My mom, who lives in Mumbai, India, has trouble understanding American politics. Recently she asked me to give her a brief summary of what's going on.
I explained, "There are two parties in American politics. There is a stupid party and there is an evil party."
In an attempt to put my own cards on the table, I confessed, "I am a proud member of the stupid party."
Then I added, "Sometimes, American politicians do things that are both stupid and evil. Those things we call bipartisanship."
I was kidding, of course, but the humor arises out of the element of truth in this description. Consider the charge of stupidity. Would the Republican Party be in the confused state it is now if Bush had appointed a vice president who was electable and actually sought the nomination?
I'm not saying Bush shouldn't have appointed Cheney the first time around. Cheney inspires irrational and paranoid loathing on the left--he's Darth Vader for the Michael Moore set--and this alone was good reason to keep him reasonably close to the Oval Office, not to mention the nuclear arsenal.
But when Bush ran for re-election, he should have sent Cheney packing. Then the GOP would have an heir apparent who would have an inside track to the nomination and who could claim up-close experience in the responsibilities of governance. If Bush had done this, he would have shown both foresight and concern about the future of the GOP.
Now let's turn to the evil party. What other term is appropriate to describe a party where Ted Kennedy's endorsement is actually counted as a positive? This is the moral equivalent of Republican candidates rushing to make campaign commercials with Larry Craig. Notice how the moral scoundrels in the GOP are typically hounded out while the moral scoundrels in the Democratic party generally continue to enjoy their prestige and good standing.
Any party with a sense of decency would ignore and marginalize Ted Kennedy. Besides, what constituency does this man represent? Is it really that important to lock in the votes of dissolute, philandering seniors who still go down to Florida for Spring break?
So here's the situation. Kennedy offers his blessings to Obama and offers to say some black masses for him. Meanwhile, Hillary's camp claims that Obama turned away while Hillary was shaking Kennedy's hand because she is a woman.
Given the irrelevance of gender to this situation, the Hillary team's reaction is downright comic. Yet the shrews at the National Organization for Women are echoing the cries of sexism from the Hillary camp. All that remains is for Obama to counter with the race card and accuse Hillary of making such charges because he is black.
As the election gets closer, I'll try to give my mom a more detailed account of the issues at stake. But I think I've given her enough to keep her informed, and entertained, at least through the primaries.
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 37)
31. Since DInesh's mom is in India, I must therefore conclude that she is an untouchable.
There, dd, you see how stupid and harmful your pathetic generalities and prejudices are???
America's Most Gangsta at 11:33AM on Jan 30th 2008
32. brian -
Going back over your post, is the 3o million you mentioned as best estimate from the beginning of humanity? Were the 3000 deaths in Iraq for the month?
Latest data I could find on abortions in the US is from a 2000 report from the CDC. I hope you were able to find newer data. Some of that report is:
"Results: A total of 857,475 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC for 2000 from 49 reporting areas, representing a 0.5% decrease from the 861,789 legal induced abortions reported by 48 reporting areas for 1999 and a 1.3% decrease for the same 48 reporting areas that reported in 1999. The abortion ratio, defined as the number of abortions per 1,000 live births, was 246 in 2000 (for the same 48 reporting areas as 1999), compared with 256 reported for 1999. This represents a 3.8% decline in the abortion ratio. The abortion rate (for the same 48 reporting areas as 1999) was 16 per 1,000 women aged 15--44 years for 2000. This was also a 3.8% decrease from the rate reported for procedures performed during 1997--1999 for the same 48 reporting areas."
I came up with an Iraq death count of about 3000 for each month from the Washington Post.
"In March, a total of 2,762 Iraqi civilians and policemen were killed, down 4 percent from the previous month, when 2,864 were killed."
alan at 11:36AM on Jan 30th 2008
33. Would that be a party at your house Mr.D'Souza?
Patty at 12:02PM on Jan 30th 2008
34. alan, I was just going to mention that to you. brian's abortion number includes all abortions since the 1970s. Between the AGI and the CDC, we are looking at somewhere aroud 1.3 million annually. This includes medical abortions.
The 30K Iraqi death toll is a long refuted lie. Surveys within Iaq show the number of deaths due to violence at around 600,000 with another 50,000 or so resulting from diseases due to poor conditions. brian always lies. (or repeats what some other liar said..."polly wanna cracker!")
emma at 11:49AM on Jan 30th 2008
35. Emma,
Billions of colonies of innocent bacteria are callously massacred by 'cleansing' products every day. Who knows what potential these unicellular wonders could have evolved into. They are life too. Bacterial Rights! Sanitizers and Listerine are MURDER!
Why don't we pass laws to keep dihydrogen monoxide out of reach of children?
