Tag Archives: democrats

Political Rants

Sex, lies, and the internets.

Okay, I’ll admit to being a bit disappointed in the guy. He went on a lying tour, and that was dead wrong as well as impossibly stupid. Didn’t think Weiner had that kind of stupidity in him, but I guess a certain amount resides within us all, eh? Though I’m not particularly given to admiring politicians, it’s always encouraging to see one that’s combative and unapologetically in favor of things like single-payer health insurance. Still, the basis of that is a willingness to speak often unpopular truths, so if you undermine your credibility, you lose your voice.  That is the worst of what a guy like Weiner is facing. One wishes he had thought of that before taking chances like a drunken fourteen-year-old.

I think, personally, that he missed an opportunity to make a point here: namely, that we all have private lives – that we all do things that are not illegal but that we prefer not to make known to the entire world. What Weiner was confessing in front of the ubiquitous blue curtain of shame is probably slightly less compromising than the secret online activities of most of the people in that room. He’s a sexting addict. There is a growing population of middle-aged people who are fans of sexting. It’s not an obsession I share (not at my data rates – every time I get a freaking text weather alert it costs me 30 cents… and I get a lot of alerts) but I may be in the minority. What Breitbart and his minions have done is just “out” the guy, not because they have some overriding conviction about fidelity and niceness, but because they disagree with him politically on a range of other issues, and Weiner has always been outspoken.

The basic question is this: Does a public figure have a right to a private life? Is it anyone else’s business if Anthony Weiner or Chris Lee or whoever engages in dalliances on the side, unbeknownst to their wives, if those persons they exchange x-rays with are 1) adults and 2) willing participants in the exchange? Sure, it’s embarrassing to have a picture of your privates circulated to all and sundry. It would be so if that image was taken from an airport scanner, too. The real question here is what are the limits to legitimate human sexuality, and do these limits apply to members of congress? I’ll be honest – I don’t give a shit what people do over the internets, so long as they are not exploiting, harassing, or otherwise abusing people, children, animals, etc. Relationships between consenting, fully informed adults are between those adults. All Breitbart did was thrust it into the public space (so to speak).

Gotta love the guy, though. When Breitbart hijacked that press conference, he had the gall to complain about how Weiner’s dishonesty spoiled his weekend, then he proceeded to explain how he was blackmailing him with yet another photo, framing it as an act of human decency. As far as I’m concerned, any passing discomfort caused to Breitbart – rightly or wrongly in this case – is richly deserved.

luv u,

j

Political Rants

Medigap.

My first thought at a Democrat winning the 26th district congressional race in upstate New York was one of deja vu. Didn’t this happen two years ago, with that seat up near Watertown, when McHugh was appointed Army Secretary? Bill Owens won, then won again last fall – the only Democrat in my little backwater region of upstate to manage reelection, as it turned out. Dems and liberal commentators tried to read that race as a bellwether, too, but it didn’t turn out to be predictive at all of the 2010 election. What matters is what the party does in between. If the Dems sit on their asses and wait for the check to arrive, they’ll be sorely disappointed.

There’s no denying, though, that this speaks to a strong undercurrent of distrust in the Medicare “reform” cooked up by Paul Ryan and company. As much as they try to dress up their voucher / privatization program, it’s still just a pig with way too much lipstick, and any fool can see it.  I am a bit heartened that their attempt to buy off the elderly by saying their privatization scheme would only affect people under 55 (i.e. me) has thus far failed miserably. Perhaps they neglected to consider that eighty-year-olds might have fifty-year-old children. In the midst of all their yak about family values, they apparently forgot about families. Nice try, mothers!

This should be a gift to Democrats, but if they keep participating in the GOP narrative about deficit reduction, any political benefit will evaporate. Democrats have to overcome the generalized distrust people tend to have for all politicians, and they won’t do that by agreeing to choke off the sick, poor, and elderly person’s lifeline a little bit more gradually than their colleagues across the aisle. If they’re truly on the side of ordinary people, they should say to the Republicans: Want to cut the deficit? Bring tax rates on the wealthy at least back to where they were prior to 2001… or wherever they need to be. Shut down the wars, shutter the overseas bases, and cancel the over-the-top weapons programs. And join the rest of the developed world in building a single payer health care system for everyone, not just the oldest, poorest, and sickest people in the country. And by the way – insist that everything the U.S. government purchases is made in America.  

Do all that, and if there’s still a massive long-term deficit, I’ll eat my shoes. (I don’t have a hat.)

luv u,

jp

Political Rants

What now.

Gingrich has thrown his hat into the presidential ring. That should go well. Not so long ago, he was the most hated man in America. I have to think he has moved up from there – perhaps that fact alone has encouraged him to try. Or maybe he’s pulling a Buchanan and using it as a fundraising, image-building exercise. (Great way to sell books.) Either way, I can hardly imagine a less likely or desirable prospect, and I don’t think I’m alone in this. It’s no accident – the policies he has been most closely associated with over the years are wildly unpopular. The current crop of GOP congresspeople represent an odious distillation of his most extremist positions. What’s not to hate?

Back when the Newt was Speaker, I wrote a song about his crusade against welfare – one cheerfully joined by Bill Clinton and various other Democrats, eager to throw the poor over the side for a few cheap political points. Written like a bloodthirsty hymn sung aboard a pirate ship, the lyric went, in part, like this:

Please, Newt Gingrich, save us from welfare dependent mothers
whose hungry infants threaten our fortunes with default
Please, o Speaker, drive them away from this captain’s table
Please drive them from below the salt!

Bring to us the biscuit, that humble little biscuit
Please add it to our bounty, we savor every crumb
Take it from the infant, that greedy mother’s infant
Please pluck it from his toothless gums!

Mr. Speaker – we beseech thee, for the gods of war and industry
Mr. Speaker – we beseech thee, please… Bless This Feast!

Imagine the singing pirates being all of those industrialists, corporate CEOs, and generals/admirals who benefit from budgetary largess, year after year, to the tune of billions of dollars (at the expense of all of the rest of us, including many in dire need) and you’ll get the idea.

I suppose it makes sense that Newt would think this is a good time for him, since the ethos of greed and further targeting of the poor/working class has descended upon us once again. Given today’s sensational announcement that the Social Security trust fund will be expended in 2036 (instead of 2037), after which the fund would only cover 75% of its costs (assuming we never come out of deep recession and never again experience economic growth above 1% a year), he may be right.

But I doubt it.

luv u,

jp