Post-game analysis

I’ve been reading a lot the past few days about the campaign, election night, demographics, and post-election freakouts. Cut me some slack, guys. It’s my thing. Or one of them, at least.

Here is a great read called How a Race in the Balance Went to Obama, which appeared in the New York Times. I enjoyed it a lot, and I look forward to a book about this campaign. It fascinated me on a couple of levels.

First, the demographics and campaign strategies were just amazing to me. Team Obama built a database of potential voters, and targeted them for registration based on algorithms they had developed to find people who might support Obama. They registered hundreds of thousands of new voters in this manner. I believe that both the 2008 and 2012 Obama campaigns will be studied as models of how to run a campaign. I don’t blame President Obama for getting choked up when thanking his team...they were awesome in the truest sense of the word. Their strategy was almost flawless: build the narrative of Romney being an out-of-touch plutocrat in the summer, when Romney was still trying to regroup and refresh the coffers after a brutal primary campaign. It worked very well.

The demographics are also fascinating. No real surprises, other than minorities, women, and youth expanding enough to offset the slight loss of Obama’s white supporters. Hispanic voters were HUGE in this election, coming out strong for Obama, and that lesson seems to have sunk in almost immediately with the Republicans, as moderate voices like Sean Hannity—hahaha I just cracked myself up there!—admitted that they need to rethink their hard stance on immigration. The truly big story here is that many conservative voices are saying that they really need to consider being more inclusive. Gee, do ya think? They’ve been all, “Yeah, we think 47% of you guys are takers and moochers, we don’t want all of you to have the right to marry that MOST of us do, and we think all you women who want birth control are a bunch of sluts...but hey, can we count on your vote?” What the hell?! It’s kind of funny when you think about it.

It’s that sort of disconnect from reality that brings me to my second point about what really struck me in my reading. I recall reading on election day that Romney told reporters that he had only prepared one speech: a victory speech. I figured it was just a show of bravado, trying to project confidence as the polls started closing and the votes started being tallied. Not so. He really had not prepared any sort of a concession speech, because he really thought he was going to win. By all accounts, he was completely gobsmacked by his rather decisive loss, as were his wife, his running mate and his wife, not to mention his staff and supporters. They ALL thought he was going to win.

I’m really not sure what was going on there. Was their internal polling really that bad? Did they just choose not to believe all the external polling? Did he really feel that sort of inevitability—as Ann put it, “It’s our turn”? Did his campaign try to hide the bad polling results from him, or brush them off as invalid? To what end? Did the ClusterFox spin delude millions of Americans? (That last one was a rhetorical question.) It all smacks of gross incompetence to me. And I’m seeing so much of this denial of reality happening lately. If you don’t like a poll result, ignore it. If your personal beliefs don’t allow the possibility of evolution, ignore thousands of books and scientific papers and hours of research on it. No no no...don’t read them! That’s dangerous. Better to just ignore them. If you don’t like the facts of something, or a truthful quote on the matter, just say, “I don’t believe it.”

I have honestly never seen such an obstinate refusal to accept facts, math, and reality. There is very much a tendency to lash out at those who have been an advocate of reality all along; just ask Nate Silver. I’ve seen people lash out at me for providing facts. As someone who kinda digs rational thought and thinks that reality is the best place to be, this is very bizarre to me.

I would say that the Republican party needs to do more than start relenting on the immigration issue. They need to grow a pair and start repudiating those within their ranks who dismiss science, rationality, and reason. Stop kowtowing to these voices of unreason within their own party, and stop treating anyone who isn’t a white male as “the other.” I would think this would go without saying, but...there I go again. Being all rational and junk.

Hit me baby, one more time

Ahhh, what a glorious evening was last night, and what an enjoyable day today.

I’m tired, because I was so wired last night that I was up until 4 am. I did next to nothing today, other than reading through the analyses and various takes on what happened, the demographics, and so forth. I kept the TV off all day, I didn’t feel like talking to anyone, and I just enjoyed the moment as I read my fill. I didn’t even spend a whole lot of time on Facebook, reading various reactions. I needed the time to regroup, take it all in, and let out the mental breath I’d been holding for about two freakin’ years! Whew!

