Where good thoughts come to die.
(psst - switzer's an idiot)
5/05/2008
Clinton and the pussification of Democrats
I've taken my shots at Hillary lately, but this one popped in my head today as I was reading this article about the Reverend Wright "flap". In it, Washington "uncommitted" superdelegate Ed Cote (uncommitted in the sense that he hasn't made his intention to vote for Hillary public - yet) is quoted suggesting:
The Wright firestorm is "worrisome because it's created a lot of footage for people to make hit ads — ammunition for the Republicans."
As the Clinton folks have turned over every rock to suggest that winning = losing and losing = electability and Obama can't win despite every poll that says otherwise and common sense and basic math, they've often attacked him, then defended themselves with the "we're worried because Republicans will use this against him" defense. Let's ignore the obvious concern-trolling and get to the underlying problem here...
What kind of pussies are these people? Seriously, Republicans are going to throw the kitchen sink at Jesus if he runs as a Democrat. Either Hillary or Obama are going to be "The Most Liberal Member of the Senate" and "Out of Touch With Americans" and "Out of the Mainstream", and they'll have lots of examples that they believe make their case. So what?
They'll use Wright against Obama? And you're supposed to think they won't use the Bosnia nonsense against Hillary? They won't use NAFTA, Bosnia, et al to show the American public that she's dishonest? They won't nail her as a flip-flopper for her ever-shifting stance on Iraq?
Attention, Democratic pussies: Republicans are going to call our candidates out of touch, out of the mainstream, tax and spend liberals who hate America and are traitors and are soft on crime/war/terror. They do this not because it's an attack or a campaign strategy, but because it's their actual platform. If you don't know this going in, and aren't prepared to stand up to it, please stay out of our elections. You have neither the intelligence, foresight, nor balls to represent my Party.
Two stories catch my attention today. The first is a local story, about the Ferndale assistant track coach who went missing last week and was found, shot dead, on Tuesday. The other is the sad tale of the "D.C. Madam", who was found hanged in a shed on her mother's property this morning.
I'll touch on Deborah Palfrey's story first. At the link provided above, some commenters speculate that she was killed by the CIA or..well, someone, anyway, in an effort to keep her from spilling the names of clients, who we all know were well-connected political personalities and would, based on timing and the makeup of DC, be overwhelmingly Republican. I think it's sad that the behavior of people in our federal government the last few years has devolved to the point that I can't dismiss this as nonsense out of hand (although I do think it most likely that she offed herself). Where's the VRWC when you need them? They'd be dead-set certain that she was killed and would spend years and hundreds of millions of dollars spreading the rumors!
But what's really sad about this is that, in a way, our nation's prudish attitudes towards sex and sexuality are what most likely led to her demise. Because we're taught from an early age in this country that sex is a dirty thing, something to be hidden and be ashamed of (unless it's between the Catholic-approved one-man-one-woman(tm)!), we've made laws accordingly. Prostitution is pushed into the shadows and viewed with a moue of disgust, and all parties are viewed as dirty, cheap, deserving of whatever they get. Meanwhile, the prostitution industry flies along with millions of customers, including our neighbors, friends, coworkers, and often religious leaders. And who gets arrested? Yes, the police sometimes put together stings to arrest johns, and humiliate them with billboards and cable-access shows advertising the names and faces of those shameful horny men willing to pay for sex. (Don't get me started on this. How many men, with a wife who doesn't want sex but understands their urges and supports their visits to a prostitute, have to deal with an unnecessary shame? Some folks are pervs. But some are just people who are looking for something they can't get elsewhere, and shouldn't have to be ashamed of it)
But the people who really pay are the women. Deborah Palfrey paid with her life for this enforced shame. Her employee Brandy Britton, too, took her life rather than face the "shame" of being put on trial and going to jail for the sin of receiving money in exchange for a service.
