Elections Don’t Always Suck

The United States re-elected Barack Obama as president yesterday and just as importantly, did NOT elect Mitt Romney, a loathsome, cynical multi-millionaire opportunist and egomaniac with nothing to offer the vast majority of Americans who aren’t white, rich and male.

Starting around 8:30, a bunch of us — James Brotheridge, Carle Steel, John Cameron, Aidan Morgan and Greg Beatty — watched the election in O’Hanlon’s well-hidden, TV-filled back room along with a cheerful pack of Friends Of The ‘Dog. The mood was good right from the beginning, thanks to the NY Time’s Nate Silver, who gave Obama more than a 90 per cent chance of re-election (and consequently, us a less than 10 per cent chance of total despair).

And let me tell you, it was a nice change. I remember the last federal election, which we also followed at O’Han’s. Watching Stephen Harper win the majority government that would let him unleash his radical agenda was crushing, as was the knowledge that more than half of Saskatchewan voters (56.2 per cent) had supported him*.

Then there was the city election, which was disappointing thanks to the fact that only one non-status quo candidate was elected. When your status quo is a housing crisis, a pension crisis, questionable city management that purges its best civil servants, no recycling, bad transit, and sketchy stadium plans that use a P3 model condemned by consultants, status quo is  a problem. I don’t envy Ward Three’s Shawn Fraser, the lone progressive councillor.

While it was a pleasure to follow the U.S. election last night, it’s important to remember how crazy this campaign was. Republicans are cracked. It’s astounding that anyone would vote for the Republican party, which champions free market extremism, restricting women’s rights, banning same sex marriage, unrestricted oil drilling and mining, and invading Iran (because the last couple of Republican ego-wars worked out so well). The party is riddled with religious zealots who don’t accept science and say awful things about rape.

And nearly half the United States wants these morlocks to run the show. It’s a nightmare.

Fortunately, nearly half was not enough.

I feel an extra connection to this election thanks to The Stranger, an alt weekly in Seattle that’s one of my daily reads. The Stranger is written by good people who support all the right things:  universal health care, women’s rights, same-sex marriage, social programs, smart urban planning, strong public transit, etc. After more than a decade of reading that paper, I care about its writers and their city, and The Stranger’s ebullience at winning just about everything** — the presidency, same-sex marriage rights, legal marijuana and more — gave me a personal connection to an election I was already passionate about. A tweet to us from Stranger writer Paul Constant  (who wrote a great piece for us this issue)  that said “You would have let us Americans crash on your couch if things went really bad tonight, right?”, sealed the deal. Yes, liberal America. You’re always welcome on our couch in a political emergency.

I have days and days worth of things to say about the U.S.election but I think this is enough for now. We’ve got our own city, province and country to worry about, after all. And there’s a lot to be worried about.

A U.S. election that wasn’t the disaster it very well could’ve been sure is great inspiration for those of us who want to believe this country can be better, though.


*When Harper’s win was announced, some moron in the bar shouted “The American lost! Suck it, Iggy”, referring to Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff. Pretty rich coming from someone who helped vote in the closest thing to a Republican president Canada’s ever seen.

**Waiting to hear more, but it sounds like a couple of very, very bad billionaire-backed initiatives passed–one of which will prevent Washington state from raising taxes without a two-thirds majority. Which is impossible to get. Which means Washington state will never raise taxes again. Which is a recipe for the state going bankrupt.

Presidential Election Day Reading: An American Apologizes To Canada

This story appears in the print edition of the current issue and will be online here for all eternity (or until we upgrade this website and break all the links). But let’s make things real easy. Here’s a great article that Paul Constant, a real live American, wrote specifically for you guys. You should read it.

THE APOLOGY TOUR STARTS HERE

The United States is sorry, in more ways than one

By Paul Constant/Illustration by Dakota McFadzean

People of Saskatchewan, I am so sorry. I’m a proud citizen of the United States, but I’d like to formally apologize to all of you for the electoral spectacle that you’ve been forced to watch for the last two years. As political correspondent for Seattle alternative weekly The Stranger, I’ve followed Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama all around my country. I’ve even shaken Romney’s hand at a rally. (In case you’re curious, he’s got a creepily efficient handshake: exactly two and a half swift pumps accompanied by a simulacrum of eye contact and a hollow smile, as though a scientist spent decades perfecting the most average handshake imaginable.) I’m a political junkie, a presidential history buff and I desperately love my job, but even I’m disgusted by the America I’ve seen.