I gave myself 24 hours to gloat, and I’ve posted a few items today that were definitely of that ilk. I’m not a mean-spirited person, for the most part, but I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t ecstatic that President Obama not only won four more years, but did so by beating one of the most cynical, mendacious candidates I’ve seen in some time. There have been times when I felt rather sorry for a losing candidate; I even had a twinge of that in 2008, because despite my anger at McCain for foisting the Grifter Palin upon us, he gave a decent and honorable concession speech.

Not so Romney. For some reason, he refused to make the phone call to President Obama for about an hour and a half after the race had already been called by the networks (if not Karl Rove, haha). When Romney finally did give his speech, I found it to be perfunctory and stiff, and it reeked of the attitude that he truly felt that he was entitled to win, and in fact, believed up until the end that he would. Most accounts say that he had not written a concession speech, only a victory speech. I believe this might be a classic case of hubris and nemesis. I can cut him some slack on the tone of it, I suppose; it’s not easy to lose. However, McCain (as well as Hillary Clinton, when she conceded the Democratic nomination to Obama) showed that concession speeches can be gracious and that the person who didn’t win can do so with decency and strength. Romney’s concession speech showed little of that.

It’s all a moot point, of course. Mittens is toast. I would be very surprised if he runs for office again. The endless parsing of the votes and the breakdown of the demographics have already begun. (Note to Republicans: your white guy base is dwindling.) It’s been fascinating to watch not only the demographics, but the hilarious freak-outs of various right wing pundits and “celebrities.” Donald “The Dorito” [thanks for the nickname, Holly!] Trump called for a revolution (at least until someone apparently told him that that might be considered treason, and he removed that tweet), batshit crazy bobblehead Victoria Jackson cried that America had died, and pants-shitting draft dodger Ted Nugent called Obama supporters pimps, whores, welfare brats, and “subhuman varmints.” I would like to give the Republican party a word of advice: until you start condemning these wingnuts, calling them out for their hyperbole and hatred, and start signalling that you do not find such rhetoric acceptable, you are going to continue to hemorrhage supporters. As long as you continue to build your coalition on white, conservative, religious-motivated voters, you will continue to hemorrhage supporters. And unless you let go of your death grip on your bibles and your religious-based social attitudes, you will continue to hemorrhage supporters. Don’t believe me? Fine. Just keep going the way you’re going. In about a decade or so, we’ll see how that is going for you, okay?

Another interesting takeaway from this was the rise of the statistics gurus. My own “personal” guru (at least the one I’ve been reading since the last election) is Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight blog. For the past three months or so, it has been a daily check for me. It’s even become a joke among liberals who were wigging out about Obama’s chances for re-election: Keep calm and check Nate Silver. Nate took a lot of flak from the right wing pundits (and even a few on the left) who felt that gut instinct would triumph over statistics and math. Peggy Noonan (insert Seinfeldian ‘Noooonan’ here) based her declaration that it was going to be an overwhelming victory for Romney on seeing lots of Romney yard signs in a particular neighborhood. Mm-hm. Maybe they feel that their jobs are threatened? No worries...the world will always need talking heads. But the complete refusal of so many to accept the polls and/or the math—and even the reality—was rather mind-boggling to me. Nate, who bases his statistical model on all the polls that are taken, both nationally and statewide, was fully and completely vindicated when he successfully predicted the outcome of every single state. (Florida still hasn’t been called, but it seems that Obama is going to win it.) In the last two elections, that makes him 99/100 when it comes to calling the states. I think a whole lot of people owe Nate Silver a big fucking apology today!

As for predictions, I made mine back in early September, with a political email group I am involved with. Here was mine:

Obama 326

Romney 212

Obama wins OH, PA, WI, CO, NV, VA, FL, NH

Romney wins NC, IA, MO

The only one I got wrong was Iowa. If I had made my prediction more recently, I would have put Iowa in the Obama camp, as well, but that’s the problem with making your prediction so early on! Again, they haven’t called Florida yet, but it looks likely Obama. When that happens, it will be Obama 332, Romney 206. I’m more than a little pleased with myself! But I owe it all to Nate Silver. So for those who kicked sand in Nate’s face, just stop it, you guys! Leave Nate alone!

