I'm a bad voter. When it comes to the presidential primary, North Carolina initially seemed like it was going to be a complete afterthought with both of the major parties' scrappin' matches done and decided. I'd like to claim that's what kept it off my radar, but of course we've known for some time that the donkeys would still be duking it out. Instead, I'm a spouter of that standard lazy American doggerel of being too busy to pay attention to my local politics.

firthofforth did an amazing job of pouring through a "Voter's Guide" we received to figure out who should get our household's support when it came to elected positions like Commissioner of Insurance and Superintendent of Public Instruction only to discover upon her arrival at the polling place bright and early this morning that she'd neglected to sort through the candidates for Governor and U.S. Senate. Luckily, she called to warn me about the hole in her prep work and I waited until the drive home to give me some time for added research. Since we're not talking about races that are as hotly contested as that Barack-Hilary face-off, information was hard to come by. For many of the races, I inadvertently become a single-issue voter as the only contrasting information I could find involved the individual candidates stances on immigration, which hardly seems like the most important topic around here.

I also suspect this the first time since firthofforth and I have been going to same polling station that we voted for different presidential candidates. I guess we canceled each other out.

I'll have to be a better kid when it comes to voting prep in November.

I can't believe we've spent another week in the presidential campaign talking about nothing!

Bring back Howard!

I would never claim to be a true political junkie (certainly not while I know people who have probably been approached by major dictionaries to book photo shoots so proper art could be acquired for future editions), but I wallow in election cycle news to enough of a degree that friends have been surprised that, as of yet, I have no particular candidate preferences for the 2008 presidential election. Beyond having a strong aversion to Mitt Romney and his magic glasses, I wasn't prepared to make any strong statement of personal preference. My pal Dave wouldn't believe me at all when I told him months ago, thinking I was pulling some sort of unfunny prank on him by declaring disinterest. For one thing, the cycle started so damned early this time that I can only speculate on the level of fatigue that will be felt by even the heartiest soul who chose to follow from the first debate to the wee hours of next year's election night. There must be something unhealthy about prolonged exposure to all those hollow words.

Today, for whatever reason, I finally started to feel something tip inside me and my antsy patrolling of Websites for relevant political news began. Maybe it was Congress finally--finally!--having the nerve to throw one of Smuggy McBombsalot's vetoes back in his lumpy clay face. Maybe it was the unexpected reminder that there are always plenty of wack-jobs out there theoretically vying for the highest office in the land. Maybe it as simple as the calendar being in a more reasonable place to begin paying attention. Regardless, I think I may have finally crossed to a point where I'll start giving various browsers and cable channels some heavy-duty usage for awhile.

It's hard to take joy or satisfaction in the resignation of Alberto Gonzales today. This was a guy who never should have been given the job in the first place and this resignation comes after so many months of exposed corruption, grotesque dishonesty and black scandal that it hardly seems a reaction to the problems caused by his callous mishandling of the Justice Department or anything approaching accountability or, well, justice. In fact, it seems like it may be mere positioning to allow the Bush administration to use a recess appointment to fill the sudden vacancy, which would stand as further proof that this delusional White House is not chastened by anything.

There have at least been some entertaining responses to the news, most notably that of Illinois Representative Rahm Emanuel (discovered via Talking Points Memo):

"Alberto Gonzales is the first Attorney General who thought the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth were three different things."

I also have to give credit to mikester, who came up with a way of noting the news that made me laugh. Although it was wry, defeated laughter. And it may have been primarily as a means to keep from crying.

Oh. My. God.

For those who don't have the time, patience or inclination to read the admittedly lengthy article the above hyperlink points to, allow me to summarize: a reporter tags along on cruise for conservatives sponsored by the National Review and is routinely shocked by the intensity of their convictions. The war in Iraq is going great, the Muslims are taking over Europe with a nefarious mass procreation plot and the black people who were devastated by Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans brought their problems on themselves by not having healthier neighborhoods in the first place. If you're wondering where they find those 30% of Americans who'll still give George W. Bush a thumbs-up on his job performance, apparently last month it was on a boat bound for Puerto Vallarta.

The sheer hateful audacity of these people is exemplified by the comments of a thirtysomething California designer who says, "Of course, we need to execute some of these people...A few of these prominent liberals who are trying to demoralise the country. Just take a couple of these anti-war people off to the gas chamber for treason to show, if you try to bring down America at a time of war, that's what you'll get. Then things'll change."

When I wonder why the left can't get a foothold and get past these monstrous people, I gravitate back to the notion that they are collectively too respectful of divergent opinions. Dick Cheney doesn't give a flying fuck what you think, allowing him to do whatever he wants and saunter away from the twisted wreckage without remorse. That makes him a contemptible person, but he's hammered the world into the shape he wants it with more brutal effectiveness over the course of the last forty years than anyone who goes to conventions with donkey silhouettes hanging from the rafters.

There's a part of me that's ready to meet these people with fierce intolerance. As much as I've always detested the "America-love it or leave it" mindset, I'm beginning to see it's appeal when America is a collection of beliefs and principles rather than just the name of a place on a map, when freedom is a fundamental belief and not merely a word that looks good on a t-shirt. If you want people put to death for voicing disagreement with our elected leaders then you simply don't belong here. Go find a totalitarian government, take up residence and smile with sinister satisfaction as the mass graves fill up.

