The Debate

I think it was a tie. But I am heartened that a lot of polls show undecided's went overwhelmingly Obama.

My own biased POV...

McCain looked cranky, and would not make eye contact with Obama. There something there that Obama needs to exploit. I think it's simmering rage that McSame is barely able to contain. Make him pop and the election is yours.

McCain sounded condescending, like "Why am I debating this uppity young upstart whippersnapper?"

Obama, find the trigger phrase that'll make him pop. Cut him to the quick, if his lips are moving, he is lying. Don't readily agree with him, McCain is an erratic, unstable, moron, reciting soundbites for his next commercial.

Hit him hard: McCain = Bush, McCain(heart's)Bush

When he sez that many congressman are in jail, remind America that they are overwhelmingly Republican. And that McCain was deeply entangled himself in a financial meltdown scandal. (Can you say "Keating Five"?)

And remind America over and over that it was all these "experienced, understanding" deregulating, wise old Republican men of Washington that got us bogged down in Iraq AND this financial mess. It plays right off his condescending and pompous attitude. This is a Republican recession/depression. (Once again, they do know how to throw a GRAND OLD PARTY!). Make them own it!

Gustav May Cancel Repub Party

Soon-To-Be-Hurricane Gustav is roaring into the Gulf of Mexico, once again threatening Louisiana.

Republicans are thinking about canceling their party. I don't know why they may want to lose all those photo opportunities.

Oh, that's right. Let's recall what photo op came out of Hurricane Katrina:

Such an adorable couple...

Meanwhile, Reverend James "Daddy" Dobson prayed for rain "of biblical proportions" last night on Denver. Instead we get a hurricane ruining the GOPper's party. Note to Jimmy, stop praying. You're making it worse.

I hope this thing dies out and spares the mainland...

But I ask...

Why does God hate Republicans?

McBush & God

Seems to me like the panderin' McCain has picked himself a peck of pickled pastors...

He's "run the good race" and now the good-bye... its about time! (Rev. Gov. Huckabee)

Rev. Gov. Huckabee:

• So long
• farewell
• auf wiedersehen
• goodbye

(A nice British rendering)

---

My feelings on the matter are best expressed by the great Doxology

This is known to some as "All people who on earth do dwell" or "The old 100th."
This particular setting is by the great Ralph Vaughn Williams who was actually rather a-religious. None the less, I think it stands as one of the finest works of sacred music ever, and one of my happiest memories from my time at the Seminary was getting to be in a choir which sang this piece.

---

A touching almost sensual Russian version

My theory on why Rev. Gov. Huckabee is still running / The Arkansas Governor <> Machiavelli connection | McCain & Sun Tzu

If you don't know who Machiavelli is...

1. Oh come on! Stop pulling my leg...
1. Ow, it hurts, I mean it!
1. It doesn't need to be any longer!
1. Or at least pull them both... I HATE asymmetry!
   
2. Click here for the Wiki article.
   

---

Now, I created that slideshow to make the point that just as President Clinton was and is often mis characterized & underestimated as nothing a bumbling lovable charmer, so too Rev. Gov. Huckabee. Both are masters following after The Master, Machiavelli.

Both former Arkansas Governors are nothing if not intelligent & articulate with "black belts" in the martial art of politics.

Rev. Gov. Huckabee is still in the race for the following reasons:

1. To become leader of the "conservative movement"- a role which is not naturally his, since his record and policies are as inconsistent as Gov. Romney's and unorthodox as Sen. McCain's.
   
2. To define that movement in exclusively social terms... which is to say- to coopt the entire mantle of conservativism for the Radical Religious Right.
3. To make sure that McCain has to pull "right" (as he defines "right")

He may succeed in #1... on #s 2&3... its less certain. Should McCain win the Presidency, then #2 is unlikely to happen, but he'll still stand a good chance of coalescing the "dissenting conservatives" around him.

On #2- I hope McCain doesn't fall for that "rope-a-dope" ploy. Military man that he is, he is doubtless familiar with Sun Tzu's seminal Art of War- it is required reading in military academies through out the world, and well so! I hope he heeds it, especially these points:

Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans, the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces, the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field, and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War

If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.

He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign.

In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory. In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack - the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers. The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn. It is like moving in a circle - you never come to an end. Who can exhaust the possibilities of their combination?

And finally and most crucially...

The clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him.


Quotations found at http://www.military-quotes.com/Sun-Tzu.htm, emphasis mine

With enemies like Dobson and Limbaugh, no wonder McCain has so many friends!/ Why does anyone give a rodent's rectum who celebs, pastors &c endorse

Confession time: I once enjoyed listening to Limbaugh years ago... before he went national, and was a local talk jock in Sacramento CA, where my oldest brother lived. Bless me father, for I have sinned... ;>

Its amusing how the prospect of a McCain nomination brings out the crazy in the likes of Limbaugh and Dobson.