So that’s that. This concludes my period of gloating, and now I’m ready to move on and help to make shit happen. I don’t wish Mitt Romney or his family any ill, but I can honestly say that I’m very glad he lost. I did not find him a likable candidate, nor an honorable one. (Please note that I specifically used the word ‘candidate,’ not ‘person.’ I don’t know him as a person, so I don’t feel that I can make that inference.) There is plenty of work to be done, and I hope that our legislative branch will get off their asses and start doing it. I foresee many letters and emails in my future, as I try to keep their feet to the fire.

After all, we all want what is best for the country, right? I think we can all agree on that. We might disagree on how to go about it, but as Joe Biden said in his debate with Paul Ryan, “Facts matter, Martha.” Just ask Nate Silver.

Fear turns to loathing

I’m sitting here with my foot elevated, because like an idiot I wasn’t paying attention to what I was doing today, and missed an entire step going out into the garage. I seem to have given myself a mild ankle sprain. It hurts like a mother, and I’m doing my best to make sure I can handle some walking tomorrow, because we have a chance to see Notre Dame go 9-0 by beating Pitt! So I’ve iced, wrapped, elevated, and Advil’d, and I’m hoping that it will be okay enough that I can handle the walking tomorrow. Maybe we need to buy a little wagon, and Ken can pull me behind him! I just laughed at that mental image.

Anyway, this is a good time to do an update. This could very well be the last one I make before the election, so I’ll try to make it a good one. I’ll warn you that I am pissed, so proceed at your own risk.

Before I get to that, let me say that I’m thinking of the people on the East Coast, and sending special thoughts for several friends who have had to deal with Sandy and her aftermath. Our good friend Raquel, in particular, is having a rough time of it, as she lives in the Village and has been without power since the storm hit. She’s been able to go on walkabout to charge her phone and find wifi, so has let us all know that she and her Mom are okay. She has also maintained her sense of humor, and I don’t feel ashamed to say that she embodies all that I love about New York and New Yorkers: tough, but with a heart of gold. Love you, Raquel, and I hope they’re right about you getting your power back TONIGHT!

Having said that, I’ll segue into why I’m pissed. While President Obama was busy getting shit done, looking all presidential and junk, and meeting with his new BFF New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, Romney was left twiddling his thumbs. Out of decency, he canceled his campaign events. Well...sort of. He decided to go ahead with a rally in the quaint little village of Kettering, Ohio, but changed it from a campaign rally to a “victory rally.” Ostensibly, it was to help raise supplies and funds for hurricane victims. A couple of things, though. A) The Red Cross specifically says on their website to NOT send food or clothing. It takes up too many of their resources to sort and catalog the items, and a monetary donation is absolutely the best way to help the organization and the people it is trying to assist. But ol’ Mittens is like the honey badger. He doesn’t give a shit. So he collected items and talked about how they were going to box them all up and drive them to a donation site. And 2) because this was a last-minute shift in focus, they wanted to make sure it looked like they were rolling in item donations, so the campaign went to Walmart and spent five grand buying supplies to stack on tables. When people were told that they needed an item to donate in order to gain admittance to the rally and said they hadn’t brought anything, they were told to “grab something off the table” and then present it as their donation.

I honestly don’t know when I’ve seen such crass opportunism as Romney and his campaign are displaying. This even trumps (HA! Get it??) the Paul Ryan “I’m barging into this soup kitchen and washing clean dishes whether you like it or not” moment. As I’ve written before, I’ve got a super duper double viper Bullshit-O-Meter, and this entire campaign reeks of bullshittery.

But THAT isn’t what pissed me off the most, believe it or not! What really did it for me, and sent me from fearing what Romney’s policies would do to our country and the economy and actively disliking his  persona into the realm of genuinely loathing the man is another Ohio-related incident.

He told the crowd at a rally in northern Ohio that he “saw a story” about how Chrysler is thinking of moving all Jeep production to China. This, in a state that relies heavily on the auto industry. GM and Chrysler spokespeople immediately responded saying that that couldn’t be further from the truth; what they ARE thinking about doing is expanding production in China, which indicates a sign of health for the companies. They are not closing any U.S. production facilities. Even the Chrysler CEO had to weigh in and say no, this is completely untrue.

But Mitt the Honey Badger don’t care. He released TV and radio ads repeating the exact same BIG FAT LIE. This, despite immediate and forceful refutation from the companies themselves.

