Diego sunsets and areas
of Atlanta that scream magnificent. But now Detroit
is on the brain.
Since we humans are drawn to train wrecks, I want
to someday go to Michigan's largest city and see
firsthand what happens when one million people leave
an area over a fifty-year period. I want to see what
made its new mayor (the one who didn't have phone
sex) order the destruction of over ten thousand
abandoned buildings within the city limits.
Take a good look at Detroit Urbex and understand
why historic preservation is about sooo much more
than who lived and died where. It's all about the
living--and their surroundings, too.
Ready for the road trip? Life insurance policy? Check.
unauthorized biography of Diana Ross ("Call Her Miss
Ross") in a Georgetown, Kentucky antique shop for a
whopping $1.
The book, which dealt largely with "The Supremes",
touched on some of my favorite reading material when
it mentioned the story of Florence Ballard: riches to
rags. People say that they like "rags to riches" stories,
but I believe that they would rather read just the
opposite. I find these downfalls, collapses and sudden
(or gradual) drifts into obscurity just fascinating.
Therefore, it was no surprise when I turned my
attention from the obviously successfuly, obviously
bi-polar Diana to poor (literally) Flo Ballard and the
city that made and broke her. What I discovered was
nothing short of astonishing, sad and transfixing.
Who surives in this?
I've just returned from beautiful Portland and its
larger yet somehow-still-attractive sister of Seattle.
I've seen the beauty in San Diego sunsets and areas
of Atlanta that scream magnificent. But now Detroit
is on the brain.
Since we humans are drawn to train wrecks, I want
to someday go to Michigan's largest city and see
firsthand what happens when one million people leave
an area over a fifty-year period. I want to see what
made its new mayor (the one who didn't have phone
sex) order the destruction of over ten thousand
abandoned buildings within the city limits.
Take a good look at Detroit Urbex and understand
why historic preservation is about sooo much more
than who lived and died where. It's all about the
living--and their surroundings, too.
Ready for the road trip? Life insurance policy? Check.
The Grim, Ghastly Grind of Kentucky and Her Politics.
In 1955, the United States Senate decided to pay homage to
only five distinguished members via prominently-displayed
paintings in the Senate chambers. Then-U.S. Senator John F.
Kennedy and his appointed committee were tasked with the
large responsibility of selecting the great statesmen.
JFK probably didn't have to search long before finding one of
the five in Kentucky's long-gone Henry Clay. It pains me to think
that most likely four out of five graduates of Lexington's Henry
Clay High School couldn't tell you anything that their school's
namesake did. Yet, I'll spare you the lesson and direct you to
Wikipedia or a book about life in the United States leading up to
the Civil War.
Don't all rush to Borders at once.
It has been quite a while (if at all) since Kentucky has put out a
Senator (or hell, any state-wide politician, for that matter) with
half of the saavy, courage and eloquence of Henry Clay. Let's take a
look at what my native state has offered lately.
Jim Bunning, elected to the Senate in 1999, reached the office due
largely to his popularity as a former professional baseball player.
Unfortunately, ol' Jim (and I do mean old; he's about 200) somehow
got traded from the Phillies to the Senate and ended up playing for
the Northern Kentucky Seniles. When he wasn't telling people that he
only watches FOX News for information, comparing an opponent to
"one of Saddam Hussein's sons" or predicting the death of Justice
Ginsburg within nine months (sorry, Senator; she's still with us),
Bunning wasn't doing much else. His bizarre behavior made him a
joke among his own electorate, which basically fired him by not
providing any re-election funding. Shady Pines, Jim.
Rand Paul is running as a Republican to replace Gramps. Unless
you've been living in a cave, you'll remember Paul's remarks about
1960's civil rights legislation being unneccessary, drugs not being a
problem in Eastern Kentucky (riiiight) and creating his own
ophthalmology board so that he could call himself a 'certified
ophthalmologist'. Basically, Rand Paul is a less-athletic, far-less
native younger version of the decrepit Jim Bunning.
And polls show that he is leading the Senate race by as much as 15%.
If you know the typical Kentucky voter like I do, this isn't all that
surprising. Kentucky voters are often 'triggered' by pro-gun politicians
and tend to 'abort' anyone remotely pro-choice. In doing so, they are
tossing away the capable Jack Conway, whom they see as Louisville
elitist, fancy-school educated and--shhhh--liberal. Yet, Jack isn't really
much of a catch. He might be articulate and attractive, but he has the
enthusiam of a 60 year-old man at his first prostate screnening and he
relates to rural Kentuckians in a Leona Helmsley kind of way. Still, I'll
vote for him because I'd rather take a snob than a yutz. *sigh*
Closer to home, we have learned that State Senate President David
Williams wants to become Kentucky's next governor. He looks (and acts)
like an evil swamp frog, and since he knew that he couldn't make it on
his own, he dragged the hapless Richie Farmer on stage as his candidate
for lieutenant governor.