(Full disclosure- never been a fan of Dr. D.- he was a Bible thumping Dr. Phil before Dr. Phil was a twinkle in Oprah's eye.)

Before we get to their latest oral flatulence, the larger issue is... why does it matter what pastors (and I say this as having been one for more than a decade), movie stars, singers, or talk show hosts think? What makes them qualified to make our minds up for us? The singer formerly known as Johnny Cougar might know about "little pink houses," but since when does that translate into expertise on foreign policy or the economy? Jack Nick might know how to creep us out on the screen, but so what? Limbaugh's done a great job being a very partisan purveyor of 6th grade style humor, he works his audience well, but he's an entertainer, not a political master mind!

OK, so on to today's flatus...

Ingram reading Dr D's letter

The flatus in written form

I'm deeply disappointed the Republican Party seems poised to select a nominee who did not support a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage, who voted for embryonic stem cell research to kill nascent human beings, who opposed tax cuts that ended the marriage penalty, and who has little regard for freedom of speech, who organized the Gang of 14 to preserve filibusters, and has a legendary temper and often uses foul and obscene language. I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative, and in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are. He has at times sounded more like a member of the other party.

McCain actually considered leaving the GOP in 2001 and approached John Kerry about being Kerry’s running mate in 2004. McCain also said publicly that Hillary Clinton would make a good president. Given these and many other concerns, a spoonful of sugar does not make the medicine go down. I cannot, and I will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience.

But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should John McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on the virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life.

These decisions are my personal views and do not represent the organization with which I'm affiliated. They do reflect, however, my deeply held convictions about the institution of the family, about moral and spiritual beliefs, and about the welfare of our country.

And of course Rusty

Piss off Coulter & Limnbaugh- Vote McCain '08 & Boxing people in with labels

I remember when "W" was first running & again when he ran for reelection, many of the Streisand / Baldwin contingent said they would leave the U.S. were he to win. He won, they stayed, and conservatives lambasted them for it.

Well, now the shoe's on the other foot. I look forwards to Ann Coulter stumping for Hillary... I might even pay to see that!

---

The larger issue is... these people are becoming parodies of themselves. Politically, it seems like they have lost all higher neurological function, and are just acting on reflex.

Beyond even that... the way these folks are so obsessed with finding the "true conservative" I've been wondering about why Americans are so obsessed with false polarities and with giving everything a label, putting everyone in a box.

• This weekend is the superbowl, and the options are being a Giants or Patriots fan. There is no "I couldn't care less could you please stop yammering about it" option.
• They talk about red states and blue states, as if the inhabitants were two different species.
• Similarly in matters of gender, sexuality, and so on. Everyone must be one or the other, have a label, stay in their box. It seems as if our culture is more comfortable with clearly defined extremes than with anyone who would occupy the space between, or incorporate elements of both.

There's probably a lot more I could say on that, but I'm worn out. I woke up at 4:30 this morning so I could dig out the car and get Tess down for her weekly pain shot. (Got some great video in Edgewater and down at the lakeshore I'll be posting over at my multiply blog either tonight or tomorrow.)

Buenas noches!

A libertarian take on the SC primary- A triumph of ideas over identity, principle over purity

{I've been a little coy about this in the past over on my Multiply blog since more than a few of my friends viewed Rev. Huckabee as the great white hope of the GOP, but I posted this there too. }

I'm very pleased- ebullient even- that Senator McCain won and Rev. Huckabee lost in South Carolina.

I'm even more so by the way that this broke down.

On the one hand: Rev. Huckabee has been pretending that he is the true blue Reagan conservative (yeh, and I'm the Easter bunny... only Senator Thompson can claim that mantle, and it served him sooooo well!), that he has appeal outside the Evangelical circles.

On the other hand: He's been campainging in churches, preaching in them even, and his lead issue has always been "values." That's Orwellian doublespeak for "Christian faith." If ethical values were really the issue, then Mitt Romney should have had the advantage because -what ever you think of the story of how the Book of Mormon came about, the LDS' early experiments with polygamy, etc.- the LDS church today walks the walk better than most any Christian church body. Their young people are expected to do service for both church and community, they take care of the poor and needy of their community, and so forth. None the less, consider how much anti-Mormon rhetoric has been thrown around in this campaign by so-called Christians. For pity's sake people, we're electing a PRESIDENT here, not a pope or a pastor!

Even in the [in]famous episode of South Park "All About Mormons" where the story of the Book of Mormon is told with a chorus humming "dum dum dum dum dum" in the background, the point that for most Mormons their church provides them the encouragement to be good people, love their family, etc. is made. From the Wiki article linked above...

Stan's anger doesn't much upset anyone in the Mormon family other than Gary, who confronts Stan and the other boys the next day, pointing out that he believes his religion does not need to be factually true, because it still supports good family values. Gary condemns their bigotry and ignorance, stating: "All I ever did was try to be your friend, Stan, but you're so high and mighty you couldn't look past my religion and just be my friend back. You've got a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck my balls." He walks away, and the episode ends as Cartman (with a new-found respect for him) says, "Damn, that kid is cool, huh?"