So what was it about that that pissed me off so much? He needlessly scared people. Panicked workers were calling into their workplaces wondering if they were still going to have a job. In a state where the auto industry means so much—and unemployment is lower than the national average, thanks to the auto bailout—he was purposefully trying to frighten people. What kind of an asshole does that?? These are people who are worried about their families and their livelihood, and he’s scaring the bejeebus out of them in order to score cheap political points.

All those people who think he’s an honorable man? Do you want to change your answer? To me, an honorable person doesn’t pull such a cynical, asshole move on people who are scared. An honorable person does their best to reassure those who are hurting and scared, and works his ass off to get them the help that they need (please scroll up to see that picture again).

Well, if there is any sort of redeeming aspect to this, it is that his actions and words speak of desperation. I am not taking anything for granted, but these are not the tactics of someone who is winning. They are those of someone who is losing.

As well as the tactics of someone who is a Loser. Capital L Loser.

For a little comic relief, please enjoy this clip from “The Daily Show” that had both me and Ken laughing out loud...especially the end!

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Excoriated

In my previous entry, I wrote about why I support President Obama. In this entry, I’m going to write about why I do not support Mitt Romney.

I could go into detail about the many of his policies with which I disagree, or about how I disagree on a very basic level with his vision of our country, especially concerning those who are less fortunate; I could also talk about his embrace of trickle-down economics, even though that cute little experiment has failed miserably for going on four decades now. Honestly, what does it take to get people to understand that lower tax rates don’t create jobs and drive the economy? It’s all about demand for goods and services. So there are deep philosophical differences I have with Governor Romney.

But as I was thinking about all of this, I realized that I could distill my dislike for Romney into one simple phrase: he lacks a core.

He may have that when it comes to his faith, and he probably has it when it comes to his family. When it comes to policies, however, he has no core. We’ve seen his frequent changes over the years in almost everything he’s dealt with. NBC published a fairly lengthy article on Romney’s changes on foreign policy over the years. And that is just foreign policy! It doesn’t include his many changing stances on marriage equality, abortion, and as far as I can tell, virtually every other issue he has encountered in his entire political life. As the saying goes, you’ve got to stand for something, or you’ll fall for anything.

This goes beyond simple evolution of stances on issues; I think we all grow and learn and change as we get more experience. For example, I’ve written before about my change from supporting civil unions only to full-on support for marriage equality. However, you won’t see me changing my stance on that again...ever. That was the culmination of years of thought, the exchange of ideas, and simply knowing and loving several gay people over the course of years. No...Romney’s changes happen frequently, and oddly enough, seem to coincide with his political campaigns. As candidate for Governor and Senator of the decidedly liberal Massachusetts, he took a moderate, even left-of-center stance; in the presidential primaries, he moved far to the right according to the dictates of the far-right factions of today’s Republican party; as the Republican nominee, he is distancing himself from those remarks—some made just weeks ago!—in order to court the moderates and independents. His head is spinning faster than Linda Blair’s in “The Exorcist.”

I can appreciate the changes that people experience in their lives and that cause their stances on issues to evolve. What I can’t appreciate, and actually abhor, is anyone who engages in crass attempts to change the core of their convictions based on popular opinion, or based on what particular bloc of voters they happen to be courting that day. I find this sort of blatant ass-kissing deplorable. It speaks very strongly to me of the character of a person, and makes me question their ability to make proper decisions. I’ve always hated a bullshit artist, and I can spot them a mile away. Mitt Romney reminds me of drunken frat boys trying to get into my pants in college, saying whatever they thought would appeal to me in order to get there.

America, Mitt Romney wants to get into your pants. Show some respect for yourself and walk away. You really don’t want to take that Walk of Shame on November 7th.

Mitt ‘n Grits

It has been with a high state of hilarity that I’ve watched video of Mittens Romney campaigning in Mississippi over the past few days. You really can’t make this shit up.

Mister I’m Worth $200 Meeeellion Dollars is working hard to convince average working folks that he’s just like them, and he seems to be trying especially hard to do this in the South by learning their lingo and having “strange things happen to him.”