Ah, yes. Agricultural Commissioner Farmer, who was elected to his
current office in 2003 after being out of the spotlight for nearly 20 years.
Some of you who find the Kentucky voter ridiculous and lacking in common
sense might think that he was elected out of nowhere based on his convenient
last name--but how dare you. We're much further along than that, thank you
very much.
We'll have you know that our Richie Farmer was Kentucky's 1988 "Mr. Basketball".
A modern-day Henry Clay, don't you think?
only five distinguished members via prominently-displayed
paintings in the Senate chambers. Then-U.S. Senator John F.
Kennedy and his appointed committee were tasked with the
large responsibility of selecting the great statesmen.
JFK probably didn't have to search long before finding one of
the five in Kentucky's long-gone Henry Clay. It pains me to think
that most likely four out of five graduates of Lexington's Henry
Clay High School couldn't tell you anything that their school's
namesake did. Yet, I'll spare you the lesson and direct you to
Wikipedia or a book about life in the United States leading up to
the Civil War.
Don't all rush to Borders at once.
It has been quite a while (if at all) since Kentucky has put out a
Senator (or hell, any state-wide politician, for that matter) with
half of the saavy, courage and eloquence of Henry Clay. Let's take a
look at what my native state has offered lately.
Jim Bunning, elected to the Senate in 1999, reached the office due
largely to his popularity as a former professional baseball player.
Unfortunately, ol' Jim (and I do mean old; he's about 200) somehow
got traded from the Phillies to the Senate and ended up playing for
the Northern Kentucky Seniles. When he wasn't telling people that he
only watches FOX News for information, comparing an opponent to
"one of Saddam Hussein's sons" or predicting the death of Justice
Ginsburg within nine months (sorry, Senator; she's still with us),
Bunning wasn't doing much else. His bizarre behavior made him a
joke among his own electorate, which basically fired him by not
providing any re-election funding. Shady Pines, Jim.
Rand Paul is running as a Republican to replace Gramps. Unless
you've been living in a cave, you'll remember Paul's remarks about
1960's civil rights legislation being unneccessary, drugs not being a
problem in Eastern Kentucky (riiiight) and creating his own
ophthalmology board so that he could call himself a 'certified
ophthalmologist'. Basically, Rand Paul is a less-athletic, far-less
native younger version of the decrepit Jim Bunning.
And polls show that he is leading the Senate race by as much as 15%.
If you know the typical Kentucky voter like I do, this isn't all that
surprising. Kentucky voters are often 'triggered' by pro-gun politicians
and tend to 'abort' anyone remotely pro-choice. In doing so, they are
tossing away the capable Jack Conway, whom they see as Louisville
elitist, fancy-school educated and--shhhh--liberal. Yet, Jack isn't really
much of a catch. He might be articulate and attractive, but he has the
enthusiam of a 60 year-old man at his first prostate screnening and he
relates to rural Kentuckians in a Leona Helmsley kind of way. Still, I'll
vote for him because I'd rather take a snob than a yutz. *sigh*
Closer to home, we have learned that State Senate President David
Williams wants to become Kentucky's next governor. He looks (and acts)
like an evil swamp frog, and since he knew that he couldn't make it on
his own, he dragged the hapless Richie Farmer on stage as his candidate
for lieutenant governor.
Ah, yes. Agricultural Commissioner Farmer, who was elected to his
current office in 2003 after being out of the spotlight for nearly 20 years.
Some of you who find the Kentucky voter ridiculous and lacking in common
sense might think that he was elected out of nowhere based on his convenient
last name--but how dare you. We're much further along than that, thank you
very much.
We'll have you know that our Richie Farmer was Kentucky's 1988 "Mr. Basketball".
A modern-day Henry Clay, don't you think?
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Old Man Love.
He was up at 6:30 CST Saturday morning. Within minutes
(it could've been hours, actually; I was half-asleep), he was
showered, dressed and ready to go.
"Why are you still asleep?! We went to bed at 10!" His slightly-
raised voice and annoying smile were prime indicators that
this didn't know that I'm not a morning person--especially
at such a nasty hour on a Saturday.
