The politicians we settle for

079 Capitol Hill United States Congress 1993

079 Capitol Hill United States Congress 1993 (Photo credit: David Holt London)

Current conventional wisdom goes something like this:

Our system is more partisan and mean than it has ever been.  Politicians don’t have any interest in leading, they base their decisions on poll numbers and focus group data and refuse to tell us the truth.  Things have never been this bad.  If only the parties would nominate some qualified candidates who would put the good of the nation ahead of themselves.  None of the jokers running are at all qualified to do anything.

Whine, whine, whine.  I may not agree with Secretary Clinton‘s recent comments about women but I sure share her opinion about this.  Let’s call it whiner fatigue.  I don’t know what I hate about it the most, the whining itself or the fact that it puts me in the scary position of wanting to defend people like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.  I think I disagree with everything Paul Ryan has said but when someone I know  said he was no more qualified than Sarah Palin, well, no, Virginia, I guess there isn’t a Santa Claus.

Mr. Pot, I’d like you to meet my good friend, Ms. Kettle.

I think one reason we love to hate politicians is because we love to hate ourselves.  I can think of no other explanation that makes sense.  The people in our government weren’t beamed there from outer space.  They weren’t born there.  We sent them there.  We want many things from our elected officials.  We want them to be both better than and the same as us.  I, personally, want them to be smarter than me.  Statements like, “all politicians do that” are bad for a number of reasons.  These statements let our politicians slide but more than that, they let us do the same.  Plus  by expecting so little of them, and ourselves, we set everyone up for failure.

I am tired of it.  I expect more of myself and I expect more from them, it’s just that simple.  You may be wondering how this will impact my presidential pick.  You know what?  That’s a bullshit question.   I do expect more from the person who will get my vote for president but even if I didn’t, my entire view of our system does not rest on one person or one office.  My vote has the least influence in the presidential election, where I don’t even vote for the person directly.  Where it can make a bigger difference is in local elections or for members of Congress.  Now, I have no real representation in Congress but I vote for my non-voting member and so should you.

Having said that, my opinion about Barack Obama is not the point.  In fact, in one draft of this I gave the reasons I think he deserves another four years but removed them because they detract from my point.

Bottom line:  Our electeds represent us in every way.  They are reflections of us in every way as well.  We need to own that and move on if we expect to change anything.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.

Seriously, things have never been this bad in the history of the world except of course when they were.  My career got its start during the Clinton administration.  You know, that rosy time when Democrats had everything they wanted and the economy grew so much that all over Washington people greeted each other with puppies and kisses.  Oh, wait, they didn’t.  (for the record, I wrote this about that time.)  Bill Clinton was concerned to not just be a bad president, he was evil.  He was accused of everything up to and including murder.  So was Hillary.  She offed Vince Foster donchaknow.  He was impeached.  Republicans alleged that as governor he ran drugs and guns into his state.  As president, the nefariousness just never ended.

So now, things are bad.  Congressional districts are becoming increasingly radical.  Members of Congress go on the record to say they will never use the word compromise, ever.  Congress used to stay in Washington over the weekends but now they go home.  We don’t even get our news from the same sources.  My side watches our news and your side watches yours.  Daniel Patrick Moynihan used to say you have a right to your own opinion but not your own facts but that may not be true any more because we literally cherry pick our facts.  Yet, whining about this is still whining.  It might feel good at the time but unless you’re going to get out there and do something to change the tenor of public discourse, shut up.

Bad people get sent to Washington by good people who don’t vote…

That used to be my outgoing voicemail.  I went on to give information about polling places and a number to register to vote.  We are an apathetic country and this is actually a sign that our system is working vs. not but that it doesn’t excuse not voting.  Not even a little bit.  And if you don’t vote and then come whine to me about government, the shit storm that comes your way is your own damn fault.

If you have made it this far, you might be wondering why I wrote this.  I get just as fed up and upset at the state of affairs in this country as anyone but as bad as our system can be, it still beats most of the other systems on the planet.