In a statement yesterday, Flohr said that Britton's death "underscores an important question: Was the public benefited at all by the resources spent on her arrest and prosecution? As we ponder the apparent senselessness of her passing, we must openly wonder about . . . a criminal justice system that seeks to punish a person rather than heal them."
The article that quote is from describes her "selling herself as a call girl" in an idealized neighborhood with moms in minivans and kids on scooters - because the children must always be brought into it, as though a sex worker is going to burst out of their home at any moment and start corrupting the children. The article does not paint a flattering picture of her. She was a mess. But let's be clear - prostitution didn't make her a mess, it was how she paid her bills BECAUSE she was a mess. Women have a right to be messed up and choose dangerous professions - just as much as male messes who choose to go work, say, on a fishing boat have a right to earn money and continue living.
Why were these women prosecuted? How many married (or unmarried!) couples engage in sexual negotiations every day - 'Okay, I'll do it, but I get to go out with my friends tomorrow night'? How is that different? It's treating the body as a commodity, and if one chooses to do so, why is this society's problem? By shaming, ridiculing and outlawing prostitution, we've forced it into the dark alleys and hourly motels where the women practicing their trade have no safety, no protection, and by their very surroundings are assured that they have no worth in society. Those who become what the media loves to call "High-priced call girls" are the lucky ones; at least there is a formal business structure to provide some form of protection.
Of course, in the best of circumstances, even legalized prostitution will always bear the risk and certainty of women being used by men who respect them not at all - but at least, like any clerk in any store, they would have the benefit of being out in the open and assured of protection, rather than persecution, by the police.
Perhaps you think I'm naive. Men suffer when they're caught with prostitutes - look at Eliot Spitzer! Women are the losers here because they're being used! It's not their choice to be there! Maybe. Some women do find themselves forced into the sex trade - no doubt human trafficking is a huge problem. But would it exist if sex laws didn't create a black market for at-risk women?
And what of David Vitter? Two women are dead now. Two women, an employee and the CEO of the escort company he admits having used, are now dead. Eliot Spitzer's career does indeed lie in tatters (although not because he visited a prostitute; no, his career is dead because he was a hypocritical zealot who fell into a trap of his own making). Yet David Vitter continues to proudly represent Louisiana in the Senate. Did David Vitter pay to fuck Brandy Britton? Did he write a check or hand his credit card to an employee of Deborah Palfrey? We'll probably never know on the first count, and we know the answer to the second question is absolutely yes. Yet he remains a Senator, while those two women are now dead and gone, and would be in jail if they weren't. So who suffered here? And why?
I don't care who Congressmen fuck, nor how, nor why they do so. As long as they stay off the children (Mark Foley, you reading this?), they have as much right to a sex life, however kinky, as anyone else. But without the bizarro obsession/repulsion our society has with sex and laws designed to be used against women who do what wives around the world do every day, we'd never have heard of either Brandy Britton or Deborah Palfrey. And these women would both be alive today.
Now, on to the Ferndale coach, Jeremy Scully. Since his body was found, the media has been working overtime to get information from the police about the case, and what did they find? That he's a member on an "adult swinger site". Naturally, they've found themselves unable to pursue any other angle, because OMG!! HE HAS TEH SEX!! SEX MAY HAVE CAUSE HIS DETH!1! Since police are looking at people he may have met on this website, it must be talked about in every story about him. What we have not heard from the media (until today) is what ELSE the police is looking into. What do you bet he was also a member of a site where people discuss fantasy football? Or politics? Would the media suppose the killer may come from those sites? What if he's a member of Meetup.com? I mean, adults go there to meet online prior to meeting in realspace, right?
The prudery of our society leads to this salacious idea that someone trying to meet other people to have sex is somehow a sign of dangerous tendencies. Well, what are we doing when we go to a bar? When we introduce ourselves to an attractive stranger in the produce section? It's no different.
Some people are interested in anal sex. Some like to be tied up and spanked. Or asphyxiated. Or dressed up in a diaper. This person, apparently, enjoyed sex outside the confines of his relationship (and with his girlfriend's blessing). Maybe group sex, too, who knows? Some people enjoy that. Why should this fact be splashed across the news after his death? Why should it lead to immediate assumptions that whatever bad person killed him must be connected to this part of his life and not some other?
Because our society is afraid of our "private parts". As a society, we've taught ourselves that sex is dirty instead of natural. Despite the fact that we all have sex, we all have kinks (whether large or small), we think the only other people having sex, especially kinky sex, must be dirty and bad. This fear poisons our thinking, and leads to the unnecessary distractions and posthumous shaming of a murdered man, and the unnecessary shaming of prostitutes, gays, masturbators...anyone who allows themselves to be sexual. This fear leads to talk of "lifestyles", the suggestion that any non-hetero non-secret non-vanilla sex is the only thing that defines a person's life, as though Jeremy Scully was helplessly fucking his way through the day and gay kids in Snoqualmie are storming the halls of their high school blowing football players.
Those people who like anal sex, group sex, being dressed up as cats or babies...their "lifestyle" involves going to work. Eating out with friends. Enjoying sports, or opera. Reading the paper. Cleaning the house. Skiing. Just the same lifestyle as the heterosexual-secret-vanilla sex loving populace. Sex is a private matter, and everyone has their own twist that is only relevant during the actual sex act. It ceases being relevant when your pants go back on.
So. The bottom line is, I'm sad for Jeremy Scully and his family. I'm sad that his life was lost. I'm sad that this was known to the police and the media on Sunday:
Documents from the Skagit County District Court show Jeremy Scully was on his way to do roofing work at her and her husband's home when he went missing last week. It was at their home Sunday that sheriff's investigators executed a search warrant looking for clues in the murder of Jeremy Scully. Inside they recovered several weapons, ammunition, computers and some marijuana.
The day Scully was supposed to help, the man called his wife from Squires Lake trailhead asking her to come pick him up. That's about a mile and a half down the road from where Scully's car was later found abandoned.
When interviewed by police, the wife admitted she was having an affair with Jeremy Scully. As for her husband, during an interview he alluded to officers that Scully was dead.
I'm sad that the media knew this on Sunday, and on Tuesday elected to run with a story intended to titillate viewers, and designed to embarrass and shame his friends and family. Because you know what this sounds like? It sounds like he found someone who shared his desires, and that person's husband objected. Sex is natural. So is hurt, and broken hearts, and anger. And sometimes those things lead to murder. That's not a dirty sex thing - it's a dishonesty thing.
Our society's fear of sex has, unnecessarily, led to the death of two women and the shaming of a dead man. And for that, I am sad today.
I'm running again (I've lost 21 switzerpounds since last October, baby!), so that's good. I'm trying to build a base so I can start training, in September, for the Las Vegas Half-Marathon. Today was a banner day; put in 5.5 miles in a time that shall not be revealed because I've lost my youthful vigor and speed and it's none of your business and why can't you just be happy for me because I ran and I'm being healthy and stop looking at my belly, it's getting smaller for God's sake and it's none of your business anyway. Now, using the kick-ass tool Map my Run, I can put my routes up here for your amusement! So I do:
Anyone who thinks Patty doesn't earn every dime she's paid in the Senate are deeply, deeply confused and uninformed about the work she does on behalf of veterans. I'm just sayin'.
{Posting on Thursday - tomorrow will be silent posting in support of Mt. Si High School's Gay-Straight Alliance's Day of Silence, and in protest of Ken Hutcherson's ongoing stupidity.}
Wow! Two whole weeks in a row I'm doing this! I know, it's a switzer-record; I've actually done two installments in a series for the first time. A little sad, but what are ya gonna do? As a reminder, this is just me bitching about grammar/spelling/other wordsmith-related things that really get my goat. I'm neither a grammarian nor an expert on the English language. Your submissions are always welcome, too! So let's get right down to it.
First: A-whole-nother. What the hell is this? I don't see it written, or at least I haven't yet, but I hear it all the time out on the streets and even on the teevee nooz. There is no such thing as a "whole nother". It may be 'another' thing, or 'a completely different' thing, or even 'something else altogether' (which is still not right, but at least uses whole words). Seriously. From an English language standpoint, this is a whole nother thing that should be avoided.
Deux: Scat talk - such as 'pee' and 'fart' - appearing in headlines. Hey, news organizations (I'm looking at you, MSNBC)...stop doing this! You're the news! Use adult words for adult things - please! Instead of 'pee', which is fine to use with your kids or even your buddies ("I need to pee, I'll be right back" - totally acceptable in informal usage), how about the new says 'urine'? How would that be?
And really, diminishing serious scientific work - even if it isn't world-changing in itself - with puerile headlines such as this one should be embarrassing to any reputable news organization. Stop it. To quote Jon Stewart, you're hurting America. Use grown-up words for grown-up news.
Lastly for this week: All of the sudden. I know, I know...it isn't technically grammatically incorrect (wait, yes it is.), nor are any of the words spelled wrong, plus it uses complete words. So this is a whole nother thing, right? Wrong. It's a common saying that's been intact for hundreds of years and the blogosphere is fucking it up for everyone else. It's all of A sudden, you bunch of morans! Honestly, just slow down and read, aloud, what you've written. If it doesn't make any logical sense, it's probably incorrect. And you may be a redneck. {Switzer punches self in nards for ever, ever using a Jeff Foxworthy joke}
Okay, these will get better in time, I promise. Or not. Suck it, it's my blog, my rules!
This court rules that Ken Hutcherson is a douchebag and exhibit friggin' A that anti-gay crusaders are motivated by sex, not God.
Okay, got that off my chest. Boy, I'm not even sure where to start with this. So, this article reports on Ken Hutcherson's planned "protest" at Mt. Si High School tomorrow during their GSA's annual Day of Silence. For those who don't know, during the DoS, gay students and others remain silent all day to draw attention to the gay students that have to live in silence, hiding their sexuality to avoid abuse. It's not even a day calling for special access or rights they lack, just drawing attention to some basic dignity they feel entitled to.
But Ken...ol' Ken, as always, can't let any opportunity to get attention for himself AND attack gays pass by, and is supposedly bringing 1,000 of his "prayer warriors" to protest. (I say supposedly, because he also has assured Microsoft that he was leading massive boycotts and bringing them down several times. Last I checked, they're still doing okay) He's bringing adults.To protest.High school kids. He even ran an ad in the local paper saying straight people should "come out of the closet", one of the more rancid things he's said lately.
Hutcherson said minority students aren't treated with the same respect and sensitivity that is being shown gay students.
"There are so many issues at that school, and homosexuals get a whole day?" he asked.
Really, Ken? Martin Luther King day doesn't ring a bell? Christmas? It's really that upsetting that a couple hundred kids will just be quiet for a day, that you need to bring "1,000" people to fucking protest them? Douche. Of course, it isn't that simple with Ken. See, he had his feel-goods smushed last time he was there on Martin Luther King day and they pulled all the kids out of class for an assembly with him. Seems some of the kids and a couple teachers weren't so agreeable about a single-minded bigot coming to talk about equality, and let him know that.
Mount Si principal Randy Taylor said Hutcherson's planned protest is continuation of that controversy.
"It's personal," Taylor said. "We embarrassed him at the Martin Luther King assembly. It's payback."
Hutcherson countered, "Of course it's personal. They embarrassed me and they embarrassed my daughter."
There you have it, folks, the pastor at Antioch Bible Church. Your religious leader, pulling you into his personal vendetta, because he was embarrassed and wants revenge. Ask yourselves this: Would Jesus hold grudges? Would Jesus pursue revenge?