It’s easy to fall prey to the belief that all Americans are racists who’ll hang Obama in effigy on their lawns, or monstrous shambles of men who claim with alarming sangfroid that rape isn’t really that bad, or gun-worshipping ghouls who believe that God is a little bearded man who perches on their shoulders and whispers homophobic, anti-science rants into their ears. And you probably believe we Americans all vote against our own financial interests — affordable health care, higher taxes on the wealthy, laws to protect us from corporate greed — because we harbor the illusion that we’re just one lottery ticket away from becoming spiteful billionaire slave-drivers ourselves.

But that’s not true. Only about half of us are like this.

The impulse to blame is strong, and culprits are everywhere. Our news media are easily the dumbest and laziest in the First World. Because we loathe taxes down to our DNA, our schools are fomenting armies of vacuous boobs who believe critical thought means posting a one-star review on Yelp. Then 9/11 happened, blowing out the circuit boards of a whole generation of our wishy-washiest liberals, transforming them into paranoid, frightened babies who throw their tantrums at the ballot box, electing only the shrillest and most offensive candidates. Bill Clinton pushed liberals to the political middle, and then George W. Bush pushed conservatives to the primate side of the evolutionary scale. You could throw around enough accusatory fingers to blind a good-sized metropolitan area.

But the thing I want you to know is that, in red states and blue states, I’ve met Americans who describe themselves as progressives and liberals and even, occasionally, as socialists. Thanks to that idiot media I mentioned earlier, you never hear about the good people because they’re not insane enough to garner attention. And when times are tough in the United States — when, say, John Kerry proves to be inept enough to lose an election against George W. Bush, somehow — the good Americans, the sane Americans, look to you for guidance. Canada’s universal health care, workers’ rights policies, marriage equality and state funding for the arts have been a guiding light for those of us who have been buried under a thick blanket of mouth-breathing, climate change deniers.

Seeing the conservative lean of your country — and your province — breaks the hearts of America’s progressives and could dash our hopes for good. You’re supposed to be the studious, responsible younger sister; don’t set a bad example for us by running off with the Bible-thumping brutes who want to see you barefoot, pregnant and dumb. We’re just now trying to dig ourselves out of that trap.

Anyway, I’m sorry that you have to watch all of this. I love visiting your country, and in a trip to Vancouver last year, I turned on a hotel TV to see a ridiculous political advertisement in which shadowy Chinese businessmen laughed and congratulated each other, in plainly racist caricatures of Chinese accents, for destroying America by promoting a fairer health care system. Our polluted airwaves are dragging their sickness up here to frighten you with the ugliest boogeymen of our political process.

Believe me: about half of us Americans are staring, slack-jawed, at the evangelical hate-mongers and apocalyptic fear-peddlers, same as you. We’re donating money and volunteering our time to stop them. I can’t guarantee our success, but I can promise you that by the time election day comes around, we will have done the best we possibly can.

If we succeed, it will be, in part, because you helped show us the way.

Paul Constant writes an awful lot of stuff for Seattle’s Pulitzer prize winning alternative newsweekly, The Stranger. You can read more of his work here.

More On Brainwashed Republicans

Remember this post of mine yesterday about mayoral candidate Chad Novak’s stadium referendum flip-flops? Much-adored Dog Blog commentator Barb Saylor* suggested I should, and I quote, “Juxtapose [it] with your Republican nitwits post; it’ll be interesting.”

I’m not sure what (if anything) she was insinuating,  but if Barb was pointing out that Regina’s wackiest mayoral candidate is a million times less scary than the Tea Party lunatics in the U.S., I agree with her.

Case in point:

Someone fired a shot through one of the Obama campaign offices in Denver this afternoon, shattering the glass in one of the windows. No one was injured, according to a Denver Police Department spokeswoman. There are also no suspects as of this writing, and the crime at the 9th Avenue and Acoma field office remains under investigation.

So, to juxtapose for Barb: things are bad and scary in the United States. Things are loopy, amateurish and entertaining in Regina. And I’ll take a Chad Novak’s earnest goofiness, occasional weird paranoia and general, good-natured lust for attention over Tea Party racism, ignorance, xenophobia, class betrayal, firearm ownership and general misdirected rage anytime.

*No, I’m not being sarcastic. Barb shows up and speaks up, and I appreciate the hell out of her for it.

Indefinite Detention Act Ruled Unconstitutional

Earlier today, U.S. District Judge Judge Katherine Forrest ruled that the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act’s provision allowing for the indefinite detention of civilians by the military in the  violated the constitution.

This law, supported by the Obama administration, allowed the military to hold U.S. citizens indefinitely without charge. Being a member of, or loosely linked to, any organization or person deemed to be associated with terrorism was enough for its application. This gave the military the ability to target  journalists and academics – doing what they are paid to do – for associations with groups designated to be a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

A group of authors and academics including Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky and Naomi Wolfe filed a lawsuit against President Obama earlier this year questioning the provision’s constitutionality. Check out today’s Sparrow Project article on what’s up now.

UPDATE: Whitworth here. First, here’s The Guardian‘s story on this. Second, a website Chris Hedges writes for, TruthDig, has a short article up on the court win. Also, anyone looking for background might want to check out a recent Hedges’ article on the case here and Naomi Wolf’s Guardian article on it here. And by the way, this is a good ruling. You expect laws letting people be arrested for no reason in North Korea, not the United States (well, actually I do expect such laws in the U.S., sigh). Anyway, aside from being beyond vile, stupid laws like the NDAA can cost citizens multi-million dollar court settlements. Just ask Maher Arar.

The U.S. government, by the way, has already announced it will appeal the decision.

By the way, one big reason this is on the blog today is that Hedges will be in Regina next week for a must-see public lecture. He’ll be promoting this fantastic-looking book. See you there?

Update On The Dude Who Allegedly Shot Up The Family Research Council’s DC Office

He’s been charged. From the Washington Post:

The man authorities say walked into the downtown D.C. offices of the Family Research Council and shot a security guard Wednesday morning was charged Thursday with assault with intent to kill while armed and interstate transportation of a firearm and ammunition, according to court filings and officials. Floyd Lee Corkins II, 28, of Herndon, appeared in U.S. District Court in D.C. Thursday afternoon during a brief hearing before Magistrate Judge Alan Kay. During the proceeings, which lasted approximately 20 minutes, the judge ordered Corkins held without bond ahead of another hearing scheduled for August 24.

Well, good. Politics and guns don’t mix and shooting people is wrong.

Gunman Shoots Up Right-Wing Christian Group’s Office, First Time For Everything I Guess

I just heard that someone shot up an office of the conservative Family Research Council this morning. A security guard was wounded. From The Washington Post:

D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said the shooter walked into the lobby of the building at about 10:45 and was confronted by the security guard as if the guard were asking him where he was going. The man then took out a gun and opened fire on the guard, Lanier said. The guard and others wrestled the man to the ground, disarmed him and waited for police, she said. The guard was then taken to the hospital and is in stable condition, the chief said. FBI officials said the guard was shot in the arm.

The shooting sounds politically motivated, too. From the same Post story:

The shooter is in FBI custody and has not yet been charged, authorities said. A law enforcement official said at one point in the scuffle, the shooter expressed views that differed from those of the Family Research Council. The official also said the shooter was carrying a bag that had a Chick-Fil-A bag inside. Chick-Fil-A’s chief executive has expressed similar views against same-sex marriage as the Research Council.

More here. The Family Research Council is a vile organization that fights to keep same-sex marriage illegal, strip women of the right to make their own decisions for their own damn bodies and all that usual asshole right-wing so-called “Christian” stuff. I’m not surprised someone wanted to shoot up their office though I wish this suspect hadn’t. Shooting up offices is not going to solve the problem of conservative Christian groups trying to force their ridiculous fake values on everyone. Activism, reason, humour and good old-fashioned ridicule and mockery are good weapons that will work against right-wing extremists. Guns are not.