 
 

Us vs. them

Trayvon Martin Protest - Sanford

Trayvon Martin Protest - Sanford (Photo credit: werthmedia)

The recent shooting of Trayvon Martin, a black teen armed with nothing but candy and iced tea, has got us talking about a lot of things; the “stand your ground laws,” the danger of wearing hoodies and even the fact that we need to talk about race relations in 2012 America.  That’s not to say we are really talking about race relations in 2012 America, we are talking about how we should be.  There’s a big difference.

Personally, I think David Brooks had it right on Meet the Press this week.  We need to talk about race for sure but we need to broaden that a bit.  We need to talk about how we all view each other.  More to the point, how we view people who we perceive as being different from us.  That feels like a really obvious statement but sometimes we miss the things that are the most simple.

I am going to talk about some things that may or may not seem related.

One of my passions is stopping and preventing genocide.  I also have intractable insomnia.  The extra free time the latter gave me the chance recently to reread the book Machete Season; the killers of Rwanda speak.  If you are unfamiliar with it, it is a series of interviews with some of the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide.  Now, I will set aside for a moment my complete horror at the fact that they seem to sleep like babies whereas I can go weeks without sleep (yes, people who butchered their neighbors and friends with machetes sleep better than me).  The main thing that sets genocides in motion is the ability to look at people of a perceived different culture as bad.

Closer to home the things that come mind for me are the shooting of Amadou Diallo, a man shot 41 times because when the police asked for his ID he went to get it out of his pocket.  I was living in New York City when that happened and I am not going to lie, that made me fear the police  Rudy Guiliani may have become “America’s mayor” on 9/11 but when I lived in his NYC, police brutality had gone up by a whopping 30 percent and his administration’s response was basically “shit happens.”  Ok, he didn’t say that exactly.  After one instance where the police burst down the wrong door (because they wrote the address down wrong), his response was that if you want less crime, you have to expect this sort of thing.  There was no apology for scaring the crap out of an innocent family.

These attitudes trickle down.  Maybe Ronald Reagan had a point, there is such a thing as trickle down bigotry.

The Trayvon Martin case could not have a clearer racial overtone than the killing of Matthew Sheppard was homophobic.  But our prejudices extend beyond that — we judge others based on their religion, culture, weight, gender — anything we can use to classify someone as different.  This sets the stage for violence on the micro and macro level and it needs to stop (I know you knew that).

Brooks mentioned a great project.  It’s called the Implicit Project.  They have several tests on there where you can measure your attitudes towards people based on a number of criteria.  It takes a few minutes and is well worth your time.  I did a few.  I will post my results if you post yours.  Go here to complete them.

Let’s all say it together: “Hook, line and sinker.”

Ok, today’s post was going to be about the book Machete Season but that all went out the window when I read this on the Daily Beast‘s Cheat Sheet:

Report: Edwards Used Prostitutes
New York City local news blog DNA Info reported Thursday that a prostitute affiliated with the so-called “Millionaire Madam” says she had sex with the former presidential candidate. A call girl working for Anna Gristina reportedly told investigators that she was paid to have sex with Edwards while he was in New York in 2007, raising money for his failed presidential bid. Lawyers for Edwards did not comment on the story, but records show that Edwards did stay at New York’s Loews Regency Hotel—which is also where he allegedly met Rielle Hunter.

Stories like this make me feel like my heart is being slowly ripped out my body through my nose.  I wrote a joke about two years ago about this.  I like to say that just when I think this story cannot possibly get any douchier, it does.  This is why I cannot read the book Game Change.  I don’t need or want any more information about this man.  Now, the argument can be made that I can just skip those sections but I don’t have that level of discipline.

This is also one of the reasons I don’t get all inspired by anyone anymore.  If I was bitter and jaded before (and I am sure I am, one of my interns once called me “gumbly” but I think that was also because I was one of the only people in the office not afraid of the Congressman we worked for and didn’t jump out of my skin every time he did something), I am now.

Trifecta of failure (in increasing order of disappointment): the Kerry/Edwards campaign, the NY Mets (jacket) and John Edwards. When you are upset about three things and the least upsetting is a failed White House bid, well, that should say something.

