You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Politics’ category.

I liked some of the election results, and didn’t like some of the election results, but that’s what I expect. Don’t you? It’s hardly worth gnashing teeth over. I figure elections are like New Year’s Eve, and the day after is like New Year’s Day – a good time to decide what resolutions to make, which to put on the shelf, and what course to try next.

Anyway, an acquaintance of ours told us that her father is so distraught that his candidate didn’t win that he hasn’t been able to get out of bed since the results were announced. I think he’s in his 80s, but I’m not sure. He’s old enough, anyway, to know better.

But, then, he’s something of a good old boy, and they’re not generally used to losing.

So, let me tell you about the election his champion lost. The post was county judge, which is a misleading name for what amounts, more or less, to county mayor. It’s a nonpartisan post, officially. Candidates don’t run by party. Their affiliation, if any, isn’t even listed on the ballot. We had two candidates, a Quiet Man and a Brash Man.

Quiet Man is painfully shy, but walked around meeting people on the sidewalk and handing out brochures explaining what he thought needed to be a priority in county business and outlining what he wanted to do. He didn’t like to take questions at debates, but preferred to take questions in writing and reply in writing. That way, he said, he had a chance to study the subject if he needed to, and his reply would be on record, where everybody could see the whole answer insteading of relying on what somebody else said they thought he said.

Brash Man ridiculed Quiet Man for not shooting from the hip, apparently on the grounds that hunches tell a lot about a man. Brash Man also refused to put anything in writing.

Quiet Man offered, if he won, to let the losing side have a place at the table with him.

Brash Man sneered. He made it plain that if anybody thought he’d give ground once elected they were crazy.

A friend of mine, early in the campaign, noticed one of his employees, a clerk at his retail establishment, having a horrible time dealing with a visitor. The visitor was livid about a sign out front of the store expressing support for Quiet Man. Livid. He announced, “I’m responsible for the welfare of this county, and I’m here to see the right people get elected.” No kidding. That’s what he proclaimed.

My friend was a bit taken aback (wouldn’t you be, if a madman walked into your store?), but tried to lighten things up by teasing his employee. “Hey, I thought you Jehovah’s Witnesses didn’t do politics?”

“That’s what I’ve been trying to tell him,” the clerk said. “I keep telling him I don’t care who wins. He won’t listen.”

The Livid Visitor got more livid. He told my friend to fire her. He said that people who don’t vote don’t have a right to a job.

Let me repeat that. He tried to have her fired for not being political enough. That’s a new one on me. Very, very fringy, yes? Very, very bad, yes?

Now, I don’t understand people who think you can’t be godly if you vote. In fact, I think they’re kind of letting the side down. But this is America, land of ‘it’s no good going around telling people they’ve got to pretend to please God your way and ignore their own ideas on the matter.’ People have a right to opt out of pretty much whatever they think displeases the Almighty.

And they certainly have a right to a job if they can earn it.

Grrr.

The Livid Visitor never would identify himself or say whether he worked for Brash Man’s campaign or was freelancing. He drove off in a huff, cursing and endangering other drivers. Shortly afterward, people who identified themselves as being with the Brash Man’s campaign started calling. And calling. They really wanted a sign up, preferably one that played off the slogan on the Quiet Man sign. One-upsmanship plays well in their circle, I guess.

They managed to talk another clerk (who didn’t know about the previous fuss and wasn’t clear on store policy about signs, but who wanted to be polite) into taking money to put up a sign for their guy, but my friend the manager sent their money back with a polite refusal and that seemed to end that. Not everybody on Brash Man’s side is a thug, apparently. Thank goodness.

Quiet Man concentrated on efforts to make the county more livable, and able to attract more business.

Brash Man has a history of trying to outlaw the United Nations and do away with speed limits on rural highways, that sort of thing: great quixotic quests with much fanfare but little chance of doing more than getting folks in the paper.

