2007 Verve Awards

2006 Verve Awards


Best Arts and Culture Blog 2005 Queer Day Awards

Best Gay Blog Nominee 2004 Weblog Awards

Best Arts and Culture Blog Nominee

Thursday, May 01, 2008

 

Hanging Out With Bill O'Reilly, And Other Disastrous Choices For Our Nation

I've been trying to avoid politics of late on this blog -- nothing really useful is said by me or the commenters, who are now usually Clintonites looking to score points against (an admitted) Obama fan -- but after Hillary's decision to appear on Bill Fucking O'Reilly's Show yesterday to kick Obama even harder on the Jeremiah Wright thing -- which any sensible person can see is a media-fueled piece of nonsense, having nothing to do with issues or policy or character or the future of our country (when's the last time YOU made a major national policy decision based on your pastor's well-documented bigotry?) -- I just realized there's nothing she won't stoop to to win. As if her blatantly political call to suspend gasoline taxes (which economists admit won't help anything) wasn't enough of a show of her pathetic desperation, now she's openly hanging out on TV with conservative Republican antichrists, trashing the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party. She's worse than Lieberman. She has been consumed by a blinding desire to win...and to destroy the person in her path, even if he's a good man. Especially if he's a good man.

Is that "just politics"? I don't think so. And I'm not letting Wright, or Obama, off the hook. Their campaign team has fumbled more than once (or twice, or three times). But I've realized that -- as much as I once believed that the Democratic Party had to stick together, come what may -- I cannot in good conscience elect a moral abyss to the Presidency. Hillary may be a fine person privately, but she's proven (and by extension, Bill has proved) that she's an unfit leader for any truly progressive thinker or ethical person. The country is on the wrong track with Bush. It will remain so with McCain. And now I see it will remain so with Clinton. And I can't support that, in any fashion.

Is that traitorous? Maybe. But America is fundamentally broken in my opinion, and Hillary Clinton has proved to me that she will not fix what needs fixing...in fact, she likes it this way, because it fits her style of gutter politics and pseudo-conservatism.

I'm sure that the commenters will start pounding on Obama in a tit-for-tat, but what I'd REALLY like to see are some reasons to vote FOR Hillary. When she finishes trashing Obama and steals this nomination -- and it's coming people, don't doubt it, look at the polls, the media wants it too badly -- what should compel any Obama supporter to vote at all in November? Or to not vote for an independent third-party candidate? Fear of McCain won't work, because I think at this point Clinton's indistinguishable from him, politically and ethically. I can't think of one single reason, at the moment, that Hillary deserves my vote.

On a kind-of related note: sometimes wisdom comes from the strangest places...
Obama's "campaign is not being derailed by his race, it's being derailed by a person who doesn't want him to prove that we have made great advances in this country...Jeremiah Wright needs for Obama to lose so he can justify his anger, his hostile bitterness against the United States of America." - Mike Huckabee

Labels: ,

13 Comments:

Blogger FleshPresser said...

As always, I agree 110% with you - and you KNOW I've held this same belief for QUITE a while now.

I WILL NOT be one of those moronic Dems who state for the world to hear that if Hillary takes the nomination, that I will instead vote for McCain - these are people who truly cannot think for themselves and have sipped the Kool-Aid a bit too much for their own good.

However, I will NOT hold my nose and vote for Hillary, either. I expressed that belief a l-o-n-g time ago, and Senator Clinton's actions, and those of her campaign, have only reinforced more and more strongly.

And on my blog and others, I NEVER get any responses when I ask people why they are FOR Clinton over Obama, or in what way she has proved herself to be superior to Obama on the issues.

First, they talk about how Obama isn't Presidential enough. Now, they've spun it around and said that he's "too elitist."

But rather than simply going on the rant, I'll join the Fabulous ModFab and solicit reasons WHY we should vote for Clinton, should she be so fortunate as to steal away the nomination in Denver?