You'd think that my Dad would have figured that out after
twenty-eight years. (He is actually aware that I'm not at my
best in those wee-early hours. It's just more fun for him to
give me hell before I let the shower head hit me in the face
and have my one cup o'joe. What a bastard.) :)
After leaving the surprisingly-okay Motel 6 in Kentucky's
fourth-largest city of Owensboro, we set out in Dad's
twelve-year old pickup. This clunky domestic lost its air-
conditioning a couple of years ago. Because Dad refuses to
have it repaired, citing that he doesn't use it that much,
yesterday's drive was kinda hellacious: 97 degrees and
plenty of sunshine, with a 250-lbs. stone weighing down
the back.
Yes. You read correctly--we were hauling a tombstone.
Look in the dictionary and find the word 'genealogist'.
Dad's picture should be adjacent. Our family tree is so
thorough that we know the exact date when Dad's great-
great-grand-father took the first shit ever taken in central
Kentucky. Okay, that's stretching it a bit, but Dad has gone
through so much Spencer genealogy that he now spends
time researching off-branches of the tree--which led us to
Owensboro.
Without perpetuating an already long story, Dad was the
driving force behind an effort to erect a tombstone for a
long-deceased, barely-distant ancestor. He proposed the
idea to those more closely related to the woman, sought
funding, got a discount from his monument-maker friend,
drove the stone from Waddy to Owensboro and, with the
help of a couple others (including yours truly), installed it
during a nice, simple ceremony.
I stood before the newly-set tombstone in a country
cemetery at least five miles from the nearest gas station
and listened to suppositions of the characteristics of Nancy
Agnes Greer Harrison. And then I listened to praise--of my
Dad, from most of those assembled at the site, for his work
and dedication in preserving the dignity of those gone
before him.
True to form, Dad was both humble and slightly indignant
about the situation when he remarked, "It didn't matter if I
knew her or was distantly related or not--she needed a
headstone."
Dad is seventy. He was a proud Bush supporter (both of
them), sends checks to the Republican Party, thinks
that Rush Limbaugh is credible and doesn't support
marriage equality.
And I still think he hung the moon.
(it could've been hours, actually; I was half-asleep), he was
showered, dressed and ready to go.
"Why are you still asleep?! We went to bed at 10!" His slightly-
raised voice and annoying smile were prime indicators that
this didn't know that I'm not a morning person--especially
at such a nasty hour on a Saturday.
You'd think that my Dad would have figured that out after
twenty-eight years. (He is actually aware that I'm not at my
best in those wee-early hours. It's just more fun for him to
give me hell before I let the shower head hit me in the face
and have my one cup o'joe. What a bastard.) :)
After leaving the surprisingly-okay Motel 6 in Kentucky's
fourth-largest city of Owensboro, we set out in Dad's
twelve-year old pickup. This clunky domestic lost its air-
conditioning a couple of years ago. Because Dad refuses to
have it repaired, citing that he doesn't use it that much,
yesterday's drive was kinda hellacious: 97 degrees and
plenty of sunshine, with a 250-lbs. stone weighing down
the back.
Yes. You read correctly--we were hauling a tombstone.
Look in the dictionary and find the word 'genealogist'.
Dad's picture should be adjacent. Our family tree is so
thorough that we know the exact date when Dad's great-
great-grand-father took the first shit ever taken in central
Kentucky. Okay, that's stretching it a bit, but Dad has gone
through so much Spencer genealogy that he now spends
time researching off-branches of the tree--which led us to
Owensboro.
Without perpetuating an already long story, Dad was the
driving force behind an effort to erect a tombstone for a
long-deceased, barely-distant ancestor. He proposed the
idea to those more closely related to the woman, sought
funding, got a discount from his monument-maker friend,
drove the stone from Waddy to Owensboro and, with the
help of a couple others (including yours truly), installed it
during a nice, simple ceremony.
I stood before the newly-set tombstone in a country
cemetery at least five miles from the nearest gas station
and listened to suppositions of the characteristics of Nancy
Agnes Greer Harrison. And then I listened to praise--of my
Dad, from most of those assembled at the site, for his work
and dedication in preserving the dignity of those gone
before him.
True to form, Dad was both humble and slightly indignant
about the situation when he remarked, "It didn't matter if I
knew her or was distantly related or not--she needed a
headstone."
Dad is seventy. He was a proud Bush supporter (both of
them), sends checks to the Republican Party, thinks
that Rush Limbaugh is credible and doesn't support
marriage equality.
