- BAC http://yikes101.blogspot.com/ I'd forgotten how much I enjoyed this blog and Kelso, SWM, professional gambler, businessman, investor, with a (yikes!) MBA in Stats and Finance is absolutely loving finding his inner FEMINAZI with the help of her writing and excellent links. Thanks, BAC. I'm loving this. I am a feminist. I've always been a feminist and now I'm going public!
- My old favorites the HELLIONS http://thedisbrimstone-dailypitchfork.blogspot.com/ for once again being brilliant visionaries. They are absolutely right. Ann Coulter IS a liberal Democrat. She's way too smart for her shit to be serious, so it makes seriously good satire, but sometimes she lets her liberal Democrat freak flag fly in very odd ways. John Edwards is a bit of a cretin and has lots and lots of problems in the old sex and gender department. I'm afraid Ann Coulter may well have been speaking truth to power with that little zinger at the Conservative confab last spring. Ok, ok, I won't be PC or shy. She called him a "fag."
A little more on this is worthy of examination. I didn't notice it during his 2004 VP debate against Dick Cheney because I was rooting for Edwards to get the best of Cheney. And then when the Republican criticism chorus came on, I paid it no mind because I was planning to vote for the Kerry/Edwards ticket, but...there was something a little weird about Edwards's bringing up Mary Cheney's being a lesbian and something weirder still about how Edwards said it and the look on his face as he said it. Then, there was the moment in the second debate this summer I've referred to before in which the Democratic candidates were asked their views on gay marriage. The best two answers were the direct ones: Kucinich (in favor), Clinton (against for now, but absolutely for domestic partnership having force of law). The worst was John Edwards's answer or non-answer or whatever it was that he said about God and again that weird disgusted look on his face. Then, he tried in vain to recoup by hiding behind some bullshit about his wife disagreeing with him on the issue. But it was too late for Edwards for me at that point. I had my doubts about anyone "changing" 180 degrees in four years. I'm 46 and I don't think any differently about things than I did when I was 42. I realized this guy hadn't changed at all and worse had some deep-seated homophobia and some bizarre issues that felt a little like misogyny to me. Finally, I have to admit missing his colossal fuck-up this week. I realized it listening to that funny guy with the Jim Beam in the youtube bragging about Clinton's win.
Katha Pollitt of The Nation has a very good blog entry on John Edwards's response to this made-up bullshit of Clinton crying. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/anotherthing?bid=25&pid=267536
You know something? John Edwards has a lot of problems with women and with his own sexual identity. While the MSM is horrible and Rush Limbaugh worse, it was not for nothing stuff about the haircuts and "the Breck girl" came out. The MSM and Limbaugh and Coulter (whether as satirical conservative or real one) were seeing something Kelso should have seen.
Here's a little anecdote from the life of Kelso which bears telling to shed some light on Edwards. There's a comic I knew from the NYC poker world who goes by the stage name of Robbie HaHa. He may even have a website. It's been two years since I've spoken with him. He's a Marine who fought in Vietnam and has kind of an old-school New York tough-guy vibe. He's also gay and loves being gay and tells hilarious jokes about it in his act and even funnier ones around the card table.
When he was dealing Hold 'Em in the poker clubs, let's say at a normal table of nine players seven of the nine of us would be straight and the two others gay. I remember everybody laughing like crazy at the jokes -- and these were some rude jokes, too -- and no one feeling uncomfortable in the slightest. That's only natural, no? If you are comfortable with where you are on the sexual continuum, why would stuff like that bother you? If it's funny you laugh. If it's interesting in some way you listen. If it's boring or stupid you pay it no mind. That's how it was. There's something not like that with John Edwards. There's something off.
So, let me turn Edwards's attack on Clinton around on candidate Edwards. I'd be perfectly happy with a gay president. I just don't know how comfortable I'd be with a confused president.
Kelso's Nuts love you
12 comments:
whatever ...
edwards may or may not have sexual identity issues. in the end, who cares. i suggest we give him a break. mostly because even though he's only recently become a true progressive, his progressivism is influencing the debate in this race in a very substantive and important way.