Headline Of The Day*

“Science Or Sex: Which Does The Right Hate More?”

Oh, but conservatives hate BOTH ever so much. Must they choose?

Anyway, here’s this from Salon:

A principal in Onalaska, Wash., was accused of “raping” her fifth-grade students. Not actually — this isn’t a case of, you know, rape-rape but rather rape as an inappropriate metaphor: “rape” by sex ed. James Gilliland, the parent of an 11-year-old girl who took C.J. Gray’s class on the birds and the bees, told Seattle’s KING 5 News: “It’s basically the same as raping a kid’s mind and taking their innocence.” What got this father and other parents so fired up? In a recent lesson on HIV, Gray answered a student’s question about what oral sex and anal sex are. Onalaska superintendent Scott Fenter told KING 5, “She only gave factual information, no demonstrations.” Gray herself told Centralia, Wash.’s Chronicle, “It was very factual and it was dropped. I did not demonstrate it.” Yes, despite at least two parents likening her answering of kids’ questions to child molestation — and others inundating her with angry phone calls and letters — she did not actually demonstrate the act; there were no photos or videos, either. It was just a matter-of-fact explanation of the basic mechanics.

Yeah, whatever. Ignorant parents are encouraged to freak out and shield their children from facts thanks to a sick culture created by vicious, deranged conservative pundits. Nothing new here.

Although: “Onalaska”? Really? Nah, no place with a lame-parent sex-freakout controversy could be called that. Somebody’s shittin’ me.

*Technically, this headline is from yesterday. Anyway.

The Current Gives An Evil Propaganda Outfit A Public Platform, Boo

I’m still on vacation — stay-cation, actually. It’s great! I get to listen to The Current every morning. Anna-Marie Tremonti’s radio news magazine has been one of my fave shows since it launched, and she’s one of my fave CBC people.

Today, a segment on her show got one thing right and one thing very badly wrong.

The Current’s segment, which you can hear here, was about remote-controlled U.S. assasination drones, which are killing terrorists, bystanders and miscellaneous wedding parties in Pakistan and Afghanistan and elsewhere. The thing the show got right: interviewing Glenn Greenwald, a U.S. constitutional lawyer and kick-ass writer who’s one of the best reasons to read Salon. Greenwald is smart, articulate and extremely well-informed, and his scathing condemnation of the United State’s illegal bad-guy-murder-robot-fun-party is a mandatory listen. Dude’s sharp.

After that, for some reason (pressure from management to bring on right-wing sources regardless of the merits, morality or legality of their position, and credibility be damned?), The Current rolled out a troll from the American Enterprise Institute to offer the pro-extrajudicial killing perspective.

Yes, this is where we’re at now. If you write columns about how killbots and weekly presidential assassination meetings are good things, you don’t get shunned as a sociopath. You get invited on the CBC to defend state-authorized killbot assassination.

What more can be said? Well, a lot.

Continue reading “The Current Gives An Evil Propaganda Outfit A Public Platform, Boo”

Obama Vs. Republicans Vs. Gay

Yesterday, the U.S. president said something that made his wacky, religious zealot-filled country a little bit more civilized and sane. Today, always-worth-reading politics writer Glenn Greenwald weighs in in The Guardian (a.k.a. The World’s Best Newspaper):

Obama’s public defense immediately enshrines same-sex marriage as the official orthodoxy of the Democratic party. It is inconceivable that marriage equality will ever again retreat to the fringe. His willingness to embrace it in the midst of an election year signals a belief that the American public is ready to accept this position as perfectly mainstream, even if they disagree with it. It will undoubtedly enable – or pressure – other world leaders to support the same view.

