Dear GOP: Please stop being gay.

Seriously, this just isn’t funny anymore. At first I loved the deep irony of moralizing hypocrites like Mark Foley and Ted Haggard being outed as gay, but then the gay Republicans just kept on coming. It’s becoming a tired running gag, and I just can’t swallow it anymore. Last year saw Florida state Rep. Bob Allen, Washington state Rep. Dick Curtis, Young Republican National Federation President Glenn Murphy Jr., and several other Republicans’ political careers go up in flames in gay sex scandals, topped only by Senator Larry Craig. The latest one is Alabama Attorney General Troy King, already burdened with the name of a gay porn star.

The Alabama AG’s office is still denying it, but rumors are swirling around saying that King was caught in bed with another man… by his wife. Of course, this would just be a plain old boring gay sex scandal if it didn’t have a generous dollop of right-wing hypocrisy. In 1992 and 1993, King wrote several hateful anti-gay diatribes in the Crimson White, the University of Alabama’s student newspaper. Some of his ironic hits:

“The argument can often be heard that what goes on in the bedroom is private. However, it is flawed reasoning to attempt to justify the gay movement in America today on this basis, for they have taken sex from the confines of the bedroom into the streets, the evening news, and now even the front page of the newspaper.

“I often hear the argument that homosexuals who live together create a loving, caring family environment, perhaps an environment which is even superior to that which can be provided by a heterosexual couple. In this day of rampant decadence, many homosexuals would mislead society into believing that three men, an armadillo and a houseplant create a functional family. This is clearly flawed reasoning, which will wilt under scrutiny and should be dismissed as such.”

“To argue that Jesus Christ condones these acts is ludicrous and hardly even deserves a response. Perhaps, Jesus never addressed the issue of homosexuality because the horror of Sodom and Gomorrah still echoed across the ages like the deep rumble of judgment.”

So, naturally, he gets caught cheating on his wife with another man. I can’t even laugh at this sort of thing anymore. It’s not funny, it’s just depressing. I’d like to go half a year without hearing about a right-winger being revealed as a closet homosexual after a career of railing against the evils of homosexuality. I’d love to see just six months tick by without seeing a moralizing conservative’s pitiable hypocrisies laid bare to the world.

At this point, being vocally anti-gay might be one of the best indicators of homosexuality available, outside of actually admitting that you’re gay. Screw enjoying musical theater, watching Bravo, or listening to Coldplay. Preaching about how terrible homosexuality is might be the most direct way to set off a gaydar.

- Will

Impeachment and the concept of time in politics

It seems like impeachment is one of those issues that heavily divides the left. When Kucinich introduced the articles recently, half of the left celebrated it, half didn’t. Those who did thought it was overdue, lauding Kucinich for bravery. Those who didn’t said it was a waste of time, that it wouldn’t happen, and it was too late in his presidency.

That last part really irked me, because it’s something I hear a lot. On one of the news stations earlier this year, I heard an exchange discussing potential impeachment and Clinton came up. The argument was that Clinton was impeached in 1998, two years before his term ended. This is at the tail end of Bush’s, far too close to simply getting a new president. Why bother?

This is an attitude that only seems to exist in the realm of politics. You’re not going to find too many instances in civilian life where someone commits a crime and no one goes after him because “that’s ancient history now.” I murder a guy and if they pin me to it 20 years down the road, guess what? I’m gonna get popped. Mob bosses have been brought into court on the brink of death, but when it’s politics, it’s temporal.

Somehow people think that there’s this little window of opportunity, and the idea of making someone responsible for their crimes simply because that’s what we should do is completely lost. A moral issue is being dealt with on political terms, which is just plain sad.

The point isn’t what good it would do from a practical perspective, most prosecutions do nothing useful. Arresting someone for doing drugs in his living room, prosecuting a guy who killed his cheating wife, or a guy that burned down the store that fired him in front of his family isn’t going to actually do anything. No one was in danger of the first guy, the wife won’t come back from the dead and that store won’t un-burn. But we punish them because they deserve it.

It’s like Washington has lost its morals entirely, and everything is done with the question of “will this work politically?” And now I’m not even optimistic that Obama will make it different.

John McCain REALLY doesn’t understand the economy

A wise man once said that the ferocity with which someone defends their position is inversely proportional to how educated that position is. I have no idea who said it, but the point is that quote describes John McCain’s latest tirade against Social Security exceedingly well.

“Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today,” he said. “And that’s a disgrace. It’s an absolute disgrace, and it’s got to be fixed.”

As the AP, in a stunning display of clarity and objectivity, points out… that’s how Social Security works. That’s how it was set up, and it’s survived economic downturns that make our current situation look like a damn walk in the park. Social Security is amongst the greatest achievements the United States has made, and certainly the most impressive part of the New Deal. If McCain wasn’t a Senator, he’d be relying on it right now.

Social Security has flaws, including the potential to be massively underfunded in the future. It might be related to the fact that there’s a payroll tax cap at $90,000 and the retirement age is around 20 years under what most old people make it to (remember life expectancy is pulled down by young deaths). Obama had a good plan to start taxing the ultra-wealthy, as well as bring back the estate tax, which could eliminate the issues pretty swiftly. McCain? Not so much.

“I cannot tell you what I would do,” he said, “except to put everything on the table. Because as soon as I say ‘This is what would be my requirement,’ then you get into a huge fight and you get all the special interests involved. I would put everything on the table.”

Oh, and this is just too great to avoid:

“That’s why we have to fix it,” McCain said, pointing to a 1983 bipartisan agreement that bolstered Social Security for a while by cutting benefits and raising taxes.

Just imagine if, in a town hall meeting, Barack Obama cited that agreement. Immediate response? “See, Democrats just want to raise taxes!” I hardly expect that to get noticed at all from McCain.

FISA “compromise” passes in the Senate

You ever had one of those times when you knew something bad was coming, and the slow approach took so long that buy the time it arrives you’re no longer angry, but rather disappointed?

Well that’s what happened when I found out that the FISA bill passed. You know, the “compromise”.

The relatively one-sided vote, 69-28, came only after a lengthy and heated debate that pitted privacy and civil liberties concerns against the desire to prevent terrorist attacks. It ended almost a year of wrangling in the Democratic-led Congress over surveillance rules and the president’s warrantless wiretapping program that was initiated after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

…

The bill is very much a political compromise, brought about by a deadline: Wiretapping orders authorized last year will begin to expire in August. Without a new bill, the government would go back to old FISA rules, requiring multiple new orders and potential delays to continue those intercepts. That is something most of Congress did not want to see happen, particularly in an election year.

Yes, a political compromise that ended with a one-sided vote. By the by, what does a “compromise” look like in 2008 Washington? Apparently something like this: all Republicans voting yea, and all of the nays being Democrats.

If that sounds like a compromise to you, then congrats, you’d be great both in Washington and, I suppose, writing for the New York Times.