I really, really wanted to believe in Edwards. It didn't really make sense to me that someone could "change" their core beliefs on war, peace and labor at the drop of a hat, but I figured "well, he did grow up poor and he was an excellent class-action tort attorney, and he couldn't have enjoyed being made a fool of by Dean from the left during primaries and by Kerry's ineptitude from the right in the gen'l election and then the Shrum book trashing him came out"... and I figured, maybe, just maybe he was for real.
But... When I thought about it some, I realized before the penny dropping for me on his potential "confusion" that even if he did disavow his vote for the wars, he really had a pretty conservative attitude all around. Not terribly to Clinton's left and not a real progressive like Kucinich. He's still super pro death penalty and law-and-order. His Iraq and health care reform plans aren't that different from hers and don't get close to even Dean's Dr Dinosaur program in VT for children up to 21, let alone Kucinich's steadfast single-payer plan. Edwards is very much a hawk on the Patriot stuff and doesn't have much respect for privacy rights despite having been an attorney and although he talks a good game about his financing, he's raising from the same sources as everybody else. Furthermore, I wouln't call him particularly committed to labor. I haven't heard anything from him on "immigration reform" which deviates from the Republican's two prongs: indentured servitude or deportation.
And then there's his whole religious shtick. I'm not down with that at all. And like all Democratic candidates except for Kucinich Edwards is scared to defend himself vigorously when the press calls him "strident." The gay stuff just reaffimed that he's still something of an Elmer Gantry.
I also have hated his constant praise of Obama at these debates when Obama's record of opinions on the wars is mixed at best. I'm put off by the fact that he's a great lawyer but always get creaned in the debates. That was worrisome. It did not speak well of his leadership qualities.
And, now, I've come to believe some of this inconsistency is part of a greater sexual confusion. To me, the confusion is trouble.
On the other hand, all it means is that he's neurotic like everybody else, which means he's a human being, not an android like Obama is. Clinton, for me, is an easy choice. Given a choice of Edwards or Obama or even Edwards or anyone else save Kucinich whom I prefer over all of them, I'd take Edwards without blinking.
Christ, I once had a shrink tell me that he felt he'd "cured" a patient if he or she came to be "merely neurotic." Why should I expect a guy like Edwards to be able to ID with something like that being Southern and pro-capital punishment and a DLC guy? Because he's a great fucking attorney and one hell of a bright guy and his wife is an incredibly impressive woman [no Hallmark cancer shit, either; I've dug her since he made his run at Faircloth(?)].
Ultimately, I see him much as I see Al Gore, Jr., a gifted thinker and talented guy who -- being Southern -- has had to walk an incredibly fine line and because of the unique pressures of being a real person in a part of the world which seems to require some unsual behavior from its men, has had to make bad choices. Thus, probably, the confusion, sexual or not.
But, again, I come back to the key questions: (1) Is Edwards really a progressive? For a Southerner yes, for an average American Democrat, no. (2) I know I'd hate to see an insenstive clod like Obama have to do pretty much all the on-the-job training another insensitive clod, George Bush, failed to do, I don't think given the choices, I want to have to worry about Edwards's various confusions and internal dramas. I usually loathe this pop psychological kind of analysis but I've discussed this stuff before with a couple of quants and we are so baffled by Edwards's inability to just snowball every debate, that we feel something's got to be amiss.
" I once had a shrink tell me that he felt he'd "cured" a patient if he or she came to be "merely neurotic." "
oh boy. i totally wish i could be 'merely' neurotic.
oh well.
A rule of thumb -- every man I have ever been able to picture having sex with has turned out to be gay or bi, even when they were outwardly straight. I can picture making love with Edwards, because he's cute and has a great smile and doesn't look like his beard would be too rough, which oddly is the thing about it that puts me off the most. I think he may use face lotion.
PS as for his "amazing" legal abilities, it would impress me more if he had been a lawyer DEFENDING doctors against malpractice in a poor state and had still put up a great record. Now your friend who got a Manhattan jury to let Robert Chambers off with man 2 or whatever it was, that's a lawyer! Or Barry Scheck, he's a better lawyer and also has done way more for people than JE ever did.
G's_B: One of the reasons you remain one of my oldest and closest friends is that YOU PLAY BIG. A straight dude not afraid to admit to having imagined sex with men. Very strong. I can't see fucking John Edwards myself, but each to his own.