Meanwhile on the Republican side of the country, presumptive U.S. presidential candidate Mitch Romney, who has denounced Obama’s  support for same-sex marriage, apparently assaulted a gay student while he was in college:

“He can’t look like that. That’s wrong. Just look at him!” an incensed Romney told Matthew Friedemann, his close friend in the Stevens Hall dorm, according to Friedemann’s recollection. Mitt, the teenaged son of Michigan Gov. George Romney, kept complaining about Lauber’s look, Friedemann recalled. A few days later, Friedemann entered Stevens Hall off the school’s collegiate quad to find Romney marching out of his own room ahead of a prep school posse shouting about their plan to cut Lauber’s hair. Friedemann followed them to a nearby room where they came upon Lauber, tackled him and pinned him to the ground. As Lauber, his eyes filling with tears, screamed for help, Romney repeatedly clipped his hair with a pair of scissors.

Not making this up. This is in the Washington Post, not some fringey conspiracy website. Yikes. America has problems.

Barack Obama, Same-Sex Marriage And Misuse Of The Word “Evolution”

So U.S. President Barack Obama had an interview with ABC news this a.m., and announced that he now officially supports same-sex marriage. “Personally,” that is. But he’s not promising to do anything about it and he supports states’ alleged rights to ban it.

Here’s the actual  ABC report that has quality video. Here’s Canada’s Xtra! on this. Here’s another report. Here’s another. Here’s yet another. Here’s awesome Dan Savage.

Here are some bigots who think blocking other people’s rights somehow protects their own rights. You don’t have to click on that one.

And here’s a merely adequate version of video, if you want to save time and just get to it:

Opinions: first off, there is no “evolution” going on here. Not even metaphorically. Obama has supported same-sex marriage for a long time. He just lied about it because the United States is a deranged and super homophobic country, and he wanted to get elected president. This is that one case where “evolution” is really and truly a buncha baloney.

Second, Obama’s a jerk and a weenie for not just declaring he’ll do everything in his power to make sure every gay and lesbian American has the right to get married regardless of the wishes of their particular state’s dumbass redneck assholes (I’m looking at you, North Carolina). You don’t put civil rights directly onto ballots.

Third, this is feeble politics. A bold stance would cause the awful Republicans to publicly self-destruct even more than they already are on an issue where the tide has turned and their party’s on the wrong side of the current.

But I guess it’s a baby step.

That’s one straight Canadian’s two bits.

Read Of The Day: Stephen King Says Tax The Rich More

There were some big laughs in the office today thanks to a great column on the Daily Beast’s website by one of the United State’s best-known authors. A sample:

At a rally in Florida (to support collective bargaining and to express the socialist view that firing teachers with experience was sort of a bad idea), I pointed out that I was paying taxes of roughly 28 percent on my income. My question was, “How come I’m not paying 50?” The governor of New Jersey did not respond to this radical idea, possibly being too busy at the all-you-can-eat cheese buffet at Applebee’s in Jersey City, but plenty of other people of the Christie persuasion did.

Cut a check and shut up, they said. If you want to pay more, pay more, they said. Tired of hearing about it, they said.

Tough shit for you guys, because I’m not tired of talking about it. I’ve known rich people, and why not, since I’m one of them? The majority would rather douse their dicks with lighter fluid, strike a match, and dance around singing “Disco Inferno” than pay one more cent in taxes to Uncle Sugar.

If you love a great rant or just plain agree with King (and you should because he’s right and his position, if not his language, is one of wisdom and fundamental decency), check the piece out.

Santorum Has Been Wiped Off The Political Map

Everybody’s favourite lunatic Republican has suspended his political campaign. From Talking Points Memo:

Rick Santorum suspended his bid for the presidency in a news conference in Gettysburg, Pa., clearing the path for Mitt Romney to become the presumptive nominee for the Republican Party. “We made a decision over the weekend that while this presidential race for us is over for me, and we will suspend our campaign effective today,” he said. “We are not done fighting.” He notably did not endorse — or even mention — Romney. His chief rival nonetheless sent out a statement praising Santorum’s decision.

It looks like that chief rival’s going to be the guy challenging Barack Obama in the fall.

I’ll always remember Rick Santorum for this video. (And, of course, for this.)