And I still think he hung the moon.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Common Sense and the Lack Thereof.
This is a day where two plus two doesn't equal four. This is a day where people stay dry
by going out in the rain. This is the 94 degree day when you should be wearing a sweater,
and this is the day where change for a $5 bill consists of two quarters.
This day just isn't making sense folks. Specifically, people aren't making common sense;
namely the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. There was absolutely zero common sense in
placing a stay on the August 18th date when Gays and Lesbians could and should have
been allowed to marry in the state of California.
And why did they do that?! To allow "a three-judge panel to hear more questions" about
the constitutionality of same-sex marriages.
WHAT MORE IS THERE TO HEAR?!
California's ban on same-sex marriage is discriminatory. A federal judge handed down
this verdict when the case reached his courtroom. But of course, several other common-
sense-lacking, prejudice-minded, self-righteous busy-bodies had to appeal it (which was
expected) and now we have yet another delay for what should be a no-brainer:
THE BAN: IT'S ILLEGAL.
It is amazing at what lengths these sanctimonious bastards will go to prevent Love.
And when it's all said and done, what happens?
First of all, someone will be caught in a bathhouse, steam room, adult bookstore, library
or an airport restroom, doing something very, very naughty. Their discovery will not
be accidental. Oh noooo. There are no accidental discoveries because these "types"; the
gays-only-want-special-rights-No-Im-not-one-but-sure-I'll-give-you-a-blowjob-type
are being MONITORED. Very, very closely. And the culprit won't be a U.S. senator or a
minister; that's too easy. No, I'm thinking that this newest scandal victim will be the
president of an anti-gay group, a lobbyist for neo-conservatives or some REALLY big
V.I.P. with the whole Anita Bryant-esque Crusade to Crush the Gays. This person will
go down (in more ways than one) quickly. The fundamentalists will be shocked, the
momentum will lose ground, dollars will stop coming in and if we time it right, it'll
happen just as the Supreme Court is deciding the validity of same-sex marriage for
the final time.
Next, most of the younger generation thinks that the opposition to marriage equality
is either mean, moronic or wasteful. Registered voters under thirty years of age
approve of same-sex marriage by nearly 3 to 1. Older establishment leaders: do you
really think that your platform (or the Republican Party, for that matter) is going to
survive without being significantly altered?! I mean, for god's sake, look at 2008: you
people couldn't even operate "THE INTERNETS" and through that alone, you allowed
our current President to have your ass on a plate! If you can't figure out how to reach
out to people in today's outlets, how in the hell do you and your archaic platform
expect to be taken seriously?!
Lastly, I am sorry that I feel compelled to write this, but this is my fear: someone, a
couple or a group of people will be martyrs for same-sex marriage. Somewhere,
some closet case in the Bible Belt will lose his marbles. He'll decide that the Gays
are getting too close; that his wife is about to find out that he's been screwing some
guy in the big city and he'll lose his home, family and position in the local church if
he doesn't keep those amoral, disgusting people out of his sights for good. He'll go out
on a shooting spree, armed with limited weaponry and massive fear. I can see the
headlines now:
"Gay couples shot while eating in Dupont Square outdoor cafe"
"San Francisco LGBT Center Destroyed; 120 believed dead"
"Little Rock man suspected in Gay Church Bombing, killing 75"
It'll be over then, folks. It will be over for the supporters of anti-gay legislation
because deadly acts like those will reach out to America. The victims will be their
sons, daughters, uncles, aunts, grandsons and granddaughters. The mainstream
will feel compassion and wonder why these crazy nut-jobs would want to do
something so awful. Watching their 6pm news, they'll see Fred Phelps and his
"church" applauding the horror. And in their minds, they'll connect senseless
death--with hatred of gays: that it just isn't common sense to kill a bunch of
people because they're different. The faces of the couples killed will flash across
the screens; articles and interviews will find that they aren't much different
from anybody else. They had mortgages, paid their taxes, went to work and
raised families.
And all because of a senseless tragedy, support for equality for Gays and
Lesbians will increase. The vocal harangues of anti-gay activists will soften
as they become shifted out of the slime light--and into oblivion; from a prime
slot on FOX News to a morning talk-radio show in Jackson, Tennessee. And
the victims' blood will be on their hands.
It'll be all over for the right-winged haters, ladies and gentlemen.
And just like with Jim Crow laws and interracial marriage, people fifty years
later will scratch their heads and ask: "Why did marriage equality take so long
to achieve?!" By then, the history books will have paid minimal tribute to the
martyrs and activism and someone will answer:
"It wasn't common sense then. People just weren't ready."
by going out in the rain. This is the 94 degree day when you should be wearing a sweater,
and this is the day where change for a $5 bill consists of two quarters.
