is this what the Republican Party stands for?

[lagilman]

From the Dallas News:

"At the Republican state convention, a booth hosted by Republicanmarket.com was selling a pin Saturday that says: 'If Obama is President will we still call it the White House?'"
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/06/stick-a-pin-in-it.html

If you go to their website (don't bother, I did it for you) you'll also see the full flower of Rebublican mysogeny on display with buttons like "KFC Special: 2 fat thighs, 2 small breasts, left wing." and "Life's a bitch, don't vote for one"

There are a few that are possibly acceptably rude -- the one of Teddy Kennedy asking Obama "if I drive her home, can I be VP" is worthy of a political satire license [EtA from comments -- tacky and distasteful, but fair grounds of satire], and "I will hold my nose when I vote for McCain" shows a remarkable amount of self-awareness if not party unity. But overall, this is a perfect display of the proudly-ignorant yokelish behavior that makes much of the world cringe when Ugly America takes the stand...

The members of the Texan Republican state convention should be ashamed that these buttons were sold at their event, much less that anyone wore even one. Is there nobody within the party ranks willing to come forward and loudly, publicly say "not acceptable!" Anyone? Bueller?

I may not be entirely enthralled with Senator Obama. But many of his attitudes -- and his actions -- are those of a civil, progessive leader. More, the thought of not voting for him -- or allowing my vote to lay fallow and possibly reward More of the Same McCain and a party that embraces homophobia, racism, and sexism as acceptable mores -- is just not in my nature. And if I saw anything similar at a convention I was attending, I'd be damn sure to make my distaste known, yes. Thankfully, although Skiffians aren't always the most, erm, socially adept of folk, we do tend to be more inclusive than exclusive.

This makes me feel a rant coming on about why I am not now nor ever have been affiliated with any political party or voting bloc organization....

EtA: Oh look. And here's the rant. Possibly incoherent, but heartfelt.
So, after much Big Talk, looks like Rove's gonna get a pass on ever saying anything under oath and in public, thereby ensuring that there is never accountability. And if he's not called to task, you think anyone else ever will? Democrats, we're looking at you. You had a chance to prove yourself, and you not only flubbed it, you flubbed it when everyone was looking.

Meanwhile, Republicans seem determined to Not Learn Anything about how to deal with people who dislike us-as-a-nation. And of course, the lovely Let the Money Do As They Please philosophy of economics has worked so well, hasn't it? Thanks for that too, Republican party.

But the Democrats have announced their intention to shove everything from the past eight years under the rug and then pretend the lump isn't there. And FISA? AT&T's got that one sewn up, thanks to Democrats who don't read their constituents' mail or listen to their phone calls or, apparently, give a flat flatulence about the Constitution.

There is no such thing as a "good" political party, and I think it's time for the American people to wake up, wise up, and walk away from affiliations that don't listen to you unless you've got the wherewithal to back their particular horse. Yes, I'm unaffiliated. I always have been. I took a hard look at the political parties when I was 18 and wasn't impressed then, even less impressed now. I'm an individual. I vote my individual conscience and opinions. And I don't ever, ever walk a party line I don't agree with, or vote a party line "just because it's not The Other." I think that's reprehensible.

If you've affiliated yourself -- are you happy with them? Can you support what affiliated Congresscritters have done with your trust? If you're not... walk. Dump them, and tell them why.

Political affiliations will always exist. But they shouldn't think they're Untouchable.

Comments

[redstarrobot.livejournal.com]

the one of Teddy Kennedy asking Obama "if I drive her home, can I be VP" is worthy of a political satire license

I don't know, a) making fun of a woman's death, b) arguably threatening a candidate and former first lady, and c) playing into the misogyny of eagerly wishing women (and, oddly, it's usually just the women) dead all seem to fall on the wrong side of the line for me. (Most of those points are also true of the "Hinckley Shot The Wrong Brady" pin one of those commenters mentions from 1996.)

[lagilman]

Oh, I never said it wasn't distasteful and tacky. Just that it was part of the rude history of political (and especially election-year) satire, specifically that of cartooning.

In a civil world, none of it would appear. It's all [to me, anyway, and I know that this is matter of YMWV] a question of what's showing uderneath In the case of the Kennedy one, it was pointing to the levels to which politiicans will undercut each other for personal gain, which is fair grounds for satire.

Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith.livejournal.com]

There's a long-standing joke that the first African-American president should paint the White House black. I doubt Obama would go for it, but I think it would be funny, even though it would piss people off. Some people just need to get over themselves.

[infiniteviking]

That is why I hate politics. And bigots of all stripes.

*grumbles something about O the humanity*

[hilleviw.livejournal.com]

As I've noted elsewhere, in general I'm finding the Democratic party has moved so far to the right that its agenda and mine barely even overlap anymore. I can't help wondering...if the Democrats lose even this election, which should really be a cakewalk, is that enough of a wake up call for them to notice they've left the party base behind in their rush to the right, and rethink some strategies? Can I live with four more years of The Stupid if it means the 40 following that are actually progressive instead of just slower recidivism?

[fakefrenchie.livejournal.com]

The Democrats are supposedly to the left? Not since Mondale, unfortunately.