More On Santorum Calling The U.S. President A Word Starting With “N-i-g”

Paul Harris weighs in at The Guardian:

Santorum’s team have also denied that he intended to say “nigger” in Wisconsin. In this case, I am much more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. The video is odd: his exact meaning, and even the nature of his stumble, is unclear. For a candidate who frequently makes a great play of the fact that, unlike President Obama, he does not use a teleprompter for his stump speeches, his slips-of-the-tongue are becoming a liability that should make him think twice about extemporizing.

Hmm. While we can’t know what Santorum meant to say, giving him “the benefit of the doubt” is a little generous. Anyway, Harris continues:

But giving Santorum a pass in this instance masks a larger point. The GOP nomination race has seen Barack Obama consistently painted as a radical, a danger to the American way of life and someone out to fundamentally transform the country. And that is just by the candidates. Among the audiences at Republican rallies, the overheated rhetoric and demonisation have been more lurid still.

That’s true. Just look at this video (which a I posted awhile back), where Santorum’s team portrays Obama as a Muslim radical. It’s wrong, insane and bigoted all at once.

I have no idea if Rick Santorum just barely braked before saying something fatally racist or if it was just a talking malfunction (they happen). But I do know the best case scenario is that while Rick “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money” Santorum might not be a total n-word spouting racist, his political and economic ideas lead to racist results.

Combined with his past homophobic, gynophobic and Islamophobic statements, he clearly is a bigot. N-word or no.

UPDATED: Was Rick Santorum About To Call Barack Obama The “N-Word”?

Sure sounds like it! Good riddance, you hateful, shitty little man.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Whitworth here. It does sound like Republican presidential nominee hopeful Rick Santorum almost called Barack Obama “an anti-war government nigger”. This would be huge, obviously. But we need to remember that we don’t know for sure what word his tongue and lips were trying to make. He could’ve been trying to say “anti-war government negotiator.” That would make sense in context, too.

About that context: the clip John posted above comes from a March 27 rally in Janesville, Wisconsin. Here’s an article on the rally. which conspicuously doesn’t mention the possible slip (they even run an excerpt from around that part of the video, so someone at WISC must have heard it). The video of the entire event is on Youtube, which is handy for skeptical people who demand context and want something this big triple-verified before they accept it.

I’m embedding the full video below. And here’s the direct link to the YouTube page it’s originally from, run by JATV,  Janesville’s public access station. (There’s a website here). Watch it and judge for yourself. The important bit happens around 34:20.

It does look bad. In any case, even the non-possibly-racist parts of the video make it clear Rick Santorum is a loathsome individual who stands for horrible things. How can someone who says they’re a Christian bash anyone for being anti-war? Unbelievable.

UPDATE: John here. Since, as Stephen points out, that syllable could really be anything, you all might want to maybe figure out what that word might be yourselves.

My thoughts? If Santorum didn’t close the bay doors on a big old N-bomb, maybe he was suggesting that Obama is “someone who constantly criticizes in a petty way.” Totally something that would make sense in that context, right? Along with dozens of other words on that page that could complete the phrase “anti-war government nig-uh-tsthfgl” in a non-racist way. Yes, so many of those words could fit there. Definitely.

Probably A Little Late For That, Jack

Former U.S. presidential candidate John McCain says his political party needs to stop obsessing over contraception:

“I think we have to fix that,” McCain said. “I think that there is a perception out there, because of the way that this whole contraception issue played out. We need to get off of that issue, in my view. I think we ought to respect the right of women to make choices in their lives, and make that clear, and get back on to what the American people really care about: jobs and the economy.”

Yeah, that’s nice and yes, of course he’s right. But you know what? Once people decree that pregnant women must be forced to continue that pregnancy no matter what — poverty, unstable life situation, health problems, just plain not being ready to have a kid — you have left the path of supporting equal rights for women. Women either have authority over their bodies or they don’t. This squabbling over birth control is access is just a detail. The Republican party — like all the anti-choice moralists and religious extremists — is all messed up about women and sexuality. It needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt.

Doonesbury’s Sticking Up For Women Next Week. So Naturally, Some U.S. Newspapers Are Spiking It.

