Madam President, Queen of Snark (kellinator) wrote,
Madam President, Queen of Snark
kellinator

  • Mood:

Political thought

Wouldn't it be supremely ironic if George W. Bush finally made good on his claim to be "a uniter, not a divider" -- by uniting voters of all creeds and political persuasions to vote against him?

I'm very obviously not a Republican, but from what I understand of the party ideals, if you're a Republican I can't fathom why you'd want Bush as the main representative of your party. I thought Republicans were supposed to be all about fiscal responsibility. Bush has shown none. In fact, he's pissed away the surplus left by that notorious tax-and-spender, Clinton.

And here's another thought that's been driving me crazy for the past few days -- the furor over same-sex marriage rights should be exposing the hypocrisy of so many in the Republican party. So many Republicans are constantly insisting that they want less government, "no more big government" -- well, as far as I can tell, that means they want less government poking around in big business, but apparently it's the government's sacred duty to tell people what they can and can't do in the bedroom. Why does anyone else care? Don't give me that "sanctity of marriage" bullshit: Vegas' new ad campaign invites you to go there and marry a total stranger, and that was even before Britney Spears' little matrimonial adventure, plus we've got an entire genre of reality shows based around marriage or at least the possibility thereof in increasingly depraved variations (streamweaver and I have agreed the thing that makes "My Big Fat Obnoxious Fiance" watchable is the fact that the bleach-blond money-hungry this-is-going-to-launch-my-career-and-I-don't-care-who-gets-hurt-in-the-process bitch being duped so richly deserves it). We straight people are doing a fine job of ruining marriage on our own, trust me. It reminds me of a debate on same-sex marriage rights I attended at Vanderbilt a few years ago. At the very beginning, those speaking for equal marriage rights stood up and said "We're not telling anyone what to do religiously, we just want equal civil marriage rights." Then the anti-people got up and STARTED RAILING ON RELIGION, as if they hadn't even listened to what was just said, which I suspect they hadn't (I knew one personally and he was a bona fide idiot). Think about it: can you heard anyone make a single argument about same-sex marriage rights that isn't rooted in religion or similar morality issues? So you object because you think men marrying men or women marrying women is icky. Well, I think anyone marrying Newt Gingrich is icky, but that doesn't mean I don't think people should have the right to. (Whether they're fucking stupid enough to marry Newt Gingrich, Mr. Family Values who didn't pay his child support and was conducting an extramarital affair at the same time he was on his Contract On With America rampage, is another matter entirely.) Look at the Bible, for heaven's sake, all you fundies: Did Jesus spend His furor on the prostitutes and tax collectors? No, He saved it for the Pharisees, who held themselves up as superior and perverted religion to hold others down and enrich themselves. And yet so many people out there follow the example of the Pharisees rather than that of Jesus. Those people make me sick. Yeah, I do plenty of things that I probably shouldn't be doing, but I'd like to think I try to treat people with kindness and compassion. What good is nitpicking Leviticus if you can't get the basic ideas down?

That's my rant, and I'm stickin' to it.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 26 comments