Skip to main content

had a bad day?


ok, so it's official (ish), the democrats now hold power in both houses of the american congress. virginia, that bastion of liberal mores, has fallen, which means that the dems now hold 51 seats in the senate, giving them more of an ability to reign in their cowboy-in-chief. (well, that actually counts the two independents who were elected as well. considering that one of those independents is joe lieberman, i wouldn't be counting on a lot of support for a progressive agenda.)

so should we break out the balloons? well, while gwb is one of my least favourite world leaders ever, i'm not exactly bouncing off the walls. after all, the definitive vote came from a state where the candidates were a republican and a former republican. the choice was not exactly overwhelming. in general the spectrum of american political parties runs from despicable to slightly less despicable, with the people being told by their media that the reason there aren't more parties is because they aren't needed or wanted. what a relief that must be to those struggling to hold their nose and place their vote at the same time.

so why doesn't the vote, excite me? well, it's hard to get too happy when you're looking at the initiatives to ban gay marriage getting approved by margins that make hilary clinton's win seem like a nail-biter. (note: these initiatives were not about allowing gay marriage. they were bills that would expressly forbid it, in case gays and lesbians had been lulled into a sense that they were tolerated.) and voters in that right-wing mecca of california said a resounding "no" to funding alternative energy and taxing oil companies to pay for it. bc hydro should try shutting down their power again to see if that jolts some sense into them. (ok, the fact is that it's a little more complicated than i'm making out. you can find arguments for and against and you can even read a conflicted person's dilemma here.)

on the other hand, california did show some good sense and reject the so-called "eminent domain reform", and voters everywhere endorsed initiatives that would raise the minimum wage above it's current "bad joke" level.

we're finally rid of donald rumsfeld, which can only be a good thing. (i wonder if bush realises that it would have won him votes and possibly the senate if he had done this two weeks ago?) and rick santorum, who apparently thinks that homosexuality and bestiality are synonyms, got is uptight whit ass handed to him.

but throw in the ongoing problems with the paperless voting system they are trying to implement and i have to say that i'm fairly ambivalent about the whole thing.

but considering that watching bush get re-elected in 2004 made me want to throw up on my living room area rug, ambivalent isn't a bad place to be.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

fun-raising

no, i am not dead, nor have i been lying incapacitated in a ditch somewhere. i've mostly been preparing for our imminent, epic move, which is actually not so terribly epic, because we found a place quite close to where we are now. in addition, i've been the beneficiary of an inordinately large amount of paying work, which does, sadly, take precedence over blogging, even though you know i'd always rather be with you.

indeed, with moving expenses and medical expenses looming on the horizon, more than can be accounted for even with the deepest cuts in the lipstick budget, dom and i recently did something that we've not done before: we asked for help. last week, we launched a fundraising campaign on go fund me. it can be difficult to admit that you need a helping hand, but what's been overwhelming for both of us is how quick to respond so many people we know have been once we asked. it's also shocking to see how quickly things added up.

most of all, though, the ex…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …