Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
The most important issue of the 2008 elections is: Who is going to bring me, in discharging the duties of President of the United States, the biggest pile of crispy smoking terrorist carcasses, hopefully with agonized and horrified expressions frozen onto their damn dirty dead terrorist faces? Two thousand a month is inadequate if another candidate will deliver three thousand.
The second most important issue is: What is up with that strange, surreal, self-obsessed political party supposedly named after democracy? Are they stupid or just plain crazy? Millions of people may sacrifice much to avoid admitting it, but I think the question is troubling to everybody, even the most loyal supporters. And it’s relevant. We know this political party must go away, for the continuing survival of the country, we just don’t quite understand how urgent this is.
The third most important issue is: What are illegal aliens up to when they come here? Not the visa-overstayers; the turnstyle-hoppers. Are they really after a better way of life for themselves and their kids? Are they here to pursue that way of life by working hard? And if so, at what exactly? Manual labor that “Americans won’t do?” Or milking the system? A combination of both? If they’re here to do the work Americans won’t do, is it possible some of those hard workers are one and the same with the illegal aliens who kidnap and molest our children, and kill our innocents on the backroads and highways while driving drunk? Should I stop worrying about any of this once I’m assured they “work hard and follow the law”? How do you know someone follows the law when you know he broke it by coming here? And when you don’t even know for sure who he is and have no way of finding out? Most perplexing within the third issue…what in the world does a candidate for a high political office, know about any of this? And how irresponsible is it to form such a crude and clumsy stereotype, even if it’s a flattering one, about twelve to fifteen million people?
And the fourth most important issue…
Is this thing called “identity politics” not just the biggest old bucket o’ crap to hang around humanity’s neck since the constitutional republic was invented?
Elaborate efforts are afoot on the Democratic side to convince Iowa women to ignore the popular phenomenon that is Barack Obama, to dismiss loyalty to familiar favorite John Edwards, and to caucus for the woman who is running for president.
With Hillary Clinton’s dream steeped in uncertainty, her campaign and other backers are banking on women to carry her through Thursday night.
“I think most women, our internal research shows, they’re not-fly-by-nights, they’re strongly enthusiastic: ‘We’re going to show up in the sleet, snow, the ice, we’re going to be there,’ ” said Clinton’s campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle. “I know the strength of our support.”
The campaign is expecting women to dominate the caucus by as much as 60 percent. To recruit more into their sisterhood of politics and to bump up the urgency for backbone supporters, an army of Clinton volunteers logged more than 10,000 house calls and 8,500 phone conversations on Saturday alone.
But some female Democrats are rejecting the message they’re hearing about Clinton, long a controversial political figure. And some men are turned off by what they see as an estrogen-soaked campaign.
:
Des Moines Democrat Marc Wallace, 40, said he thinks Clinton’s gender-based campaigning is a mistake. He intends to caucus for Obama,he said today.“The Clinton campaign has not reached out to me in any real way beyond automated calls, bulk mail and having a local volunteer call to see what my candidate preference might be,” said Wallace, a John Kerry caucus campaign volunteer and a Polk County Democratic Central Committee member.
West Des Moines Democrat Mike Boltz also questions an apparent lack of attention to men.
“I think she’s been targeting women too much,” said Boltz, 44, who works in the insurance industry. “Her commercials are very female-centric. I think she needs to cater to the male population, too.”
You know, just putting aside all of the candidates, I think that’s a great debate we can have now. Form the issue first…and then let the candidates address it. Is it possible to represent someone in a high political office, such as President of the United States, who is not part of your personal demographic group? Or is a woman guaranteed superior representation from someone else who is a woman, compared to what she’d ever get from a man?
I personally favor the first of those two options. I know if Condoleeza Rice was running, as a straight white man who is a parent and has been married before, I’d put her ahead of a lot of married-and-divorced straight white fathers who are in the race now. I’d vote for her over Giulliani, McCain, definitely over that crackpot Ron Paul. She’d come in behind Thompson, because Thompson has actually been consistent and stalwart on things that I think are important. I’d put her on par with Romney, I think. Maybe a little bit ahead of Mitt.
That’s the fourth most important issue right there: Is this something I’m not supposed to be doing? I just stacked Condi in behind Fred but ahead of Mitt and Rudy and John and Ron. White guy, black girl, white guy white guy white guy. Hey, I’m a white guy and I put a black lady in as #2. Is there a “Stick To Your Own Kind” police coming over to put me under arrest now? Or am I simply betraying my own interests, with my readiness to vote for someone who’s a woman when I’m not one myself?
There, that’s the issue right there…for surely whatever answer applies correctly to me, applies to everyone else right? Okay, so now that the question is defined, will someone please pose it to Hillary — and everybody else running? Just to get their opinions on the record. Let’s just stop tip-toeing around this thing, and finally address it head-on.
America deserves to know.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
[…] On the last day of 2007, I bitched and moaned about identity politics. The science of…or the instinct to…elevate figures to high office, based not on their true qualifications for that office, but based on their perceived resemblance to me, me, me, me, me, me, me and me. […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 01/10/2008 @ 10:08[…] On the last day of 2007, I bitched and moaned about identity politics. The science of…or the instinct to…elevate figures to high office, based not on their true qualifications for that office, but based on their perceived resemblance to me, me, me, me, me, me, me and me. […]
- Webloggin - Blog Archive » Someone Like Me | 01/10/2008 @ 11:00[…] What did I say… The Fourth Most Important Issue : Is this thing called “identity politics” not just the biggest old bucket o’ crap to hang around humanity’s neck since the constitutional republic was invented? : Is it possible to represent someone in a high political office, such as President of the United States, who is not part of your personal demographic group? Or is a woman guaranteed superior representation from someone else who is a woman, compared to what she’d ever get from a man? […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 02/06/2008 @ 10:10