Dear Political Leaders, Regarding Rep. Weiner: STFU
I’m so sick and tired of the stupid, narrowminded crap that passes for a political message these days. Yes, what Representative Anthony Weiner did was a distraction. Yes, it’s an annoyance. But for the establishment, including DNC Chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz, to call for Weiner’s resignation? Please do us all a favor and shut the hell up.
What Weiner did WAS NOT AGAINST THE LAW. It is an inconvenience. It’s a distraction. But again, NOT AGAINST THE LAW. He’s a stupid man. Men lie when it comes to sex. They always have, and they always will. Deal with it.
We’re not the puritanical society that these people want us to be, and I don’t hold political leaders to any other standard than I would a stranger on the street (though in this day and age, I’d probably be nicer to a stranger on the street than a Congressperson). Get over it and move on. This is a distraction that’s keeping you from doing your jobs. And to the media? Same thing – STFU. Who cares?
But here’s the hypocrisy of the situation: All of the Republicans who are calling on Weiner to resign haven’t said SHIT about Republican David Vitter. Senator Vitter (R-LA), who actually broke the law by using a callgirl service. He did far worse than Weiner ever did, and yet Republicans start whistling like nothing’s going on when you bring that up.
What are we?
Seriously. I want to ask this question of Republicans. What, exactly, are gay people to them?
A few weeks ago, The Advocate, a leading GLBT magazine, posted a story about how Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) was so ga-ga to meet Chris Colfer, the actor from Glee (he plays Kurt). She got a photo-op with Darren Criss, a straight man playing a gay teenager, but they couldn’t find Chris, though they desperately wanted to. Bachmann said:
“We don’t watch TV, generally speaking. But the kids were thrilled. What kids don’t watch Glee?”
Okay, that’s cool. But wait a minute. Another headline from Towleroad.com screamed another Bachmann story this afternoon. What was the headline? It was “Michele Bachmann Encourages More Inequality“; it was a story about how Michele, a Tea Party favorite, got up in front of a bunch of supporters and said that she thinks “marriage is under fire” from the gays, and she’s glad that there’s going to be a ballot measure in 2012 to try and outlaw marriage equality in Minnesota.
WHAT THE FUCK?
I’m sorry for my profanity, but it’s all I can do to keep from screaming. Bachmann loves a television show that has gay characters on it that she wants to get pictures with the cast, but in the same breath, demonizes gay people for having the audacity to desire equal rights under the law. Representative Bachmann: What are we? Just play things that are here on the Earth to amuse you? Things that you want to entertain you, but you don’t think should have the same rights as everyone else? You know what you are, Bachmann? You’re not only a hypocrite, but you’re a sad, pathetic excuse for a human being.
Chris Colfer did an interview, saying how he doesn’t really mind the hypocrisy, but that he’s doing the photo-ops, etc for GLBT rights. Here’s the thing Chris: They don’t care about you. They’ll take your picture and use it for their own messed up being, but turn around and curse you in the name of their religion the first chance they get. Maybe I’m just old and crotchety, but I wouldn’t be as kind as Colfer; I’d tell them to take a hike.
What are Republicans up in arms about?
This is ridiculous! The Republican party wants to do away with the EPA, so that polluters can trash our environment. They want to gut Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid to kill off the poor and the elderly. They want to give billionaires even MORE tax breaks – like the ones under Bush worked.
There is so much damage that can – and will – be done by Republican lawmakers. And what are Republicans up in arms about? That Gingrich disagrees with Congressman Paul Ryan’s plan to gut Medicare. Remember – dissent isn’t allowed within the Republican party. They’re all supposed to be dittoheads. Only the Democratic party is allowed to have multiple opinions on the same subject.
Typical Republican Lawmaker
And by typical, I mean the recent story about Arnold Schwarzenegger. He vetoed – twice – bills that would allow marriage equality within the State of California. But at the same time? He fathered a child – out of wedlock.
Why do I say typical? Because it is. Republicans – be them Schwarzenegger or Gingrich – will rail against the GLBT community, denying them civil rights. But they’ll flaunt their own marriage in the face of “traditional values”. Gingrich doing it by having an affair (or three) and serving his wife divorce papers while she’s in the hospital for Cancer, or Schwarzenegger fathering a child out of wedlock.
But these idiots are the darlings of the Republican party. All Gingrich has to do is say that “God forgave him” and he’s back to being in people’s good graces. Moron.
If the tables were turned…
Okay, I totally don’t get this. So in Iowa, where gay marriage is legal (because all seven Iowa Supreme Court justices agreed it was a civil right), the Iowa House is investigating a bill that would allow discrimination against gay people who are married. I understand the basis. If you hold religious beliefs, that’s fine. Everyone should, in one way or another. Or you don’t have to. See, religion is a very, very personal thing. But these people, led by Republican Representative Richard Anderson, says he’s put forth the bill to preserve religious liberty.
There’s just two things wrong with this. Okay, more than two things, but still.
First off, this “religious liberty” bill is so broadly written, that it can be used in just about any situation. Like if a Christian married an Atheist. Or if two Muslims got married. Or – surprise, surprise, even a mixed race marriage. According to this bill, if the provider of a service – housing, a restaurant, a car dealership – if the company representative is not comfortable or objects to the marriage, they have the right to refuse services. How is this right?