Yeesh

[lt260.livejournal.com]

Amongst the comments at the Dallas News is one that quips about the obvious photoshop job. The GOP and its members are not afraid to say anything, no matter how false or demeaning, nor do they fear reprisal or just retribution. Why should they? All the criminals of King George's court will not see one day in jail or even a dollar in fines. When the highest office in the land is immune from responsibility for any misdeeds, what have the minions to fear?

PS: Both King George and Darth Cheney now have had articles of impeachment brought against them. Wherein is the hue and cry for proceedings and a trial? Buried at the capital by a reluctant press and even more reluctance by the Oatmeal Twins (Pelosi and Reid).

[neadods.livejournal.com]

Republicans seem determined to Not Learn Anything about how to deal with people who dislike us-as-a-nation

Somewhere online is an article about the authoritarian mindset and politics that is just fascinating. Basically, it goes into that whole "you're with us or against us" where might=right and any attempt to understand, negotiate, compromise, or even tolerate is a form of weakness.

You hear it coming out all the time in the talking points - giving terrorists human rights is showing weakness! It means they'll attack us again!

[darillian.livejournal.com]

The problem with these buttons is not just that they are uncivil, but that they display such a lack of class.

What a crude bunch of losers they are, to phrase things in such a low manner. I wouldn't want *anyone* representing me or my country if they do things in that manner.

There was a time when political representatives did things in a couth and classy manner. I'd like to see that again.

[onyxhawke.livejournal.com]

Much as i avoid poly-ticks in LJLand... One can note that when all one heard was "Condi for Prez" out of the right, there was none of this.

Double standard? Naw, can't be.

[jperceval.livejournal.com]

Amen! Everything you have said sums up why I'm an independent. Though I tend to vote Dem, I have never been able to bring myself to join the party.

[lagilman]

"I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member."

It's not as though I don't make my opinions known. In addition to voting every election I'm involved in (okay, I missed a few of the smaller local ones, I admit it) I'm also quite comfortable calling or e-mailing my local congresscritter or state rep and letting them know what I think about an issue, and my cash has found its way to support a candidate or two over the years. But they can't count on me before I decide. They have to prove themselves, first.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

"I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member."

You beat me to it. Anyone who wants political office is basically suspect to begin with. Anyone I'd actually want in office wouldn't touch said office with a ten-foot pole, because they're too smart.

So there's really never very much to be done about it. We're on our way out as a species, anyway.

[jhetley.livejournal.com]

Political parties suck. However, the candidates suck worse. While I was out for my bike ride yesterday, I kept running that one line from the song through my head: "That more than self their country loved..."

I haven't seen any indication, in the whole slew of candidates from either major party, that any of them loved their damned _party_ more than their own sweet ass.

[lagilman]

me, I don't care if a candidate loves their party. I don't even care if they "love" their country. I want them (him, her or Undecided) to want to be a proper, faithful representative of ALL the citizens, black white red green, female male in-transit or undecided, heterosexual homosexual metrosexual asexual, Christian Jewish Pagan Muslim agnostic atheist Buddhist pan-whateverish, single married poly, liberal conservative terrified aggressive, hawk or dove. And any other leaning I left out.

I don't even ask that they be ego-free, graft-free or folly-free. We're electing humans, after all. Just that they understand the basic job requirements and that they are obliged to maintain and live within them, no rewriting the laws and traditions to their own personal people-preferences....

(and yes, I mean this on both sides of the aisle)

And now I really need to wipe the taste of modern politics off my brain for a while, and dive back into Research...

[jhetley.livejournal.com]

We haven't done that well on the "alabaster cities" line, either.

[lagilman]

P.S. Just for jollies, remember when President Clinton was hailed as being "the first black president?" Remember???

He was actually called that because of the way the Black population responded to him, and he to them -- the polls indicated that they felt that he as theirs, in many ways. Why that was is open to discussion, but it certainly helped him carry the vote.

Also, and as an aside, Bill Clinton has The Gift all politicians crave -- immense personal charisma. And I mean immense, and across social and gender and racial barriers. When he looked at you, you felt that you were the most amazing person he'd ever spoken to, and you had his entire attention. Knowing that the next person in line would get the same treatment negated the effect not at all. I cynically think that's why so many old-timers hated him -- because there was no way to fight that kind of Gift.

Hillary has some of that, but what I'm curious to see is if Chelsea inherited it (word is that she got both her father's charisma and her mother's more subdued but still potent charm), and if so, what she does with it...

[burger-eater.livejournal.com]

I want to see pictures of everyone who wore that button at the convention. I know the Texas RNC gave that seller the boot, but I want to see pix of everyone walking around with one of those on their lapel.

[otterdance.livejournal.com]

Ah, you saw this too. I'm spreading the word, as well. I just typoed a new word at my LJ: Republiclan. Fitting, don't you think?

[handworn.livejournal.com]

There is no such thing as a "good" political party, and I think it's time for the American people to wake up, wise up, and walk away from affiliations that don't listen to you unless you've got the wherewithal to back their particular horse.

I keep thinking about Bismarck's line that in order to appreciate either laws or sausages, one should not inquire too closely into how they are made. The reason to deal with this party stuff, disappointing as it often is, is of course that politics are going to be done one way or another, and the rage of the uncompromising on one side or the other is entirely dismissable. Moral purity versus effectiveness is and always has been one of the great dialectics of democracy.