July 15th, 2004


Previous Entry Next Entry
jimbojones
03:06 am - Political Armageddon?
I was thinking about our current political situation tonight. The proposed Freedom in Marriage Amendment, aka "make teh gay illegal in teh constitution", was narrowly shot down in Congress today, and was pretty much a straight party vote - six Republicans voted against, three Democrats voted for, and everybody else Toed The Line. We've got Bush and company pushing the FMA for all it's worth, knowing that it's going to do more to alienate swing voters than to solidify their base; and Kerry keeps touching Edwards like he's got a hard-on for him every time a camera's around with much the same results - yeah, the gay-friendly folk love it, but THOSE people were going to vote for him ANYWAY. Meanwhile, legions of mildly homophobic swing voters get antsy and start wondering if Bush is really that bad, and... yeah.

So what the fuck? Is this Politics Armageddon? Will Judgment Day occur soon, and will all the voters for the winning team get caught up in the Rapture while all the voters for the losing team go straight to Hell, and the abstaining slackers get to cool their heels in Purgatory? Doesn't ANYBODY care about courting the fucking moderate vote anymore?

With all the political bungling going on right now, on both sides, it's utterly impossible to feel secure about what's going to happen when the booths open. And the idea of another four years of George W. "to hell with your civil rights, I have an agenda" Bush in office frankly fucking terrifies me. Sigh.
Tags:

 
Current Mood: cynical
Current Music: C-SPAN with a canned laugh track

(12 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:



 
[User Picture] From: bitchness
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 12:41 am
  (Link)
I am so not kidding about leaving my options open for moving to Canada.


 
[User Picture] From: teapotdome
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 12:51 am
  (Link)
The proposed Freedom in Marriage Amendment, aka "make teh gay illegal in teh constitution", was narrowly shot down in Congress today...

'Narrowly' probably isn't the right word here. Keep in mind the Senate wasn't actually voting on the America Against Butt-Lovin' Amendment--it was just a vote to end debate (aka filibustering) and bring the thing to an actual up-or-down vote.

For the vote to have succeeded--to bring cloture--the Republicans needed to get 60 votes. This is less than the 67 needed to actually pass the thing, but Frist and Friends still got the beat-down: 48 votes for cloture, not even half.

And keep in mind, of the three Democrats who voted for cloture, one was Zell Miller, who is a Republican in disguise, and the other two did it just so that they could get to a real vote, say "nay", and deep-six the thing once and for all.

Yes, the situation in Warshington is pretty grim. But I think we can put this one in the win column.

(Also, the 'hot hot Kerry-on-Edwards action' story is pretty much DOA. No one's really touched it besides Drudge and Wonkette, who are shit-disturbers anyway. So no need to fret on that front.)


 
[User Picture] From: ravenword
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 04:36 am
  (Link)
Also, the 'hot hot Kerry-on-Edwards action' story is pretty much DOA. No one's really touched it besides Drudge and Wonkette, who are shit-disturbers anyway. So no need to fret on that front.


I've read about other news sources playing games with headline juxtaposition, though -- like a big picture of John+John and whatever headline relates to the Democratic campaign right next to some kind of "Bush is protecting American families from teh gay!" headline. Of course, that may have only been an isolated incident or two.


 
From: cpf
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 07:12 am
  (Link)
Regarding "narrowly" - my local CBS news reported it as being defeated "by a wide margin" and I nearly peed.

No worries about Bush getting re-elected - everyone knows 63 percent of the US is gay.


 
[User Picture] From: stpdlsr
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 07:24 am
  (Link)

I just noticed that it's in the New Catholic Times, too.

Political armageddon?
Regular armageddon!


 
From: aduncous
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 11:03 am
  (Link)

Re: I just noticed that it's in the New Catholic Times, too.

Whoever you are, I love you.

I have been quietly contending that for some time. Now I have journalistic justification! I can quote sources, and thereby look less insane. Huzzah!


 
[User Picture] From: stpdlsr
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 03:47 pm
  (Link)

Re: I just noticed that it's in the New Catholic Times, too.

Don't forget to mention that the Pope believes in evolution (unlike Dubya).


 
[User Picture] From: pinballsorceror
Date: July 15th, 2004 - 11:50 am
  (Link)
Was Kerry or Edwards even present to cast a vote regarding the FMA, I think it's strange that there is no coverage on their angle on this issue at all. I do think Bush's prime motive in pushing this really isn't to make it happen, I think he just wants to appeal to the huge clump of evangelical voters we have throughout the United States. It seems more advantageous for him with that sect if it appears he's fighting a righteous cause in a world of sinners. They turn out to the booth in numbers that are rarely discussed...


 
[User Picture] From: keithmcnally
Date: July 16th, 2004 - 02:25 pm
  (Link)
I kinda like this crazy polarization. Makes it exciting. It's not just two versions of the same guy. Most elections are like a bland wrestling feud between two mid-carders. Nobody cares who wins. This time it's heel vs. babyface all the way. Surely evil Bush couldn't win against the wholesome goodness of Kerry... OR COULD HE? Don't forget that the turncoat Sgt. Slaughter kicked the shit out of Hulk Hogan. That could happen to you, America! The swerve! The heel win! The 4 more years of anti-bush merchandise!

I swear, it's just like wrestling.


 
[User Picture] From: bitchness
Date: July 16th, 2004 - 03:02 pm
  (Link)
Damn. I had to backspace, I just don't have the drive to make fun anymore. Hi Kieth.


 
From: (Anonymous)
Date: July 16th, 2004 - 11:53 pm
  (Link)

Pregunta

Sr. Salter:

¿Piensas que el país estará mejor con el Senador Kerry como el presidente?


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 17th, 2004 - 12:07 am
  (Link)

Re: Pregunta

Let's see, so far under the Bush administration, we've:

1. invaded a sovereign nation under false pretenses
2. systematically tortured and sodomized POWs in that nation
3. failed to accomplish major military and political objectives in above invasion
4. removed more and more basic civil rights from our own citizens with every year that goes by
5. failed to actually put any strictures or impose any penalties on Microsoft, even though they were convicted as abusive monopolists under the Clinton admininstration (and the European Union has fined them more than $670 million for OTHER abuses than the ones we already convicted them of)
6. attempted to add a Constitutional Amendment specifically intended to prevent homosexuals from ever enjoying a very basic and fundamental civil liberty in the future as well as at the moment
7. antagonized nearly every major nation, and most minor nations, on the face of the planet against us
8. united the Sunni and Shiite muslim factions for the first time in centuries... against us
9. gained massive amounts of sympathy for terrorist organizations in the wake of our brutal and misguided reactions against a country that had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with any terrorist action against us
10. elected a president whose family, for the past couple of generations, has collected over one point six BILLION dollars from the governing family of a foreign power with links to terrorist organizations for their own private business enterprises

Shit, yeah, I honestly don't see how things can get much WORSE under Kerry. Or for that matter under, oh, I don't know, Ron Jeremy, if he was the guy the Democrats were fielding as competition.


> Go to Top
LiveJournal.com