Finishing off on my critique of Rev. Governor Huckabee. His appeal can be summed up and paraphrased thusly: Vote for me because I'm like you. I share your social and religious values. He's running on his social and religious purity more than political experience, principles, or policies. He's so afraid of being shown to be impure in any way that he's even refused to give straight answers to questions which might show that he's less than a purely "small government, low taxes" Republican. SO WHAT?! Be different, be your own man, and be PROUD of it. I'd rather hear straight from a candidate what they believe, what they've done, and what they want to do, than have them try to tickle my ears with what they think I or some core constuency wants to hear.

I find the way he's conducted his campaign and the source of his support as small minded and divisive as if Senator Clinton were to go around saying "Vote for me, I have ovaries!" or if Senator Obama were to say, "Vote for me, I'm black." Not that I don't expect one or both of them to sink to this level... while I've been typing this, I heard a report that Oprah Winfrey's been getting hate mail because she supported a male candidate over a female candidate.

A humorous aside: Were I to be the same way, then I'd be chairman of "Alice Cooper '08".

Senator McCain, on the other hand, has focused his appeal on his qualifications to be president, and his long standing record of telling people what he believes, not what they want to hear.

I was impressed with his victory speach. He was well spoken, gracious, and did speak a lot to the "responsible, small, fiscally conservative" libertarian values which I hold most dear. He said something along the lines of "The government shouldn't be doing for us what we can better do for ourself." Amen and Amen! (Yes, that's me being funny.)

To be fair, I should also say that I was also impressived with R-G- Huck's concession speach. Were he not running on "values" and preaching in churches while running for president, the kind of things he said in his speach were ones I find generally acceptible.

---

On to the Dems, and a summation of the issues of my subject line

Most of my critiques of Rev. Governor Huckabee have parallels in how Senator Clinton has comported herself, going back to her initial election to the Senate from New York. She's from Chicago, but she made herself out be a pure New Yorker. Then there were the times she went around the country trying to affect the accent and style of each place she went. More recently, she's been backpeddling and obfuscating about her support of the initial war resolution as much as RGH has done about his tax record.

Both of them have been trying to run more on identity and purity than ideas and principle.

I don't know what to make of Senator Obama yet. His win in Iowa and his continued viability are historic. They suggest that the day may yet come in our life time when we see and live Rev. King's dream of people being judged not on the color of their skin but the quality of their character. The problem is... I don't know much about his character, I don't know what kind of president he'd make. When he's gotten specific on issues I've disagreed with most all of them, they're about as far from the classic/Jeffersonian liberal idea of "The government which governs best governs least" as you can be. But again, he's a great speaker, he's broken through a barrier which should be been destroyed long ago, and he could well be a great man. His presence in the race and his success are a good thing for America.

In summary, a bit of a history lesson, since those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it (extra points if you can ID the source of that paraphrased quotation.)

We throw around the term "fascist" in a very loose and inaccurate way. The blog "morpheme" has an excellent and extensive discussion of the word, of which I will quote only a small part.

It comes from both the Italian fascio and the Latin fasces. Both words mean “bundle”; the latter specifically refers to ““bundle of rods containing an axe with the blade projecting” (pl. of fascis “bundle” of wood, etc.), carried before a lictor, a superior Roman magistrate, as a symbol of power over life and limb: the sticks symbolized punishment by whipping, the axe head execution by beheading” (from the Online Etymology Dictionary) Similar to the Chinese tale of a father demonstrating to his sons that one chopstick is easily broken but a bundle is stronger than the sticks that compose it, this etymology implies that Fascism is an ideology concerned with the collective and opposed to the individual.

Identity and purity politics of the sort I've spoken above are a form of this in its original etymological sense. The word has come to gain such a range of meanings and negative connotations that this denotation is now meaningless, so I shan't be applying it to any given person or group.

Rather what I'm on about is this: The original and true motto of our country was not "In God We Trust" as the revisionists would have us believe, it is the Latin phrase "e pluribus unum" as seen on the Great Seal of the United States. Varying translations are given, but it means basically "from many, one" and is often and aptly compared to the adage "United we stand."

Politics of purity and identity divide us, they break us into little groups which are set in constant conflict- men vs. women, blacks vs. whites, nascar vs. indycar, red state vs. blue state, and so forth. (Extra points if you can find the one bit of almost subliminal humor there.)

I'm alarmed when any candidate tries to peel off a section of the electorate for the sake of political advantage, be it by demonizing Mormons, homosexuals, environmentalists, homeschoolers, people on welfare, wed mothers, unwed mothers, creationists, or anyone else.

I don't know that we'll ever be able to "all just get along" but I sure would like it were we to look beyond the tips of our noses when electing the president who will lead all 300,000,000 of us in all 50 states.