As it stands, I still believe that Obama will be the nominee, and that this will be sealed no later than May 20th - so it's largely a hypotheitcal conversation, admittedly.

But should she steal the nomination, there is currently NO WAY that I see myself, in good conscience, giving her my vote. Nor will I give it to McCain. Nor will I give it to Nader. And were Clinton to win the nomination, I can't help but think that another candidate will spring up over the summer - someone who already has BIG name recognition and dollars to match - who could join the fray as a third-party choice for the fall.

Any guesses as to who it may be?

5/1/08, 12:00 PM  
Blogger Keith a.k.a. K j A M said...

Me: Your response to Hillary’s decision to appear on The Factor is typical and expected. My partner and I watched it last night and saw a cool, collected and very intelligent woman ready to become the President of OUR country. She was not only prepared, but diplomatic in her responses (especially those geared towards Rev. Wright). The reason both she and Obama have not appeared on Fox News until now, is solely based on the threats they’ve received from organizations like Moveon.org. Both Obama and Clinton appeal to very distinct halves of the Democratic Party. There’s just that one little group they need to win over in order to clinch the nomination and the presidency…the Independents, or as some like to call them “Regan Democrats”. You know who they are, the very people Obama recently insulted during one of his speeches in San Francisco (or as the media likes to say California). From a political standpoint, it made perfect sense for Obama to go on Chris Wallace’s Sunday morning show and Clinton to appear on O’Reily’s show. They are trying to reach that targeted demographic that McCain could very handily win over in the general election. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Obama appears on The Factor if he loses Indiana and has a considerably narrower win in North Carolina than expected. Frankly I’m surprised you’re not pissing all over yourself because he went on Fox News Sunday. Then again, you tend to wear your heart on your sleeve when it comes to the other man in your life.
ModFab: “I'm sure that the commenters will start pounding on Obama in a tit-for-tat, but what I'd REALLY like to see are some reasons to vote FOR Hillary. When she finishes trashing Obama and steals this nomination -- and it's coming people, don't doubt it, look at the polls, the media wants it too badly -- what should compel any Obama supporter to vote at all in November?”
Me: The very same reason I would vote for Obama should he win the nomination. To win the Whitehouse back! Whether the nominee is Clinton OR Obama, anyone not willing to vote in the general election or is willing to vote for McCain strictly because their guy or gal didn’t win, needs to grow up. At this point, the only division we as Democrats should have is who we think is the best candidate to run against McCain. After that’s been settled, this is a non-issue. So quit your whining. Ultimately, Obama will most likely be given (notice I didn’t say ‘win’) the nomination. Even that wouldn’t prevent me from supporting him in November.
Now, should you ‘choose’ not to publish my response, especially since you’ve previously either edited my responses or chose not to publish them at all, you would have only proved me right. Frankly, I think that’s what you’re afraid of.

5/1/08, 12:06 PM  
Blogger will g said...

You're right, no reason to bother voting for Clinton over McCain. No Supreme Court. No gay rights. No Iraq quagmire. No depletion of the environment. No reasons at all.

5/1/08, 1:48 PM  
Blogger ModFab said...

Fleshpresser: It's interesting that we've both come, separately, to the same conclusion. And as you'll see from the pro-Clinton commenters, there's not a lot there to answer the "vote for Hillary" question.

Keith: Ah, but you see, you're posted...you continue to think this is about me and my ego, when it's really not. It's about what I think the country must have to heal. And as much as you hate me for it, I don't think it's Clinton. (Why you continue to read this site is beyond me, since you clearly aren't interested in what I have to say. But you're welcome, like everyone else, to read, participate, and bash my head in. Only fair, if I blogrant, for others to commentrant back.)