No, Senator Santorum, it’s not the media trying to “pigeonhole” you, it’s your own statements

Rick Santorum

Rick Santorum (Photo credit: Gage Skidmore)

At the risk of being a broken record, I enjoy watching Morning Joe.  I like it a lot.  I appreciated the exchange they had with Rick Santorum this morning enough to want to write about it.  Unfortunately that led me to have to read through and actually watch some of his statements.  After watching more clips of him than I would like, my soul hurts.  It hurts a lot.  I also think I may have sprained my neck from shaking my head so much.

Santorum’s hypocrisy is overwhelming.  To get a smaller point out of the way, can we stop blaming the media for reporting on things public figures say?  No, if unedited video is aired somewhere — on YouTube or a media outlet — you don’t get to claim the press did you wrong.  Say you misspoke.  Say you made a mistake.  I know that I would be impressed with either answer.  Although, if your misstatement or mistake reflects an opinion you have been expressing for decades, you don’t get to say that one time you used the wrong words.

And now we come to Santorum’s hypocrisy.  He sparred with Joe Scarborough over his position on contraception — something he thinks is destroying America is is “not how things should be.”  Sex, in his view, is only meant to be between a heterosexual, married couple and only when they are trying to have children.  I don’t know where that leaves people incapable of having children, I guess in a sexless life.  Or maybe in their hearts they could just hope they are going to get pregnant and therefore please the vengeful God who would otherwise smite them down for such a heretical act.

Problem one:  Santorum chastised Scarborough for giving into the media proclivity to “pigeonhole him” and to basically put words in his mouth.  According to him, he has done “thousands of rallies” where contraception never came up.  When he did mention his opposition to it — and he omitted how vociferous that opposition has been — it was merely in reference to the overwhelming threat posed by Obamacare.  It isn’t contraception that bothers him, per se, it’s the federal government’s overreaching into our private lives.  Except that’s not what he has said.  He didn’t frame his comments in 2011 or 2010 or the last few decades as concern over the federal government overstepping its bounds, he talked about contraception as being one of the evils that is destroying America, promoting “the wrong kind of sex” and leading, paradoxically, to “more unplanned pregnancies.”  Yeah, increased contraceptive use usually does lead to that (what am I missing here? Oh, right, I forgot about the YouTube clip I saw where Santorum calls scientists “amoral” — check it out, if you dare.).  So the mere idea that the fine former Senator from Pennsylvania’s comments on the issue have been taken out of context or blown out of proportion is absurd on every level possible.  No, Rick, the media didn’t force you to talk about this issue, you brought it up all on your own.

Problem two:  Santorum argues that his campaign isn’t about this issue but in several interviews he mentions things he would do as president to accomplish his goals.  To give him some credit, I agree with some of what he says.  The presidency comes along with a bully pulpit an if you are not prepared to use it, why bother? (Case in point, the role of First Lady comes with the same perk and one major issue I had with Howard Dean was that his family was clearly not on board with his presidential run.  Not only did his mother tell Vanity Fair that he ‘had no shot of winning’ — ouch! — but his wife declared she would not serve as First Lady. Truthfully, I would not trust anyone who would give that opportunity up with feeding my cat much less providing my health care but that’s my personal opinion.)  So by saying, he has been talking about these moral issues but didn’t mean them to have such an impact makes zero sense.  That kind of logic does not belong in the White House.

Problem three:  And this one, to me, applies to many members of the Republican party.  I am sorry, Mr. Scarborough, but this includes you sometimes (abortion, not contraception, I loved your idea about the quid pro quo in Virginia — if the vaginal probe ultrasound requirement for abortions passed so should an anal probe requirement for Viagra).  How can you claim to support less government in our business lives but more in our personal ones?  I know, I know, if you think abortion is murder… (I do not, I am just admitting I can see a flaw in my own criticism of your logic, which I still think is flawed).  But what about contraception?  Not to get all personal but I have used contraception for both the purposes of preventing pregnancy but on more than one occasion for other health issues.  And truthfully, that shouldn’t be germane to this discussion but as I see stats as high as putting the percentage of women who have used contraception at 99 percent, and given that would have to include lesbians, a bunch of us are using these medications for reasons that have nothing to do with sex — casual or otherwise.  (Oh, and if you are so “pro-marriage” as you claim, Mr. Santorum, why oppose gay marriage?  Maybe that’s a topic for another day.)