What’s worse than this? People would be up in arms if a gay person refused services to a Christian couple. The gay person would be, in effect, burned in effigy by the media and these politicians. So how is it right that this discrimination is allowed one-way, but not the other?
Are we a country that’s moving forward, or are we going back to the puritanical days of the 1700s?
ATTN: People Blaming Obama for the Arizona Immigration Law Being Stopped
Yes, the racist Arizona law was blocked. It’s all over the news. And people are already blaming Obama for it. WTF?
Here’s the facts. The law was blocked by a Federal Judge, not Obama. Her name is Susan Bolton. Who is Susan Bolton? Someone who has lived in Arizona for quite a while. Someone who has been in the judiciary for quite a while. Someone who has been described – by conservatives and liberals alike as “fair and thorough”. Someone’s Federal judgeship was spearheaded by REPUBLICAN Sentator John Kyl of Arizona. In 2000, under President William J. Clinton.
So STFU already about activists judges and blaming Obama for this!
Why the public should never be allowed to vote on civil rights
You would think in this day and age, that people would understand our past. As the saying goes, those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And so the going happens with gay marriage.
Most people don’t see the parallel between interracial marriage and gay marriage. They claim they are two very different things, though the arguments for one have been used for the other. Religious intolerance was used to fight against interracial marriage for decades, and that same religious intolerance is used today against gay marriage. But here is one truly concrete example of why voters should not be allowed to vote on a civil rights issue.
The election of 2000 was contentious. I mean, everyone remembers the outcome in Florida, and how it dominated the news cycle meant that an important Alabama race went unnoticed. Here’s a little excerpt from USA Today:
Did you read that right? ONLY 59% of Alabama voters approved to remove the invalidated interracial marriage laws. That means 41% of the Alabama voters wanted to keep the discriminatory laws on the books, even if they were invalidated and couldn’t be enforced. Here’s the voting breakdown (the percentages are rounded):
So here, literally, is a black and white example of why voters should never be allowed to vote on civil rights.
Another slam from the DCCC
The old saying, “With friends like this, who needs enemies?” comes to mind when I recently dealt with the DCCC. You see, I took the “Don’t Ask Don’t Give” pledge from AmericaBlog.com. It means that I will not give money to the DNC, DSCC, or the DCCC until I think that there is actual movement on GLBT issues. We need the Obama Administration to stop comparing gay marriage to incest and pedophilia. We need Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repealed. And we need the Employee Non Discrimination Act passed. These aren’t hard things to do. But 18 months into the Obama Administration, it appears that Dick Cheney was better on GLBT issues than Obama.
I got a phone call from the DCCC on Friday, asking me if I stood with Nancy Pelosi, and if I did, would I donate to the DCCC to continue Democrats in making progress. I REALLY wish that I recorded this conversation, it left such a bad taste in my mouth.
The conversation started like normal. I let the guy speak for a minute, and when I got time to respond, I told him about the “Don’t Ask Don’t Give” pledge. He asked why. I told him all of the basic reasons, but stressed on the gay marriage being compared to incest and pedophilia. The guy LAUGHED.
I said, “Excuse me?” and the guy continued to laugh. He then giggled through a “thank you for your concerns” and hung up. It was INFURIATING. Like I need any other reason not to give to the DCCC.
This whole thing reminds me of the time the DCCC sent out emails calling supporters “Slackers”.
UPDATE: I just talked to the DCCC. They outsource the fundraising to another company, and they’ll be investigating what happened last Friday.
What is wrong with the media?
Okay. So yesterday we had primaries. Lots of them. And what is the definition of a primary? It’s that several republicans run for one office, and the one with the highest vote count is chosen. And several Democrats run for one particular office and the one with the highest vote count is chosen. That’s what a PRIMARY is.
So tell me. WHY the F*CK is there a headline out there this morning that reads as this one does?
This is just irresponsible. Demanding change? If you look at the races, the ONLY people that were in the “establishment” that were kicked out was one single Republican Governor, the Governor of Nevada. I mean look at the headline right below that one! “Incumbent Lincoln wins runoff over Halter”. And look at the image – it is a Senator Lincoln supporter!
This is beyond ridiculous!
Union bashing at 35,000Feet
It is absolutely no lie that unions are what built the backbone of this nation. Happy to have child labor laws? Paid time off? Workers rights to safe working conditions? Thank a union. And the airlines are actually a largely unionized group, with mechanics, flight attendants, pilots, and the like. Unions are good for the common man, which doesn’t make it surprising that corporate greed is at the heart of airlines pushing for anti-union rules. After all, they are for-profit corporations that think more of corporate profits than customers or their workers.
It would not be so bad if Airlines didn’t rely on the government so much. Subsidized tickets for rural travel? Free money from the government. 9/11 occurred, and the airlines went to the government for bailouts. Most pilots trained in the Air Force. You know.
So next time you airlines want to bad mouth unions, think again. If you want the public to keep traveling, they have to have good, well paying jobs. Union jobs.