It was bad enough when he was campaigning in Michigan and uttered that perplexing thing about liking the trees in Michigan because they’re the right height. What? But this week in Mississippi, he cranked up the Awkwardometer and started saying things like “Mornin’ y’all!” and “I like grits!” (Grits One and Grits Two)

You know, I don’t hate the guy. I completely disagree with him on most of his policies, I think supply-side economics has been proven to not work, I think he’s spineless and kisses Rush Limbaugh’s fat ass, I think his criticisms of President Obama’s foreign policy is disingenuous at best and a deliberate, pandering lie at worst, and I think his religion’s practice of baptizing people into the Mormon faith—even Holocaust victims, who are, you know, JEWISH—after their death is obscene. But he seems like a decent kind of guy for the most part.

But I have never seen anyone so completely unable to connect with people. I often feel socially awkward, but this guy makes me feel great about my social skills. It’s almost painful to watch at times, and sometimes I almost feel sorry for him. Then I remember that it’s all deliberate, he has people telling him what to do, how to act, what to say...and instead of coming across as a regular guy, he keeps hammering home the fact that he’s richer than the vast majority of us will ever be. (And he also wants to lower taxes on himself and those on his level...don’t forget that part!) It’s really just embarrassing now. He’s not a regular guy, and he never has been.

As we begin to see the return of Candidate Obama, the contrast between the two is astounding. Obviously, much of what President Obama does is calculated; I’m not naive. But I also think he has a genuine understanding of and a concern for most Americans. Mittens may feel that way (but I doubt it), but is simply unable to get past that rarefied air of privilege. Obama is also a fantastic speaker, with great oratory skills.

It’s fairly obvious that Mittens will be the eventual nominee. I look forward to the debates between him and President Obama. Mittens is no slouch as a debater, but there have been many awkward moments, especially the combative ones with the moderators (“You get to ask the questions you want, I get to give the answers I want. Okay?”), and he gets very defensive about his taxes and wealth. But Obama comes across as authentic and genuine, and Mittens comes across as exactly what he is: a really, really rich guy.

It will be fun to see the personae that Mittens adopts in the coming primaries. Perhaps we’ll get to see some Native American stuff in the southwest (certainly no LATINO stuff...get real!). Maybe he’ll don a 10-gallon hat in Texas and shoot a varmint. Illinois might give us a glimpse of ‘20s Gangster Mittens, and I can hardly wait to hear him talk about his love of ‘sport’ in Indiana, especially that ‘hoop’ game (“Boy, you Hoosiers really love your basketball, don’t you? I saw that movie, you know. Wasn’t that a great movie?”) and the upcoming Indy 500 (“Boy, you folks sure drive fast around here. I think I took a wrong turn when I was trying to get here, and I just kept going around in circles, and then they gave me some milk to drink. Ha! Ha! Ha!”)

Jeez, the guy is the Borscht Belt comedian of the political world. Ba-dum-tsss!

Chumtossing in the Palmetto state

I watched the Republican debate last night, and I think I’ve finally recovered. That was traumatic (and I’m really not exaggerating...more in a moment).

I find myself bizarrely fascinated by the spectacle of these debates. I watch with a strange combination of horror and hilarity. I find that I need to concentrate on the latter in order to not blow a vein, and I’m usually live tweeting with friends and a handful of journalists I follow. (You can find me on Twitter @Luvrte66.) Sometimes Dan and George make appearances; sometimes Tom; last night it was Ryan. We make some serious points, but throw a few jokes and sarcastic remarks in there, too. The journalists that I usually see on there are David Corn of Mother Jones, Chuck Todd of NBC, and last night Democrat strategist Paul Begala and Time correspondent Michael Scherer were on there. They have some very astute comments and pertinent points. I’d say that they’re generally quite fair, although they’re pretty much on the left side of the aisle, so they express horror at some of the same things that I do.

Last night was especially awful for me because of the South Carolina audience. They were out for blood. They came across as angry and combative. They booed Juan Williams for asking Newt if his remarks about poor kids working as janitors or about food stamps (He offered to go to the NAACP and discuss why jobs are better than food stamps. Yes, he really did.) were racially insensitive. Williams was one of the moderators, people. He was doing his job in asking tough but reasonable questions. They booed Ron Paul when he said that we should really be “doing unto others” when it comes to attacking people...that we carpet bomb these countries and then wonder why people hate us. That’s right. They booed the Golden Rule. They cheered when Perry said that “South Carolina is at war with this federal government and this administration” concerning the Voting Rights Act. This in the state that first seceded from the Union, starting the Civil War, and to add a little double shock powah, on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day! Impressive. They also cheered Perry when he made the incredible statement that because members of the Obama administration condemned the behavior of the Marines who urinated on Taliban corpses, they show “disdain for the military” and are engaging in “over-the-top rhetoric.” Never mind the fact that desecration of corpses not only undermines what we are trying to accomplish there, it is illegal according to military law. But that’s a discussion for another day. When Perry said that the Marines in question should not be charged with a criminal act (again, ignoring that the military considers it exactly that), the crowd cheered.

