There are some political shenanigans going on here at my second home. I’m like an old man deprived of his favorite chair – they’ve taken up residence at my favorite spot with their fliers and Macbooks and signs and magnets and things. You can tell who they are because they all wear buttons with one name: OBAMA.

I love the idea of a black President with a Muslim name. I really do. In an age where the common wisdom rejects our current President because the rest of the world hates him, electing a man from a race of former slaves whose father was a practicing member of the religion whose fundamentalist radicals recently murdered a lot of our citizens is a really appealing idea. We can point to our national conscience and say: “Hey, dudes. Check out our guy. That’s how better we are than you. We elected a black muslim. Would you elect a Christian woman or whatever to lead your country?”

But he’s not going to change a goddamn thing.

He’s not going to end the war and bring the troops home any faster than a Republican would. It’s cute that you think he will, but he won’t. There are overriding strategic ramifications at work in Iraq, many of which are invisible to anybody who isn’t the Commander in Chief. When the next guy gets in office, he’s going to meet with the Joint Chiefs, they’re going to show him how a fast exit from the theatre of war will result in one of the biggest clustereffs in the history of the American military, and then let him take credit for smaller-scale troop removals and draw-downs that were in the pipeline already. Obama gets to keep his political promises and the massive industry of war gets to continue.

Bush and his cronies made the decision to go into Iraq, for sure. But the consequences are undeniable and untenable. It’s their bath water, but we have to lie in it. I don’t like it either, but we just have to deal.

A woman’s right to an abortion is in no danger. Gay marriage will probably not happen in our lifetimes. Socialized medicine, one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas, won’t get past committee. A version of it that helps poor families might, but not the sweeping changes that many people are hoping for.

There’s a reason for all of this, and it’s called the wedge.

The Republicans know that they can continue to make money and stuff from people who don’t want two men to be able to get married to each other. If they want to keep making money, then they will make sure not to let the idea get very far.

This is the pivot around which all of politics moves – the acquisition of power, money and influence. People who want to change things don’t get very far, and their changes rarely amount to much. Waging war is the big exception, but even a war doesn’t change the domestic situation much.

Our politicians are figureheads, attractive faces slapped on stumps and soapboxes. They don’t represent constituents anymore, they represent themselves. They don’t fight for what’s right, they fight for more power. They don’t have opinions, they have exit polls.

Any illusion you have that Barack Obama is any different from the many people who followed him is just that, inexorably and inevitably. He is not going to make your life better. He is not going to change things.

How many politicians have run, and have been elected, on the same platform of change and solidarity? Every few decades, we elect an outsider who wants in.

Do you really think Barack Obama wants to be President because he wants to help people? Really?

I look over at the stumpers and I see the main guy adjust his Buddy Holly glasses and dive right into his argument against Hillary – he’s trying to convince somebody not to vote for her. I listen to everything he says, and I see his fervor.

But then I imagine what’s going to happen if Hillary gets the nomination and he’s out campaigning for her – he’ll be saying the same things, or maybe slightly different things, about a completely different person. He’s going to be arguing for the very person he’s arguing against.

Why? He can’t believe in both people, can he?

Can he?

Ok. I occasionally post personal ads on Craigslist. Sometimes, those personal ads are frivolous. Sometimes, they’re pointless. Sometimes they’re even obtuse.

But my correspondence with the responders is always authentic. I actually am trying to make a connection with people. More specifically, I’m trying to make a connection with single women around my age.

I can write pretty good emails. I can strike a tone and write for an audience. I can direct the conversation, I can be flirtatious, I can be ernest, I can be vulnerable – you know, pretty much anything.

But I can’t help the way I look. And while I’m not as dysmorphic as I used to be, I’m not exactly feeling like the cock of the walk. I know I’m pretty handsome, at least in an ancient celt/Jeff Lynne sort of way. I have a decent sense of style. I bathe regularly, and my grooming habits are definitely on the passing side of the curve.

So why is it that for the last six potential dates I’ve harvested from the cesspool of Craigslist, every single one of them stopped responding after I sent them a picture?

This is the picture I sent:

I always explained that the photo was taken on the sly by somebody with an antique camera, to dissuade any color correction concerns.

So, what is it about that picture that would dissuade a girl who is obviously attracted to my intellectual side? Six of them, people!

You can either explain that, or you can try to cheer me up. There’s only so much rejection a man can take. Yes, yes, these don’t exactly qualify as rejections per se, but I’ve had a few of those lately, too. Real life ones, by real life women. They hurt, too.

Go ahead. I’m waiting.

In this video, he says that somebody has to have faith in order to run the country.

He says this as a response to a Christian in the audience who tells Mitt that he doesn’t “know Jesus,” because Mitt is a Mormon.

Mitt Romney’s response to intolerance is more intolerance.

When is the rampant distrust and demonization of atheism going to end in this country?

Yeah. Probably never.

Reason Magazine is a fun read. Even if you don’t agree with its Libertarian point of view, it’s hard to argue with their primary concern: freedom is good, and America needs more of it.