PS: I've decided to take the director's chair from John Carpenter and give it to James Cameron.
Mokele-Mobembe at 11:58AM on Jan 30th 2008
36. 4. alan,
let me answer your queerie, jesus does not ride the backs of donkeys or elephants. thats said, i suppose its possible for a democrate to be christian. its a stretch as i see it, but it is possible. the democratice party is the party of death. take abortion. they want to cloak the murder of the unborn behind a mask called choice. when the gruesome details of partial birth abortion were to be shown on the senate floor the demoncrats objected. they did not want to"see" the gruesome nature of what they stood for. they wanted to keep the lid shut. thank goodness the republicans prevailed. now when we get atilla the hun in the white house a dare say any and all abortions will be legal. again the demoncrats are largely the death squad in disguise. really, i know some democrats who are christians. but when you confront them about these issuews its "deer in the headlights"look. its about money. its all its ever ben about. the democrats want to take and redistribute wealth and call themselves generous. pathetic.
brian at 9:20AM on Jan 30th 2008
*************
This entire comment is so incredibly rich, and hypocritical and ridiculous, it would actually be funny if it were not so sad. These well-rehearsed statements coming from individuals belonging to the party of “Love the fetus, Hate the child” are sickening at best heinous and vicious at their worst!
Are we to believe that Democratic Party is the only party of murderous people? Really, now are some dishonest pots calling the kettle, black? Do tell who is for the death penalty, Chicken Hawks loving wars, even those that are immoral. Health care for children, are you kidding us? Hey, we need our $$$ for War and for tax cuts for huge corporations and oil companies.
Before we start judging each other, I think we all need to take a good look inside, be honest with ourselves and see that there is both good and bad everywhere and with everyone.
Patty at 12:02PM on Jan 30th 2008
37. AMG,
"Since Dinesh's mom is in India, I must therefore conclude that she is an untouchable."
Dinesh exists, so someone must have touched her. Did I just cross a line?
Mokele-Mobembe at 12:01PM on Jan 30th 2008
38. Thanks emma.
alan at 12:02PM on Jan 30th 2008
39. M-M,
Yes, unfortunately, Dinesh does indeed exist. But NO, you have not crossed the line....not my line anyway.
America's Most Gangsta at 12:31PM on Jan 30th 2008
40. I really don't see why DD considers liberals/Democrats "evil." I mean, really? Why? What have we done that's evil? Is it that we think if two adult men want to have sex behind closed doors, who are we to stop them? Is it because we feel women have a right to decide what to do concerning their bodies? Is it because we think every man, woman, and child should have access to the best healthcare they can receive?
I belong to a childfree community on LJ. A while back during the "partial birth abortion" craziness, one member posted a story about a woman who was carry a fetus that she intended to keep. However, it died in her womb around (I think) 7 months into the pregnancy. The woman was forced to carry the dead fetus in her womb until she could deliver the dead baby, because she could not legally get an abortion. How fucked up is that? Why do men think they even have a say when it comes to women's choices about their bodies? People like brian make me sick.
K at 12:35PM on Jan 30th 2008
41. I believe brian's 3000 number is only americans killed. For him and those of his ilk, coalition members or lord forbid Iraqis don't really count as humans.
Dennis at 12:40PM on Jan 30th 2008
42. Dennis, thanks. It never even crossed my mind that someone would NOT count the total death toll!
In that case, maybe we need to deduct all the abortions by those who live here, but are not citizens....
Man, brian's twisted logic turns my stomach, especially when combined with his horrible spelling and grammar skills!
emma at 12:50PM on Jan 30th 2008
43. #40 - K - While I agree with your position, I have to disbelieve the example story. If a fetus had died in the womb, it would have aborted on its own. Even if it hadn't, the decay process would have killed the mother.
Posters on both sides of an issue should be careful with their facts. Those on the "other" side will seize upon them to negate any positive points made. Note the fate of brian.
alan at 1:11PM on Jan 30th 2008
44. Dinesh,
Your analysis of the GOP's problems hinge on your belief that Bush actually had the power to name his own VP. Do you honestly believe that? Just wondering.
Anyway, Cheney is just one of the problems of the GOP. He's not the biggest--that's the unpopular war. Or maybe you're saying that Cheney and war go together like peanut butter and chocolate? hey, now you're making sense!
I agree with you that Ted Kennedy is irrelevant. But it would do no good for a young candidate, eager to establish credibility, to alienate the old guard, either.
best,
mw
whitem at 4:26PM on Jan 30th 2008
45. Alan, I realized that after I posted it but I was on my way out the door for lunchies. I will try to find the article.
K at 1:30PM on Jan 30th 2008