What really got to me, though, was when one of the moderators asked a question of Romney about immigration, and began his question with the statement that Romney’s father was born in Mexico after many Mormons fled to Mexico to avoid prosecution for polygamy. As soon as the moderator stated that George Romney was born in Mexico, the crowd booed. They BOOED! At the mere mention of the country, which happens to be one of our allies! I still cannot believe that happened. I had a moment of despair and depression, but today I’m channeling it into contempt and anger. Paul Begala tweeted this:

I completely agree with him. I’ve seen the behavior of these crowds—this was definitely the worst yet—and I have just been appalled. Obviously, I’m pretty far to the left, but there are plenty of people who are more in the middle, moderates and independents who are still making up their minds, and I don’t see how any moderate person could see this behavior and think it’s anything short of dangerous and mean-spirited lunacy. It is of some consolation to me that the more the crowds egg them on, the more the candidates attempt to play to them and toss out more and more red meat. It may play well with audiences like that in South Carolina last night, but when it comes to the general election, I’m guessing it won’t be so warmly received. And there is plenty of video to be mined for use this summer and fall.

As for being traumatized? I had a bad dream last night in which the President was shot, and later died. I don’t recall any details about it, probably because it was so disturbing to me. It’s one thing to disagree with this President, but the behavior of the crowd last night was deplorable and downright bloodthirsty in its intolerance. I haven’t been quite so disgusted during this process as I was last night. It also solidified my resolve to do what I can to make sure President Obama has four more years and to keep these pandering cretins out of the White House. (Ron Paul excepted. I don’t want him in the White House, but it’s for other reasons, not because he panders.)

There’s another debate this Thursday, in Charleston. What will happen in that one? Will the audience burn an effigy of the President as the candidates look on with indulgent grins?

Pledge is for furniture

Can someone explain to me why or how it has become some sort of litmus test for a candidate or legislator to sign a pledge?

The latest one has been issued by the Susan B. Anthony Foundation, an anti-choice group. Several of the Republican candidates signed it, but Romney and Cain refused. Cain cited his reason as that as President, he can’t advance legislation. Romney said that the pledge itself was flawed, with unforeseen consequences; that it’s one thing to defund Planned Parenthood, but entirely another to withdraw federal funding from hospitals all over the country for providing abortions to victims of incest or rape.

You all know me well enough to know that I am firmly and irrevocably pro-choice, and that I find the defunding of Planned Parenthood here in my state and in others to be harmful to women’s health (especially low income women). That is not the purpose of this entry. It’s no surprise that both candidates were attacked for their refusal to sign it, particularly Romney, considering his past pro-choice stance. It’s also no surprise that fellow candidates attacked him. That’s politics. I get it.

The other pledge that has been out there for some time is Grover Norquist’s anti-tax pledge. Norquist must have one hell of a blackmail file on all sorts of legislators, because over 200 Congressmen and 41 Senators have signed this agreement stating that they will not raise taxes unless such raises are accompanied by tax cuts in other areas. First of all, who the fuck is Grover Norquist? (That was a rhetorical question. I know who he is.) And why are so many people kowtowing to him and his stupid pledge? He doesn’t seem to have ever held elected office, and he is basically a conservative lobbyist. Yet somehow he twists enough arms (With what leverage? I have no idea.) to coerce people to sign his little pledge, and vilifies them if they don’t.

Senator Coburn of Oklahoma actually had the guts to stand up to the guy recently in a showdown over ending ethanol subsidies. Norquist had the nerve to say that ending $6 billion in ethanol subsidies amounted to a tax increase, and called for tax cuts elsewhere. The subsidy repeal passed the Senate, with 33 Republicans going against Norquist and voting yes to repeal. Let’s hope this is the beginning of the end of Norquist’s bizarre stranglehold over so many legislators.