Both Obama and Clinton have been on Fox News many times...but Bill O'Reilly is in a different league, in terms of viewership, of distortion, and vitriol, than the rest of the network. If Fox News is evil incarnate, then Bill O'Reilly is the Prince of Darkness. I object to Clinton going on that show, and THEN using it as a forum to attack other Democrats. She played right into their hands, for her own self-serving purposes. I don't dispute she's intelligent, or well-spoken, or knowledgeable on the issues, or smart about positioning herself as a conservative Democrat. I like her for all of those things. But her inability to find any shred of human decency when it comes to Obama is appalling, and it reveals her true character.

As for reasons to vote for Hillary, "To Win The Whitehouse [sic] back!" is not going to cut it for me. If there are no substantive difference between her and McCain ethically, I can't see how she'd lead the country to a better place. Sure, her policy differences with McCain might be significant at first sight. But with no ethical backbone, no sense of what's right and fair...how can we ever trust her to implement ANYTHING progressive? Have we all forgotten how Bill Clinton sold the gay community down the river in 1992, the moment things got tough? If she is the ambitious, win-at-all-costs political creature of these primaries, then political expediency is all we can truly expect from her.

And to be clear: I'm not suggesting that anyone vote for McCain. He's a disaster for the nation. My sadness comes from realizing who Hillary really is, and realizing there's not much difference between them.

And to be even clearer: if you think this is mere "whining," you're not paying attention.

WILL: I'll take your "reasons to vote for Clinton" one by one, although again, no one said to vote for McCain over her. (I'm suggesting a third-party or independent vote, if Clinton is the nominee.

1) The Supreme Court. I've got no faith that a conservative Democrat like Hillary will choose progressive judges. I want a better Supreme Court, but I don't believe Hillary is the answer to that.

2) Gay rights. If you seriously think Hillary will give gays equal rights, you are quite naive. Neither she (or Obama, or McCain) will give the gay community much more than election-year lip service.

3) The Iraq quagmire. Hillary has contradictory statements about withdrawal, but she might get us out faster than McCain. Whether that helps or hurts the "quagmire" is up to you. But no serious anti-war voter can choose anyone but Obama. Any other option supports Bush's decision process, and our continued occupation.

4) Depletion of the environment. If I believed that this was a priority for Hillary, I'd be dancing on the ceiling. But she hasn't given it any serious attention to date. Her policies are sound...but my faith in her willingness to achieve them is not.

5/1/08, 2:36 PM  
Blogger will g said...

Believe me, I'm no Clinton supporter (okay, don't believe me) and I UNDERSTAND. However, weak as my faith may be in her, weak is better than none at all. I KNOW that McCain will continue failed Republican policies and find some new ones of his own to placate the conservatives who don't like him. Please don't waste your vote!

5/1/08, 5:54 PM  
Blogger Dr. S said...

That cracking you hear off in the distance, far to the east? That's the sound of my heart breaking as this whole thing--which I had hoped would be so triumphant, after the craptastic past eight years we've had--gets uglier and uglier. Meanwhile, young, smart, ethical, innovative potential leaders are, one by one, continue crossing "politician" off their lists of desired professions.

5/1/08, 5:58 PM  
Blogger Keith a.k.a. K j A M said...

ModFab, I continue to read this and other blogs because I enjoy some of the insights and input on a variety of other issues besides politics. You and I are about the same age and share many of the same experiences. As I stated before, we are not far apart in our views, but to intentionally prevent any Democrat from winning the Whitehouse is just plain dumb if not immature. Sure I could spend all my time at Gaysocialites.com, but for what? This guy has a hard on for Hillary, doesn’t allow comments, thus dissenting points of view and his information and statistics are painfully skewed. Not to mention he blew several episodes of ‘Big Brother’ for which he cannot be forgiven. If you go to my blog, you’ll see a long list of other gay blogs I enjoy reading frequently.

Before I respond to your list of reasons not to vote for Hillary based on your own logic, let me just point out that Obama has no record of EVER reaching across to Republicans to achieve a common interest or goal, something that will be required when in office unless you have better than a 2/3 majority in both houses (highly unlikely). That alone suggests he WILL have some major problems in trying to get his agenda passed. Also, keep in mind ‘The President’ can never realistically deliver on ALL of their campaign promises.

