Cliche has it that “God, Guns, and Gays” are the default positions of the American right wing so it’s interesting that the U.S. Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court dealt with a couple of these positions in some recent decisions (altho it’s difficult to seperate God from the righties’ obsession with gays). The real question is how does any of this effect the election of ‘08; have these issues been effectively spayed or do the court decisions put them in play, and who benefits, McCain or Obama?
The gay marriage ruling has been destroying straight marriage now for 3 weeks and kids are “going gay” in record numbers. Funny how that works because as long as straight marriage has been the norm, it apparently hasn’t kept anyone from “going gay” but I guess the opposite isn’t true. So now that were cast into this right wing talk show version of Dante’s Inferno, which presidential candidate benefits? Obama is on record as being opposed to gay marriage so it’s difficult to see how he’s hurt, but the devil is in the details. The straight marriage initiative is on the California ballot which, of course will drive untold number of homophobic morons to the polls in California (all of whom, I’m assuming, are McCainiacs) but Cali is a given for Obama in the fall. The real concern here is for the upstart congressional Democratic candidates facing Repug incumbents and a hostile brood of feverish Jesus freaks driven to the the polls strictly to vote for a constitutional amendment which will be ultimately proven to be unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the California constitution.
The gun thing is potentially a nation-wide issue, but Obama has made all the correct noises about gun rights, although his hometown Chicago will be the next to face a NRA lawsuit over their gun restriction laws. If McCain’s storm troopers can find even a scintilla of written evidence that Obama has actively or latently defended those laws ( http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/chi-0627edit1jun27,0,1543324,print.story ), you can bet the straight shooter will exploit it. Plus, there’s the small town rubes clinging to God and guns line which will haunt Barack either way (http://www.newsweek.com/id/143759/output/print ). Brace yourself for the obligatory photo-op of Obama emerging from an Illinois corn field with a 12 guage and a former migratory bird flung over his shoulder. Hopefully the latte will be cropped from the picture. That none of this really matters, or should matter, to the American electorate is a moot point. The easily frightened, the paranoid, and the Jesus-fevered are consistently begging to be manipulated and the Repugs are masters at that game.
Obama’s recent move to the right on some key issues will satisfy some concerns, altho I find them unsettling. How do you go from a position of promising to filibuster the new FISA telecom immunity bill to supporting it in the name of “national security” is beyond me, except that it’s one of those politically craven compromises national candidates must make in order to win over the “security moms”. Too bad/how sad. Thought Barack was a “different” sort of politician, guided by principle not electoral pragmatism. Combined with his bizzarly hawkish speech last month before AIPAC and his tough guy support of capital punishment in light of the recent Supreme Court decision on kiddy rape, one can’t help maintaining anything but healthy skepticism about all this hope and change. Given Obama’s notorious free trade position and his love of corporate money, what are we really dealing with here? A third Bush term vs. a third Clinton term?
Let me be the first to reply to your piece. It was as unsettling to me as it was to you ,hearing Obama falling into lock step with all other brain dead politicos. As you ,I was unsure as to whether I was going to still vote for the man simply because of the alternative and protest by not giving any more funds to his cause, now I’m sure. Really sad to see a promising attempt to inact change go swirlling down the toilet. Integrity seems to be a thing of the past. In Passing—A tribute to one of my Favs. George Carlin. Exerpt from ” When Will Jesus bring the Porkchops” FURTHER THOUGHTS ON EXPLODING HEADS—-Wouldn’t it be interesting if the only way you could die was that suddenly your head blew up? If there were no other causes of death? Everyone died the same way? I think Sooner or later, without warning, your head would simply explode? You know what I think? I think people would get use to it. I believe people can learn to take anything in stride if they think it’s unavoidable. Picture a bunch of guys singing’ ” Happy Birthday”: Happy Birthday to you, Happy Birthday DEAR CHARLIE… BOOM! And Charlie’s head blows up. But all the candles go out, so it’s actually a form of good luck. And every ond applauds. Of course there’d be an occasional downside. “God another head? Thats two this week. I just got this suit cleaned” But we’d get used to deal with it.— Lets say you were sitting in a restaurant with your girl friend, and the waiter was reciting the specials: Tonight we have the marinated bat nipples on a bed of lightly saute’ed panda ass holes…BOOM! The waiters head explodes. I’ll bet you wouldn’t miss a beat— Honey, did he say bat nipples or cat nipples? We’d better get another waiter. And some fresh salsa. I’m not eating this stuff; he was holding it when he blew. So anyway, I’m alergic to bat nipples. I think I might go with the free range penguin dick or the deep dish moose balls. How about you? Wait, hold still. There’s a little piece of eyebrow on your cheek. There,I got it. By the way,honey,what wine goes with brain? R.I.P. George
Comment by knifemaster — Sunday, June 29, 2008 @ 2:11 pm
Yeah Stacy, when it comes down to it, “change” is bullshit and they’re all the fucking same.
Comment by Sammy — Sunday, June 29, 2008 @ 5:24 pm
They’re all the same - politicians - and now the Libertarians are no better, selling their souls, too (Bob Barr).
Comment by Sammy — Monday, June 30, 2008 @ 8:07 am
“…altho it’s difficult to seperate God from the righties’ obsession with gays…”
I’d say it’s also difficult to separate God from the righties’ obsession with guns!!
Thanks for the post, Stacy. I’m an Obama man, but it definitely is unsettling to see the pandering and position modifications. Not unexpected, though.
Wouldn’t it have been great if Obama had decided to go ahead with the public financing, and won anyway…
Comment by goodguy — Monday, June 30, 2008 @ 10:12 am
whats pretty disturbing to me is you have 4 Supreme Court judges who DONT think the Second is a collective right.