Quiet Man won, by a healthy but not overwhelming margin. The first thing he did (according to the grapevine) was offer Brash Man a chance to sit at the council table, next to him. I thought that went too far, myself. If I go in front of the county court with an idea or request, I don’t want to have to face Brash Man’s sneer and ridicule. (Did I mention he likes to ridicule people? Or that he’s much bigger than me? And has rough and rowdy friends?)

Brash Man, though, decided to sneer at the offer instead of people who might come to any future meetings. He has announced that he thinks he’ll move. The county’s gotten too conservative to suit him, he says. A sunnier clime would suit him, he says. He adds he might keep a summer home around here so he can go hunting, but basically he’s tired of trying to live somewhere where he’s surrounded by idiots.

We thought about getting up a collection to help cover moving expenses. But most of the people we know are frugal either by necessity or by choice, and it would be asking a bit much to ask them to spend their hard-earned money subsidizing a Brash Man. Besides, we’re afraid that if people were too open about being happy to see him go he might get contrary and stay. Just to show us who’s boss, you know.

Heh. I love it that the bullies sometimes have to step aside. It would suit my idealism streak a bit better if we didn’t need secret ballots to get the job done, but, well, thank goodness for secret ballots.

Here’s hoping the Democrats at the national level are easier to dance with when they’re leading.

And here’s hoping the Republicans dance as well as they can, with some class.

All right, I was going to try to ignore John Kerry’s ‘study hard or you’ll get stuck in Iraq’ gaffe, but this response from some guys in uniform is too rich to not share. [Correction: that would be guys and gals. My apologies, ladies.]

If by chance you don’t know what the flap is about, the first two items here provide a good overview: the gaffe itself in print, a link to a video of the incident, and a copy of the quite bizarre press release that was issued at Kerry’s still-operational campaign website following the incident. I didn’t post on this earlier because I thought the press release was too John Kerry, if you know what I mean. I assumed the site had been hacked by someone good at parody, perhaps as a tasteless and harmful Halloween prank. Apparently not.

Wonders never cease.

Kerry has since issued what he calls an apology. I think it translates in part to ‘I’m sorry people couldn’t read my mind and if anybody didn’t know what I meant that’s not my fault.’ But I’m not sure. He’s calling his bungle a botched joke. A joke? He wants us to believe his original intent was to tell a joke? I have my doubts – and it certainly would have been a mean-spirited joke, I think – but I think I’ll walk away now and let the dust finish settling. If Kerry decides to run for national office again, though, I reserve the right to repost that press release, especially if he touts his supposed diplomatic skills and gift of nuance.

No, wait. Bookworm has an angle on all of this that most of us seemed to miss. (You may envision me smacking my forehead and berating myself for missing the obvious.) Why is that so many people on today’s Left, including John Kerry, seem to equate academic achievement with wide-ranging intelligence (ed note: except in their political opponents), but don’t recognize that military experience can be an education? Or that it can build backbone, which can turn a life around? Just asking. (For the record, I graduated college with honors. But I’ve learned lots of more useful stuff since then. College had its merits, but largely in what I learned from dealing with people and situations and ideas that were new to me – much of which I could have done just as easily outside of school, yes?)

I wonder if part of the explanation might be that so much of what passes for Leftist thought these days is incubated, hatched and fed almost entirely at college campuses, with a huge assist from ‘true believer’ college grads who go on to careers in media, journalism, and entertainment? Without the folks holed up in academia earnestly making Utopian pronouncements with a straight face and telling their students it’s up to them to change the world, postmodernism and its related worldviews might die on the vine, or at least wither substantially, at a guess. Just a guess. Maybe?

I’d like to add something else to this train of thought, if I may. If Kerry meant to imply that people join the military because they can’t hack the sorts of supposedly wonderful jobs theoretically reserved for college graduates, isn’t he forgetting the people who join the military to give themselves a way to pay for college? Silly man.