This is my country, too, and I'd like it back now.

Here's the other big chunk of nastiness surrounding the gay marriage debate--



It's entirely and almost exclusively used by the GOP to motivate a base of voters to cast ballots for Republican candidates who have no real interest in pursuing it as a political agenda. From a purely tactical standpoint, the Republicans have good cause for making this choice. A recent ABC News poll found that "People who "strongly" oppose gay marriage — 51 percent of the public — outnumber strong supporters by 2-1. And those strong opponents are nearly three times as likely as other Americans to say they would vote only for a candidate who shares their view on the issue."

So these are the people who cast their ballots on one issue and one issue only. What doesn't seem to occur to them is that these candidates who blast gay marriage and part of their stump speeches have not done a single thing about stopping government recognition of same sex "marriage" since they talked themselves breathless about it in advance of 2004 election. Now there are some duly elected nutjobs who I believe actually wring their hands over this issue on a daily basis, jumping at shadows and sweating bullets over the inevitable descent of society, but most of these podium-punching politicians are just posturing.

And with a new election looming, the time for vote-hungry tough talk is with us again. So that 51% of the electorate will punch their ballots caring about a single solitary issue and those candidates will make their victory speeches in front of cheering throngs bathed in showers of red, white and blue balloonsbefore returning to Washington to perpetrate legislation that feeds the rich, shields negligent corporations from retribution, ratchets up the deficit, erodes civil liberties and personal privacy and generally does nothing to protect their motivated constintuency from the encroaching national doom hastened by boys kissing in front of justices of the peace. This issue will not be broached in the halls of power. Until roundabout June of 2008, when the discussion will begin anew.

It all distracts from good-hearted attempts to address the real issues facing our nation, such as the threat of smiley superhero pop songs and out of control haunted thresher counterfeiters.

(Anyone wanting further context on the non-sequitur at the end of the diatribe, can look here and here, respectively.)

Building off the close of my previous post just a touch more righteous indignation especially relevant to today's headlines...

For those appropriately aggravated by the right-wing reassertion of the gay marriage debate, here's a true tale from the Maryland legislature, as told by the "Capital Notebook" reporter for the Baltimore Sun:

           Sen. Nancy Jacobs, a Republican who represents Harford 
           and Cecil counties, engaged in an impassioned debate 
           with Jamie Raskin, a constitutional law professor from 
           American University, over the influence of the Bible 
           on modern law.

           "As I read Biblical principles, marriage was intended, 
           ordained and started by God - that is my belief," she 
           said. "For me, this is an issue solely based on 
           religious principals."

           Raskin shot back that the Bible was also used to 
           uphold now-outlawed statutes banning interracial 
           marriage, and that the constitution should instead be 
           lawmakers' guiding principle.

           "People place their hand on the Bible and swear to 
           uphold the Constitution; they don't put their hand on 
           the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible," he 
           said. 

I now having a rooting interest in the election for State Senator in Maryland's District 20.

I miss my old Senator.

And...

(from The Note)

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) expressed his disapproval of the President's defense of the "terrorist surveillance initiative" last night: "I can't believe the president of the United States got up there and asserted that kind of executive power about a wiretap that is unlawful," per the Chicago Tribune's Jeff Zeleny.

"I can't believe that members of Congress would cheer him in disrespect for our system of government."

Four things I learned today that I'd like to share:

1. Last week, when George W. Bush finally signed the into law the bill that explicitly made it illegal to torture detainees (and how proud we should be for our country that we need a law like this in the first place), he followed up the signing, without any fanfare mind you, by issuing a "signing statement" which indicates how the White House interprets this new law. In this signing statement, Bush indicates that the White House will follow this law within the context of executive branch obligations to protect national security. Legal experts say this is the Bush administration's way of basically saying "We won't torture people unless we really feel we need to." It's bad enough that the White House fought this bill and turned around and praised it after it passed both houses of Congress with veto-proof majorities, but now they've also signed it law while surreptitiously issuing a document that gives them all the exceptions that they unsuccessfully fought for during the whole ugly process.

2. While we're on the subject of Dubya, at a New Year's Day event which involved visiting with wounded veterans at the Amputee Care Center of Brooke Army Medical Center, he followed up some fumbling praise for the medical professionals who work there by talking about the own wound a sustained: a scratch he picked up "in combat with a cedar." He's just visited with soldiers who've lost appendages in Iraq, and he's making small talk jokes and drawing correlations about injuries he sustained dicking around on his ranch. In this case, they actually put video of the event on the White House website so you can see his callous ineptitude using government bandwidth!

3. Representative Robert Ney (R-Ohio), who is the member of Congress most likely to face criminal charges in the ongoing saga of political crook Jack Abramoff, is also one of the cosponsors of the ludicrous 2003 bill that doled out retribution to France by creating the terms "Freedom Fries" and "Freedom Toast." So at least karma's working there.

4. Amidst the parade of ridiculous variations in the Barbie doll line is this version of Ken:



Can't you just hear him say "The horses are restless, and the men are quiet."