They recently posted an excellent entry on the coming elections, and how journalists of all kinds frequently lob soft balls at candidates.

Included in this entry is a list of 20 questions that the frontrunners of both parties need to be asked. These are questions that should make the candidates think, and on topics that the candidate probably doesn’t have talking points to crutch them through answering them.

I’m going to repost the questions here, but you should still check out the article.


1) Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani
“When you were mayor of New York, you made two attempts to extend your term in office. You opposed a term limits bill that voters passed; you publicly speculated over staying in office after September 11, and only reluctantly stopped a third party from nominating you for a third term after the state legislature made it clear they wouldn’t allow it. Given that the last six years have seen a vast expansion of presidential power, how can Americans trust you not to abuse the office and seek more and more personal authority?”

2) Arizona Sen. John McCain
“You’ve backed off on some campaign finance reforms, and you yourself are opting out of public financing for 2008. Could you explain why the other candidates should abide by the old campaign finance reforms, and by McCain-Feingold?”

3) Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney
“When Sen. Hillary Clinton gave a mildly hawkish speech about Iran but opened the possibility of engaging with their leaders, you blasted her. ‘Advocating engagement displays a troubling timidity toward a terrible threat. The right strategy is not engagement, but economic and diplomatic isolation.’ Please enumerate which other countries you want to threaten instead of engage.”

4) Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback
“You opposed President Clinton’s 1999 action in Kosovo, and said at the time ‘I continue to implore the Clinton administration to present a clearly thought-out exit strategy from the hostilities in Kosovo.’ Why didn’t you apply this standard to the Bush administration over the last six years?”

5) Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee
“Your successor as Arkansas governor, Mike Beebe, is considering dropping the ‘obesity report cards’ you introduced. As president, what mandatory, federal programs would you introduce to schoolchildren to get them in shape?”

6) Texas Rep. Ron Paul
“You want to abolish the Federal Reserve. What is your plan for grappling with the international financial instability – if not panic – that would follow this move?”

7) Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo
“Five years ago you said ‘China is trying to export people’ and continued, ‘It’s a policy for them, a way of extending their hegemony. It’s a government-sponsored thing.’ As president, what measures would you take to stop Chinese people from breeding so energetically and dominating the world – and by extension, this country?”

8) Former HHS Sec. Tommy Thompson
“Could you briefly explain why every American should get a computer chip implant?“

9) Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore
“In 2001 you signed a proclamation celebrating European-American Heritage and History Month, only to rescind it when it was pointed out that David Duke lobbied for the holiday. If it was proposed by non-racists, would you support a federal European-American heritage month?”

10) California Rep. Duncan Hunter
“You’re perhaps the leading advocate for a fence on the Mexican border, as you won the funding for a border fence in California. However, that fence was a boondoggle that went far over budget and poured illegal immigrant traffic over into the Arizona desert. Does this call into question your solutions on illegal immigration?”

11) New York Sen. Hillary Clinton
“Defending your vote in favor of the Iraq resolution, you said: ‘As a senator from New York, I lived through 9/11 and am still dealing with the aftereffects.’ What was Iraq’s role in the 9/11 attacks?”

12) Illinois Sen. Barack Obama
“In your 2004 campaign for Senate, you approached the issue of a nuclear Iran this way: ‘Us launching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in. On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse.’ How far along would Iran’s nuclear program have to get before an Obama administration launched missile strikes?”

13) Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards
“You have said you were mistaken to vote for the 2002 Iraq resolution. But you did more than that: You were a co-sponsor of Sen. Joe Lieberman’s war resolution, along with Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Zell Miller. Given the arc of your flip-flop, why should anyone trust your judgment on foreign policy?”

14) Delaware Sen. Joe Biden
“You were the author of the RAVE Act in the Senate. Can you explain why glow sticks should be considered drug paraphernalia, and as president what you might do to prohibit them?”

15) Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd
“When you were a congressman, you argued for ending funding to South Vietnam by saying: ‘The greatest gift our country can give to the Cambodian people is peace, not guns. And the best way to accomplish that goal is by ending military aid now.’ With that in mind, don’t you have a credibility problem when you talk about ending the Iraq war with minimal repercussions?”

16) Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack
“Did making English the official language of Iowa cut back on the state’s influx of illegal immigrants from Mexico?”

17) New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson
“Could you defend and explain your conduct in the Wen Ho Lee case, and why it doesn’t disqualify you from holding another job that would deal daily with issues of national security?”

18) Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich
“As a congressman, and now a committee chairman, you have made ‘media reform’ a priority. What do you see as the president’s role in regulating and limiting the media available to viewers?”

19)
Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel
“If you were prohibited from appearing at any debates or candidate forums, would you still be in this race?”

And the 20^th question, a bonus question for any candidate who wants the extra points:

“You have to abolish one cabinet position. Name it.”

Yes, that’s more of a demand than a question. Easy to forget, but we’re allowed to make those, too.