Last month, the Times covered this when it first came up and Hutcherson's brownshirts went to a school board meeting to complain about other people's kids looking for a bit of tolerance. As you'd expect, there are the conservative kids who assure us they were mistreated and made to feel badly because they didn't "go along" with the DoS.
Irony, thy name is youth.
In an open letter to the school's GSA, Garding and five other CoDE board members said the day coerces support and encourages hostility.
"Neutral students can't opt out, and they can't say they don't like it," the board members wrote. "Please choose to not spread anger this year and do not request the Day of Silence during the school day."
Irony, thy name is also these douchebag parents. Yes, let's teach kids tolerance by asking them to stop seeking tolerance. That's not comically inept at all.
I love the kids complaining that education isn't "taking place to its fullest extent" on this particular day. (This, of course, appears in both articles. Talking point, anyone?) Riiight. That's your problem with it. I assume these same kids oppose pep rallies, the day before winter break, and assemblies, right?
But guys, here's the clincher for me:
...Hutcherson, whose daughter attends the high school, has also denounced the school's Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA), calling it a "sex club," and urged parents and community members to oppose it and the Day of Silence.
I've said it a million times, the opposition people like Hutcherson have to homosexuals has nothing to do with religion or sin. There is no such thing as a gay "lifestyle". It's all about sex. Sex, sex, sex. To Ken, the mere existence of a GSA means kids are walking around sodomizing each other all day long, and the survival of civilization is threatened! Oh my!
Would someone please out this douche as a Haggard already, so we can stop hearing his nonsense?
Returning to today's article, which closes with my favorite quote:
GSA adviser Kit McCormick said members will observe the day regardless of the protest going on outside.
"It's enough of a tragedy that there are 1,000 grown-ups protesting kids who are asking for acceptance. We don't need to say a thing."
Grandpa visited a shuttered factory in Ohio yesterday on his "I care, really I do" tour (not sure if his $100 million wife was there), and talked about free trade vs. protectionism, encouraging the out-of-work folks there to consider going to community college and learning how to work a computer. You know, be part of the "knowledge economy".
According to this article, his big plan to help these folks is...wait for it...see if you can guess (hint - he's a Republican)...yup, tax credits.
Sen. McCain, who is a father of seven, proposed doubling the tax credit for children. In Youngstown, nearly half of single-working-mother families live in poverty. Sen. McCain said the current tax credit isn't adjusted for inflation and the increased credit would allow adults to "invest more in their own families."
Listen, let's assume that the half of single-working-mother families living in poverty include two children, for the sake of this exercise. According to the most recent HHS poverty guidelines (pdf), a family of three has to make less than $17,170 to be considered "in poverty".
Um, Grandpa? How much do people making less than $17,000 pay in taxes?
I don't have a problem (for the most part) with a higher tax credit for kids. Childcare is expensive, and it's the kind of thing where the government can help you out in this way. But let's face it. This is McCain picking low-hanging fruit; he doesn't know how to help these folks without abandoning his ideology, so he appeals to "I'm helping your kids!". It's the opposite of a third rail. And the reality is, this will help middle-class families and have little to no impact on folks in poverty - while it's great to help middle-class families, and there should be a lot more of that than there is here, we've got a rapidly expanding bottom tier economically, and keeping the conservative blinders on isn't going to make things better for them.
Grandpa McCain's tax policy is immoral. Telling families in poverty that you'll help them by giving tax credits to middle-class families is like telling the failing neighborhood store that you'll help them by shopping at Wal-Mart. It's not just immoral, it's stupid, and more typical Republican magical thinking.
Okay, I haven't looked at the intertubes since 8:00 last night, so I'm making my prediction unsullied by third-hand breathless reports of BREAKING - PROBLEMS WITH POLLS IN PODUNK!!!!! or MASSIVE CROWDS IN PHILLY, OBAMA'S GOING TO WIN IN A ROUT!!! or any of that nonsense. Here we go...