Why anyone would commit to signing some sort of pledge (pushing ANY sort of agenda put forth by any group) is beyond me. We are in dire straits at the moment, and the unrealistic and illogical Republican adherence to no tax increases is incomprehensible. Every analysis I’ve read shows that the deficit can only be reduced with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. BOTH. We’re not talking hiking the rates up to 90% (like they were under Eisenhower). Let’s just hike them on our highest earners by about 3%, okay? Let’s all have a dose of reality and understand that compromise happens in politics. It must, if anything is going to get done.

And jeez, grow some balls, politicians. Grover Norquist is not the boss of you. He’s a freakin’ lobbyist. I’m really amazed that I have to point this out to you. Your pledge is to uphold the Constitution, not to kiss the ass of a dude with a Muppet name.

It’s a free for all!

The infighting continues among the GOP, with some attempting to jockey into a position of front-runner for 2012, others trying to inject a calm voice of reason into the debate...and then there's Limbaugh. Sort of like "And then there's Maude!" Wouldn't you love to see how Maude would have dealt with Limbaugh? What a comedic goldmine that would have been! But I digress.

The latest brouhaha started with Mitt Romney commenting on only two Republicans appearing in Time's 100 most influential people in the world: Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. He tried to make some joke about how maybe it was really a list of the most beautiful people rather than most influential. Silly Mitt. Obviously not, since Limbaugh is on the list! Many Palin supporters took offense at that, thinking that he was being dismissive of her qualifications. Silly Palin supporters. What qualifications? [grin] So a group of Palin supporters came out with this video:

I had seen it earlier yesterday, and when Ken saw it last night, we both started laughing. Not at the video, but at the continued snarky infighting going on in the GOP. But wait, there's more!

Colin Powell spoke Monday about the problems the GOP is facing, and believes that one of them is Limbaugh. "I think what Rush does as an entertainer diminishes the party and intrudes or inserts into our public life a kind of nastiness that we would be better to do without." Limbaugh fired back today (surprise, surprise), calling Powell "just another liberal," and stating again that Powell's endorsement of Obama was about nothing more than race. He said, "He’s just mad at me because I’m the one person in the country who had the guts to explain [the endorsement]. There can be no other explanation for it." He suggested that Powell leave the Republican party and become a Democrat.

A few things here.

This sort of fighting amongst themselves is very unattractive. While Ken and I laughed about it, we also agreed that it's exactly this sort of thing that made us stop calling ourselves Republicans, and why we'll switch our affiliation to Independent. While I had made up my mind a while before the election about who I would vote for, Ken's ultimate deciding point was the nasty turn that the McCain campaign took at the end, especially Palin's attack dog tactics. I know some will disagree, but I believe that instead of offering real solutions and plans, their primary campaign platform was to tear down the opposition and paint them as bad people and scary characters. When I see that sort of behavior, it really turns me off, and I much prefer hearing someone clearly articulate their plans and refrain from character attacks.

In that light, Colin Powell is completely correct. I believe that the majority of people are like us in not enjoying such unseemly attacks, and I also completely disagree with their social platform, which I find horribly exclusive and discriminatory--that's another reason they lost me. The fact is that only 21% of Americans identify themselves as Republicans now. They certainly lost me and Ken in this last election, and it would seem obvious (it's certainly obvious to me) that what they're doing isn't working. What don't people like Limbaugh get about that?

As for Limbaugh, his remark that Powell's endorsement of Obama was about nothing more than race is offensive and completely unfair to General Powell. It implies that Powell is neither intelligent enough or impartial enough to make an informed decision, that he voted for Obama only because he's black. Obama wouldn't have been elected without a significant number of white votes, so that's a stupid argument. Also another reason why the GOP is hemorrhaging members. Being so dismissive of an obviously intelligent, decorated member of the military--who also happens to be black--would seem imprudent, don't you think? Suggesting that they leave the party seems even more foolish. I suspect that Limbaugh won't be satisfied until everyone who is still left in the party (after he gets done with his exclusionary tactics) is in complete goosestep with him. Yeah...good luck with that.

In honor of the GOP's free for all, here's the Motor City Madman himself, Ted Nugent, in his gonzo glory days. I believe Ted is quite the conservative, so this seems especially fitting...just like Ted's pants. Nuge is a little crazy, but he's one of my favorite guitarists!