This day just isn't making sense folks. Specifically, people aren't making common sense;
namely the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. There was absolutely zero common sense in
placing a stay on the August 18th date when Gays and Lesbians could and should have
been allowed to marry in the state of California.
And why did they do that?! To allow "a three-judge panel to hear more questions" about
the constitutionality of same-sex marriages.
WHAT MORE IS THERE TO HEAR?!
California's ban on same-sex marriage is discriminatory. A federal judge handed down
this verdict when the case reached his courtroom. But of course, several other common-
sense-lacking, prejudice-minded, self-righteous busy-bodies had to appeal it (which was
expected) and now we have yet another delay for what should be a no-brainer:
THE BAN: IT'S ILLEGAL.
It is amazing at what lengths these sanctimonious bastards will go to prevent Love.
And when it's all said and done, what happens?
First of all, someone will be caught in a bathhouse, steam room, adult bookstore, library
or an airport restroom, doing something very, very naughty. Their discovery will not
be accidental. Oh noooo. There are no accidental discoveries because these "types"; the
gays-only-want-special-rights-No-Im-not-one-but-sure-I'll-give-you-a-blowjob-type
are being MONITORED. Very, very closely. And the culprit won't be a U.S. senator or a
minister; that's too easy. No, I'm thinking that this newest scandal victim will be the
president of an anti-gay group, a lobbyist for neo-conservatives or some REALLY big
V.I.P. with the whole Anita Bryant-esque Crusade to Crush the Gays. This person will
go down (in more ways than one) quickly. The fundamentalists will be shocked, the
momentum will lose ground, dollars will stop coming in and if we time it right, it'll
happen just as the Supreme Court is deciding the validity of same-sex marriage for
the final time.
Next, most of the younger generation thinks that the opposition to marriage equality
is either mean, moronic or wasteful. Registered voters under thirty years of age
approve of same-sex marriage by nearly 3 to 1. Older establishment leaders: do you
really think that your platform (or the Republican Party, for that matter) is going to
survive without being significantly altered?! I mean, for god's sake, look at 2008: you
people couldn't even operate "THE INTERNETS" and through that alone, you allowed
our current President to have your ass on a plate! If you can't figure out how to reach
out to people in today's outlets, how in the hell do you and your archaic platform
expect to be taken seriously?!
Lastly, I am sorry that I feel compelled to write this, but this is my fear: someone, a
couple or a group of people will be martyrs for same-sex marriage. Somewhere,
some closet case in the Bible Belt will lose his marbles. He'll decide that the Gays
are getting too close; that his wife is about to find out that he's been screwing some
guy in the big city and he'll lose his home, family and position in the local church if
he doesn't keep those amoral, disgusting people out of his sights for good. He'll go out
on a shooting spree, armed with limited weaponry and massive fear. I can see the
headlines now:
"Gay couples shot while eating in Dupont Square outdoor cafe"
"San Francisco LGBT Center Destroyed; 120 believed dead"
"Little Rock man suspected in Gay Church Bombing, killing 75"
It'll be over then, folks. It will be over for the supporters of anti-gay legislation
because deadly acts like those will reach out to America. The victims will be their
sons, daughters, uncles, aunts, grandsons and granddaughters. The mainstream
will feel compassion and wonder why these crazy nut-jobs would want to do
something so awful. Watching their 6pm news, they'll see Fred Phelps and his
"church" applauding the horror. And in their minds, they'll connect senseless
death--with hatred of gays: that it just isn't common sense to kill a bunch of
people because they're different. The faces of the couples killed will flash across
the screens; articles and interviews will find that they aren't much different
from anybody else. They had mortgages, paid their taxes, went to work and
raised families.
And all because of a senseless tragedy, support for equality for Gays and
Lesbians will increase. The vocal harangues of anti-gay activists will soften
as they become shifted out of the slime light--and into oblivion; from a prime
slot on FOX News to a morning talk-radio show in Jackson, Tennessee. And
the victims' blood will be on their hands.
It'll be all over for the right-winged haters, ladies and gentlemen.
And just like with Jim Crow laws and interracial marriage, people fifty years
later will scratch their heads and ask: "Why did marriage equality take so long
to achieve?!" By then, the history books will have paid minimal tribute to the
martyrs and activism and someone will answer:
"It wasn't common sense then. People just weren't ready."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)