And you absolutely got me on this one. I bet $200, and you raised me $10,000,000. Let me exercise my right to revise and extend my remarks. I am a feminist. I have always been a feminist. And now I'm going public. I've already been public with not only being a capitalist but also a leftist which would make me a "limousine liberal" in America, a "champagne socialist" in the UK, but it has no equivalent in Panama because even the right-wing here is left of America's Democratic Party so every person with two nickels to rub together es "izquierdista de lujo" o sea.
But let's get back to feminism. and attorneys. It's not just a question of "friend." I am represented in the United States by the law firm of Litman, Asche and Gioiella. I have always been represented by the firm of Litman, Asche and Gioiella. I like them as friends. And I've been public about it, obviously, but thus far it's been irrelevant on my blog.
While the latter two name partners handle most of my affairs, Jack Litman did indeed secure a very light sentence for Robert Chambers in the death of Jennifer Levin and he fought hard to get it. Messrs Gioiella and Asche, Esq., were able to get an acquittal for Thomas Wiese of one of the NYC cop scandals. It is an infamous general practice law firm with a specialty in criminal defense and litigation. No apologies. I'm calling the raise. This blog has always been skeptical about America's obsession with the concept and politics of "law and order," and very critical of their companion TV empire. And I guess I'm being too-clever-by-half again because I am represented in Panama by the former attorney general in the Moscoso adminsitration.
On the other side of the ledger, LAG LAW, with a small piece of USA v KPMG were able to smash the Larry Thompson Memorandum (bit of fascism brought to you by one of Ashcroft's Uncle Tom subalterns) into smithereens. They have each served as head of the NYS criminal bar and have not been shy about arguing against capital punishment on Larry King, etc. And you're absolutely right. I'd never swap them for John Edwards. Never.
I think you were able to catch here because I went against my better instincts and tried to be "fair". I'm for Clinton for a whole bunch of reasons and one of them is that I don't trust John Edwards. [I have no opinion whatsoever about the skills and social conscience of Barry Scheck.]
With Scheck I was referring to discrediting the OJ DNA evidence, for lawyering, and then creating the Innocence Project, for using DNA to release Death Row inmates wrongly convicted. Just put yourself in the place of even one of these men, for one second, and think about what they think about Barry Scheck.
I'd be perfectly happy with a gay president. I just don't know how comfortable I'd be with a confused president.
we have a confused president.
It didn't really make sense to me that someone could "change" their core beliefs on war, peace and labor at the drop of a hat,
we have one of those also - Mitt Romney. tho his changes have eveything to do with marriage and gay rights and immigration and abortion. i dont think mitt is confused, just a fucking liar
I thought we already had a gay president.
I heard their making a movie about it as we speak, "Brokeback Presidency."
I meant "they're."
Obviously that's what I meant.
Who writes "their" when they mean "they're?"
that's so funny. i just saw brokeback mountain for the first time last night.
it was ok. a little over-rated perhaps. but i have to say, heath ledger is one SEXY man in that film.
Gary's Boner is way too modest. He came up with something that should catch on as worldwide No Limit Texas Hold 'Em shorthand.
The name of the starting hand K-K: "BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN" jajaja
Ty, G'sB for precis on Scheck. I guess it all comes full circle, no? Or at least when it comes to politics it's always HIGH NOON in Chicago.
I recall that the INNOCENCE PROJECT comes out of Northwestern University Law School. This led to Republican Governor George Ryan declaring moratorium on death penalty. Whether what followed was related or not, or even whether it was ex-post or ex-ante, I don't remember. BUT...during the course of the corruption investigation into George Ryan, the gossip about JACK (no relation) Ryan's sexual activity found light. On the Democratic side, the nomination for the seat PETER Fitzgerald (who beat Carole Moseley-Braun!) vacated was won by an obscure Illinois State Senator named Barack Obama in a close 4-way race. Jack Ryan, the Republican nominee, was crushing Obama in the polls when the sex stuff came out and Ryan withdrew leaving Obama without an opponent. Republica party threw up Alan Keyes as a sacrifice and the rest....
Meanwhile, back at the ranch Uncle Ben was converting rice or granny was beating off the Indians with a stick...and Barack Obama remains PRO DEATH PENALTY (in fairness, so do Clinton, Edwards and everyone else left in the presidential nominating contests except Kucinich and Paul).
Post a Comment