I don’t read the strip any more but it sounds like next week’s run will be the kind of Doonesbury I like. Creator Garry Trudeau’s topic: all these bullshit new bills and laws that U.S. states are drafting and passing to make abortions as inconvenient and humiliating as possible. Jim Romenesko has day-by-day descriptions of the strips:

Monday: Young woman arrives for her pre-termination sonogram, is told to take a seat in the shaming room, a middle-aged male state legislator will be right with her.

Tuesday: He asks her if this is her first visit to the center, she replies no, that she’s been using the contraceptive services for some time. He says, “I see. Do your parents know you’re a slut?”

And it continues.

I still have no idea how anyone could think that forcing a pregnant woman to give birth against her will — which is what anti-abortionists want — is an acceptable and ethical alternative to terminating an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy. Not to demonize people who have different opinions than me but, okay, I’m gonna demonize the jackasses:  you’d have to be stupider than fuck or batshit crazy to support anti-abortion laws.* Eff the anti-choicers. Eff ’em!

Maybe one of our enterprising bloggers will post links to Doonesbury every day next week.

*Caveat: being personally opposed to abortion is okay. That’s the flip side of this “choice” pro-choicers talk about so much.

Santorum Booed: You Can Haz Link

The article’s in the Six In The Alleged Morning that I just posted but for your convenience, here’s the YouTube video of Rick Santorum getting booed by Republicans over his moronic, insane and freakazoid homophobia.

Santorum should should be seeking psychiatric help, not the Republican presidential nomination. Also he should take remedial math, since he clearly doesn’t understand the “two people in a marriage” concept if he believes same-sex marriage between two people is analogous to multiple-partner polygamy.

So What Exactly Is The Deal With Republican Rick Santorum?

Are you baffled and wondering? McDuckling’s post whet your appetitie for more information? Here you go. Dan Savage, editor, journalist, pundit, sex advice columnist and engineer of the greatest Google bomb in history, explains all in this Guardian op-ed entitled “Rick Santorum’s Homophobic Frothing”:

I have a history with Rick Santorum. In 2003, when Santorum, in an interview with the Associated Press, first compared gay relationships to child rape and dog fucking (have I mentioned that Santorum has compared gay relationships to child rape and dog fucking?), I held a contest to redefine Santorum’s last name. The winning definition: the frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.” (“Sometimes” is the most important word in the new definition of santorum; if you’re doing anal sex correctly, there won’t be any santorum – lower- or upper-case.) And since 2003, the new definition has the been the No1 Google return when you search “santorum”.

Don’t know Dan Savage? Well hey, meet Dan Savage.

Fox News Astonished That Musicians Aren’t All Republicans

From “Born in the USA” (CNN) onward, American election cycles have only ever had one consistent narrative: that of the Republican presidential candidate fucking up and playing a song by a publicly leftist musician at one of their rallies. Tom Petty and John Mellencamp (Rolling Stone) have been on the receiving end, as has The Boss, and every time the lingering embarrassment (because, while the actual accomplishments of his presidency are subject to debate, it is indisputable that Reagan somehow fucked up at understanding a Bruce Springsteen song) could have been avoided if maybe someone in the campaign just asked first and got the response, “We hate your ideology and policy ideas, so no.”

It’s pretty easy to understand why! The kind of populism espoused by Springsteen and his ilk – the difficulties of the working class, the hopes and dreams of the youth of rural and dying-urban America, the value of collectivism and “we’re-all-in-this-crapheap-together” communal spirit – is only one strain of leftist thought commonly espoused in music. This is because people interested in forward-thinking culture, self-expression, and the like tend to like social and political policies that make those things possible, and so tend to be leftist before they even get into music, and then write a bunch of leftist music, and you can kind of see how this goes.

That conservatives who enjoy Springsteen-esque roots-rock are at odds with their musical idols’ politics is, one would hope, a fact that those conservatives who are fans of the band have thought about and simply made peace with, because it’s hard to begrudge someone for thinking Bruce Springsteen is a pretty good songwriter. But it’s surely not a surprise. Right?

So why do Democrats seem to get more free passes then Republicans?

oh COME ON

Continue reading “Fox News Astonished That Musicians Aren’t All Republicans”