Anyhow, i no more trust Repubs w/ the Second than I do the Dims, who at least figured out it burns when you touch it. Rightfully so.
The feds have militarized 7 Federalized local cops across the country, and now has a unaccountable merc army it can use “off the shelf” to use a Contragate term. Results: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2008/061808_strike_teams.htm
And what do “progressives” demand? Criminalizing firearms ownership across the board, via incremental means, ie, disarming law biding citizens. for “the chilllll-drennnnn.” Bull.
And they wonder why normal people treat them skeptically.
well, we dodged a real evil here, and solely because the putative “conservitive” justices voted out of character: FOR the supremacy of the citizen over the State or corporate interests. Thier votes on the 2nd & those of Habeas and other decisions that pitted the individual against State power are 180 degrees apart.
But Ill take it……….
But for no reason other than he’s not a serious thinker like, say, malcolm X, - a thinker, yes, but I dont think he sees as many moves ahead- hell continue to cede to the far right loons because they have power. Period.
too bad, but being a skeptic, Im not “dissappointed” or angry…….guys a pol, at this point less corrupted than most, by far.
Maybe the Missus can keep him on the straight & narrow-
Comment by mutt — Monday, June 30, 2008 @ 3:16 pm
Remembering the history of Gen. Patton WWII and Gen. McAurthur of the same time period, I’m struck that both of these men thrived on war and wouldn’t have made a splash in our history without it. The same with McCain. Harry took care of McArthur and a roll over of command car took car of Patton. All we can hope for McCain is that people will come out of their comas and vote for someone who will string together coherant sets of words and thoughts and pull us out of this tailspin were in. I’ve thought for a long time the very thing that W. Clark said was exactly what should have been said a long time ago. Hey, “The Keating Five” Remember? I’ve not seen one qualification that makes McCain a candidate for anything.
Comment by knifemaster — Monday, June 30, 2008 @ 4:27 pm
Yes, it appears that our candiate for change is now going to continue Bush’s faith-based initiatives. Great…
Comment by Lorelei — Tuesday, July 1, 2008 @ 11:13 am
Brief and to the point; I figured Obama was some sort of politico, but he’s is going too far, at least for me. FUNDING religeous groups with my tax paying money and giving them a tax free status is total bull shit. I thought we were going to leave the grandios pandering to the Repubs, seems not so. I fear Carlin’s piece on exploding heads is fast comming true At least there’s a great pounding between my ears and a trace of bulging eyes
Comment by knifemaster — Tuesday, July 1, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
The word progressive confuses me in the way its used now. It used to be that progressive was what we liberals decided to call ourselves as a backlash to the repugs turning the word liberal into a dirty word, i.e., “those nasty liberals…” We weren’t going to let them define us that way! But over the last few years it seems a group of crazy folks have co-opted the word “progressive.” I call them crazy because they seem to have no common sense and despite the facts as we know them, they think they know better. Have you been to a PDA meeting lately? They’re no different than the “Goose-stepping Republicans.”
Now, for example, Mutt says progressives want to criminalize firearms ownership. Who are these progressives? The one’s who’ve co-opted the word? Or do Liberals = Progressives?
Also, the progressives who so vhemently supported Obama must be very upset over his FISA law flip-flop and the continuation of Bush’s Faith-Based Initiatives. I wonder what he’ll do next.
Comment by Lorelei — Wednesday, July 2, 2008 @ 9:13 am
It’s obvious churches do a ton of good in the real world.
But it’s also obvious that federal funding of religious activity is a direct violation of the separation of church and state.
It’s the same reason we don’t tax churches, after all…
Comment by goodguy — Wednesday, July 2, 2008 @ 3:05 pm
this wierd, authoritarian “progressive” strain came about quite a while ago. USED to be the Left had a serious critique about the coercive nature of State power- the State was NOT your friend. Liberals way back when recognized State power is a dangerous thing to liberty- G Washington thought much on the subject and said at one point: “Government is a dangerous servant and a fearful master”.
then, what I identify as middle & upper class mostly college kids, and suburban dems, came to the idea the problem wast the coersive nature of the State, only that they werent doing the coersion. “Give US the club, and we’ll show you PROGRESS”.
now it is manifested in laws large and small regulating every aspect of human existance, if possible, in nitwit, niggling ways. pretty soon, your kid will have to stay in that car seat til he’s 18.
one notes all such fussbudget HOA type lawmaking is often for “the children”, prompting one to suggest: Try parening. Its worked for 50, 000 years.
The lengthy screed above taking Stacy to task for not marching in lockstep with the latest decree on social responsibility is a classic of the type.
Simply take the liscenses of bad drivers. We will reduce auto traffic by 30%, in a flash.
But safe roads arent the “progressive” actual DESIRE, no, its the ability to enact endless laws, like a HOA dictating mailbox color.
As far as proggies being for the incremental criminalization of firearms owners, I can only point to my 30 plus years on the putative Left in this country. ive been involved in the issue for many years……its a constant theme.
Comment by mutt — Wednesday, July 2, 2008 @ 4:17 pm
Churches also do a lot of damage. I certainly don’t want my tax money to be used to “help” people while recruiting new church memebers. I say leave the tax money to government social services and non-profits who can help.
I gotta tell you, I’m tired of going to the dentist and being told that my baby has a heartbeat just because his office is next door to an OB/GYN. I certainly don’t think tax money should be used to “save babies.”
Comment by Lorelei — Wednesday, July 2, 2008 @ 4:21 pm