You said:

1) The Supreme Court. I've got no faith that a conservative Democrat like Hillary will choose progressive judges. I want a better Supreme Court, but I don't believe Hillary is the answer to that.

Me: Don’t kid yourself. Hillary and Bill are bleeding heart liberals to the core. Just because they lead from the center, doesn’t mean she won’t do everything possible to ensure Roe v. Wade isn’t upheld. Remember what I said, you need a 2/3 majority or you’ll have to compromise (another compelling reason we should ALL get out and vote come November no matter who the nominee is). And yes, character and judgment will come into play during the selection process.

2) Gay rights. If you seriously think Hillary will give gays equal rights, you are quite naive. Neither she (or Obama, or McCain) will give the gay community much more than election-year lip service.

Me: Fair enough. At least you admit that it’s all a sham no matter who we support. However, I don’t think for one second she would ever sign a bill like the “Defensive Marriage Act” into law. Extending Gay rights is a political HOT button when it comes to marriage. However, I do believe that she or even Obama would repeal the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy from her husband’s administration. The need for additional soldiers and the clear argument that one could make is obvious. We are increasingly allowing felons to serve in the military because a draft would be political suicide for the Republicans. The military already has soldiers serving 18 month tours, which is outrageous! On average, 923 good men and women removed from their positions, solely because they are gay, while increasingly admitting known felons into the military (many with violent backgrounds) is plain stupid. I think a clear case could be made for the military to move into the twenty-first century with countries like Israel, where every soldier counts (gay, straight, male or female). I definitely see this one coming.

3) The Iraq quagmire. Hillary has contradictory statements about withdrawal, but she might get us out faster than McCain. Whether that helps or hurts the "quagmire" is up to you. But no serious anti-war voter can choose anyone but Obama. Any other option supports Bush's decision process, and our continued occupation.

Me: Are you fucking serious? You really believe that Obama is going to just go in and yank everybody out within 6 months just like Nixon did in Vietnam? Do you remember what happened after that? Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese who sympathized with the U.S. were slaughtered. Maybe you remember an Oscar winning film about the very same subject called “The Killing Fields”. Why would you think Iraq would be any different? I like you have NEVER been for Bush’s stupid-ass war, but let’s be reasonable. There are a lot of innocent people involved. I think whoever wins (with the exception of McCain who has already made up his mind) will base their decision(s) on a variety of information from a variety of government sources before doing anything stupid. However, I do believe that Iraq’s government needs to get their shit together so we CAN set a FIRM timetable that would allow us to reasonably begin withdrawal, thus putting the Iraqi government on notice.

4) Depletion of the environment. If I believed that this was a priority for Hillary, I'd be dancing on the ceiling. But she hasn't given it any serious attention to date. Her policies are sound...but my faith in her willingness to achieve them is not.

And you base this on what? The next president will be in a unique position to go down in the history books for their leadership (not just because they were the first African American or a woman). Investing in the technology that will set the standard for fuel, energy, water and transportation all the while helping the country lift itself out of a recession would be an amazing feat, but it CAN be done. Providing incentives to states that mandate new homes meet “green” standards. Ensuring that all Federal buildings meet the same requirements would go a long way towards the education and understanding of the need to protect our most valuable asset, the environment. Provide tax breaks to existing homeowners and businesses that retrofit their home/business to meet environmental standards. Rebuilding this country’s infrastructure (roads, bridges etc.), the realistic possibility of desalinization of the oceans already overflowing water and then storing it, and yes that nasty word, Nuclear Technology would not only set us on the right path but put people to work and move this country back to a strong economy. These are the things we should get behind and push the next presidency towards. And before someone goes off on nuclear energy, there are multiple sound options for recycling the waste. Most are not employed, because of the costs involved. With the building of several new plants in states where the energy source is most beneficial, it would be possible to maintain an onsite facility for recycling without the need to transport to another location. The options are wide open.