Kerry says he meant to insult the President instead of the troops. Noting in passing that this is low-rent behavior in and of itself, I can’t get that to make sense. President Bush was granted a bachelor’s degree in history from Yale and a Master of Business Administration degree from Harvard. Not exactly something to sneeze at, I wouldn’t think, and more or less a career path Sen. Kerry was otherwise advising in his speech.

Why am I bothering with this? Eek. I was discussing the whole kerfuffle with a friend yesterday and I think we decided that we were trying to make sense of something that was nonsense. Silly us.

Sigh. Now I’m walking away.

Update: Background on that troop photo: GIs drop smart bomb on Kerry. (Via Bookworm Room)

Yesterday I discovered talk radio on the Internet. OK, so I knew it was there. I just hadn’t bothered to listen to it. Talk radio tends to exasperate me.

But there had been so much buzz about the Hugh Hewitt interview with Andrew Sullivan Read the rest of this entry »

There has been a moderate scandal of sorts out of Washington recently. A Republican legislator was found to have had an attraction to boys, and to have spoken inappropriately to some of the male pages (at the very least). The pages responded by leading him on, which prompted him to send them even more sick messages electronically, which were subsequently shared with the world, whereupon the disgraced lawmaker was shown the door.

So, this is pretty straightforward, no? A guy abuses his position of power, he should be out of a job. A grown-up man propositions teens, either sex, and he ought to have to answer for it. Somebody tries to recruit young people into the homosexual lifestyle, he should pay for it, since kids can’t be expected to know how to counter seduction (or even to know that they ought to, since many kids like to think that that sort of attention means that somebody sees them as grown-up).

But what’s funny about all this is that the Democrats and what passes for a professional press corps in this country have been trying, and trying, and trying to shove this into a template. They seem to hope that Republicans, upon finding that an alcoholic who is confused about sexuality got voted in on their ticket, will all get the heeby-jeebies and either stay home this election out of disgust or vote Democrat to teach Republican leaders a lesson. Or I think that’s what all the screaming comes down to. (I admit to tuning much of it out as this has gone along.)

For crying out loud.

Do they really think that Republicans get the vapors every time they’re around people with serious faults? Don’t they get it that it’s not that Foley is messed up, but that he acted on his messed up views the way he did? Foley could sit around having all the fantasies he wanted as long as he kept them to himself. It’s when he did something harmful that action was taken – appropriately so. What he thinks is between him and God. What he does to other people is the province of his neighbors and colleagues and other human beings (as well as God).

It’s so simple. Conservatives expect people to act in a civilized fashion. When they don’t, they need to face the music. Nobody being perfect, and nobody making wise decisions one hundred percent of the time, we all have to face some music of one kind or another now and then. There are matters of degree, of course. But. Occasional slips are one thing, trying to insist upon getting a free pass is another.

It’s that insisting, time after time, that their uncivilized, immoral behavior is OK because they like to think that it defines them, that makes me tear my hair out when dealing with today’s modern leftists and so-called liberals. It’s that insistence that we’re all supposed to agree with them, or at least assume that any and all of their bull-session bright ideas possess more wisdom than anything built on the foundations of Western Civilization that makes me wince.

I’m not saying that Western Civilization has always been right, or that there isn’t room for improvement. I’m just pretty sure that much of what the “progressives” are proposing are steps backward. (Do you ever wonder if they look at every civilization that self-destructed and said, Oooh, let’s try that. Being post-modern and therefore enlightened, we can do it with more flair? The main problem with that theory, I think, is that so many ‘progressives’ I know think history is dead and buried and ought to stay that way – except for when it ought to be rewritten to try to get the conservatives to sign on to something.)

It’s maddening. What we could really use in this country are more reporters and fewer template-fillers, I think, especially when so may of the the templates seem to be jerry-built out of academic ideas that are based on other academic ideas and don’t bear a whole lot of resemblance to life on the ground, at least not life on the ground around here.