Problem four:   Why does  your religion trump mine?  When you described why you are making the sacrifice you are making to run for president — and I am one of the people who appreciates anyone willing to go through it, running for president is hard business so I agree with you on that — is that you want to live in a country where you can practice your faith.  I am cool with you practicing your faith.  Practice away.  Why does that give you the right to impose your faith on me?  My personal religion is physics but I don’t expect you to sit around pondering Einstein’s theory of relativity like I do (like a slippery bar of soap in the shower, every time I think I get it, I lose it again).  There is a reason our Founding Fathers wanted the separation of church and state (and no, when President Kennedy talked about religious tolerance, he was not suggesting faith has no place in the public square.  He was merely pointing out that all religions and faiths have a place in the country.)

Faith is often defined as the belief in something without any discernable proof and the argument could almost be made that I have faith that you are running for president because you do want to make the country better, though none of your positions give me any reason to believe that goal would be accomplished.  That’s harsh, the proof is you are running and I cling to the idea that most people in politics are in it for the right reasons.  The comparison I like to make is that Democrats and Republicans both want to get to the same place — a better, safer, more prosperous America — we just have different routes we think we need to take to get there.

My last point, for the people with my sized attention span: the nation should not be forced to practice or adhere to the religious beliefs of the president.  And that does not mean I don’t think faith has a place in our system.  I think one of the traps into which liberals fall — myself included — is to deny the role it can play in bringing us together.  I am all for religion that brings out the better angles of our nature, as it did during the Civil Rights movement, which began in churches.  It troubles me, however, when it is used as a weapon to divide us into different classes of people — like when we deny half our population the right to marry or use it to tell more than half the population what kind of medical treatment they can receive and who will decide that.

This video won’t be for everyone, I know I need a drink after watching it.

RIP Andrew Breitbart

Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012)

Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012) (Photo credit: Templar1307)

Last week, conservative activist Andrew Breitbart died of “natural causes.”  I am really curious about this because he was pretty young — 43.  I wonder what those “natural causes” were.

Now, I was not a fan of Breitbart.  Full disclosure: I started work at Acorn Housing, which was not actually part of Acorn proper and had nothing to do with voter registration, three weeks before the video scandal broke. You know the one.  When James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles produced a series of videos showing Acorn and Acorn Housing staff saying incredibly stupid things to prospective clients on tape.  One of those videos was shot in the office where I worked.  That was a great day at the office for me.  I heard about the first video and asked the counselors in our office this: I know this is going to sound crazy and you don’t really know me but did the following ever happen…??? Oh, yes, they said.  Those people were here.  I told them they had my ever-lasting love for having shown the duo to the door and felt that genuinely — until I saw the video.  That scandal didn’t kill Acorn Housing right away as it did Acorn but they have since closed their doors after a painful two years of struggle.

Breitbart funded this venture.  So, I was not a fan.

Still, there was something a bit refreshing about him.  When I was in college and put together pro-choice rallies, I was always at the back — where the counter-protesters were.  I always felt the need to be on what I thought were the front lines of things.  I wanted people to not like me.  I wanted to make enemies.  Whatever it took to get my point across.  It may be why I love hate mail so much.  If I anger someone enough that they take the time to email me about it, I did something right that day.  It seems, Breitbart had the same opinion.  He didn’t care if I liked him, he already didn’t like me.

I think some liberal broke Breitbart’s heart and that  is what made him so angry and bitter about liberals and our causes.  And he did always seem really angry and very bitter.  So he made it hard to find anything redeeming about him yet his honesty — he was all about making liberals look bad and would do just about anything to accomplish that — was refreshing.  James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles are both idiots but Breitbart wasn’t.

Now, I would be lying if I said I cried when I heard the news of his untimely death, I did not.  I never like to hear that someone died, especially at 43 or whatever.  I won’t miss him but I have a lot of respect for people who act on their convictions even when I disagree with them.  Patricia Heaton, who played Ray Romano‘s wife on his sitcom (and had the best line ever uttered by an actress: When I speak, what is it you hear?  Is it backwards talk?  Dolphin speak? What is it? I feel that way when I talk to my mother.), is very active in the pro-life world.  I am very pro-choice but appreciate anyone who takes the time to put their money where mouth is, so to speak.  I have the same respect for Breitbart.