In short, whoever receives, begs, borrows or steals the nomination, better have a strategy in place to get their agenda passed quickly but intelligently. You can rest assure, whatever that agenda is, there will be bickering from the Republicans as well as within the party. That person will HAVE to maintain excellent negotiating skills to get the job done.

Now, because I’m not really trying to be a thorn in your side, I promise not to say another word on politics (at least on this blog : ) until after June 3rd. Though it won’t be easy, I’ll just bite my tongue until then. Carry on my fellow Gaymocrats!

5/1/08, 6:28 PM  
Blogger ModFab said...

Keith, say whatever you want. I have problems with Blogger's comment approval system from time to time, but I don't purposefully delete any except profanity and spam. I feel strongly that I should be able to take whatever any smart commenters dish out. So no need to keep quiet on my account.

Your points:

KEITH: "To intentionally prevent any Democrat from winning the Whitehouse is just plain dumb if not immature."

MODFAB: I'd agree with you...if I thought any Democrat was better than any Republican. I'm not sure I believe that anymore. This has little to do with my support for Obama, actually...it's seeing that Clinton is as ethically empty as Karl Rove. Sure, she might make a few decent policy decisions while in office...but I think the country is fundamentally broken, and needs an overhaul. She isn't interested in what I want. Period. And therefore, I have to look around at third party candidates and see if there's someone I CAN believe in, because if it's McCain vs. Clinton, I can't in good conscience vote for either of them.

KEITH: Obama has no record of EVER reaching across to Republicans to achieve a common interest or goal, something that will be required when in office unless you have better than a 2/3 majority in both houses (highly unlikely).

MODFAB: Wrong. Dead wrong. Here's the proof:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200803280011

KEITH: Hillary and Bill are bleeding heart liberals to the core. Just because they lead from the center, doesn’t mean she won’t do everything possible to ensure Roe v. Wade isn’t upheld.

MODFAB: I don't see liberal or progressive politics in Hillary's record or legislative priorities. And if the only test of liberalism is upholding Roe v. Wade, the bar has been set incredibly low. It's safe to say that Obama (and maybe even McCain) will uphold Roe.

KEITH: However, I don’t think for one second she would ever sign a bill like the “Defensive Marriage Act” into law.

MODFAB: I'd count on it. We'll just have to see. But it's not a given that she'll be pro-gay in a legislative sense. She's good at talking, but it's all talk at this point. Obama, on the other hand, has advertised in the gay press and made some very clear and measurable policy choices.

KEITH: I like you have NEVER been for Bush’s stupid-ass war, but let’s be reasonable. There are a lot of innocent people involved. I think whoever wins (with the exception of McCain who has already made up his mind) will base their decision(s) on a variety of information from a variety of government sources before doing anything stupid.

MODFAB: Again, you've got faith in her. I don't. She's proven to me, time and time again, that I can't believe her. Maybe she will get us out of Iraq. Or maybe she won't. Maybe she'll be smart about it. Or maybe she won't. With her, I have no faith.

KEITH: In short, whoever receives, begs, borrows or steals the nomination...

MODFAB: I love the way you parse words, Keith, but here's the truth: Obama is ahead. He will stay ahead through the end of the primaries. He will be ahead in every way that the official rulebook says you should be. He has played fair, by the rules, by the book. And he is the leader.

ANY scenario that changes the rules mid-stream (that all campaigns agreed to in advance) is an abuse of democratic process. Period. So only one person can "beg, borrow or steal" this nomination. Period.

5/1/08, 7:28 PM  
Blogger John T said...

I'm not going to get into the discourse above (right now, I voted several months ago, for Hillary, and I'm going with the Democratic nominee in the end, which will be Obama, so I'm good there), partially because I don't think I could ever be as eloquent as ModFab, and it's too late in the night to try.

However, I do think that saying she's worse than Lieberman is a terrible stretch and quite below the belt. The man has endorsed McCain, has turned his back on a lifetime of liberals who have supported him, and his views on Iraq are getting scarier than Cheney's.

5/1/08, 11:36 PM  
Blogger Keith a.k.a. K j A M said...

ModFab, you don't need to post this.

I agree to disagree with one exception: Obama reaching across party lines..you got me there.

If you could extract one important message from that mess I wrote, it would be to VOTE in November. In an effort to ease the next President's ability to make substantial change, we want our guy/gal to maintain a majority in both houses. Encouraging dissent, serves no purpose other than to continue what seems like an eternity of conservatism.

5/2/08, 5:54 AM  
Blogger ModFab said...

I understand what you're saying, Keith...and I respect it. I felt the same way you do, until sometime last weekend. I was ready to be a good little soldier and line up behind the Democrat, whoever it was. I did it with Dukakis, Clinton (1 and 2), Gore and Kerry.

But it's different now. I really feel that the whole system of America needs an overhaul; that's what drew me to Obama in the first place. (Whether he is that change I'm seeking is yet to be seen, but at least he seems to have lived it to this point in his life.) Clinton has revealed, over the last four months, how much a creature of old-school politics she is, I realize that my need for "Democratic unity" might simply mean "more of the same"...that, in fact, I couldn't trust Hillary to do the right thing any more than I can trust McCain.

It saddens me to write that sentence. You have no idea how much I loved the Clintons, and in such high esteem. I feel like I'm seeing heroes turn out to be charlatans.

But if I truly believe what I've been railing about on this blog (much to many's dismay), I have to vote with my principles. I have to do what I think can save our country from oblivion. I have to vote for leaders that will get us out of our mess, not keep us in it. And since Clinton has proven to me with her recent actions that she is NOT that leader, I have to go find one to vote for.

I realize this course of action, if pursued by enough people, might cost Hillary the presidency, and give it to McCain. But if enough people follow their conscience, maybe we can change the course of the country. Maybe a legitimate third way can rise.

If it's Clinton vs. McCain, that's all I really have to hope for.

5/2/08, 10:58 AM  
Blogger Jill said...

I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so. :) Like you, I can no longer see this woman as the lesser of two evils, not when she's so damned EAGER to be John McCain in drag (no disrespect to anyone who does drag WELL, but SHE does not). For a while I thought the Supreme Court was the kicker, but now I am not even convinced that her justices will be one iota less batshit crazy than McCain's, And if you read about her ties to The Fellowship, she's even more of a card-carrying member of the Christofascist Zombie Brigate (™ Marc Maron) than McCain is.

She is an absolute, unmitigated disaster. And by the way, I have gotten on the shit list of just about the entire so-called feminist blogosphere because I've said so. Sorry, but not all middle-aged women think this dame is somehow "our girl." She is a shandeh for any woman who ever decides to do this again; she's ruining it for everyone.

Like you, I hate to agree with Huckster on anything (and it GALLS me to no end that the man is a bass player). But I think with Wright the situation is threefold: 1) He's jealous of this younger man who's going to reap the rewards of that for which he sees his own generation as laying the groundwork; 2) he's a complete narcissist; and 3) What Huck Said.

But what really gets my goat is that Obama's crazy pastor supersedes all other issues in the news media (and I think that's why Rachel Maddow felt she needed two days away from the lunacy at MSNBC this last week), but John McCain's even crazier spiritual advisors get a completely free pass.

5/3/08, 9:20 PM  
Blogger Jill said...

One more thing: Hey, Keith, while you're spouting Clintonian talking points about Moveon.org, do you by any chance recall why Moveon.org was formed?

IT WAS TO DEFEND HER HUSBAND AGAINST A RIDICULOUS IMPEACHMENT ATTEMPT. "Censure and Move On" was the full name at the time. But of course that's just too inconvenient when she's trying to throw the entire Democratic Party base under the bus.

5/3/08, 9:22 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home