Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Texas’

Schizophrenic State

September 29, 2012 5 comments

As those who know me have long known, and as most others have guessed from my nom de blog, I am a denizen of the great state of Arkansas, the butt of our national jokes and general, all-purpose whipping boy.  Trust me, a lot of that is deserved – look at our state rankings in education, health care, income, and any number of other measures, and it quickly becomes obvious that we don’t have our shit together.

But one thing has long irked me, and that’s the tendency of bloggers and others in the more-liberal-than-thou coastal areas to tar our state with the same reactionary brush they apply (correctly) to Texas, Mississippi, and other god-forsaken places.  While it’s true that Arkansas shares some regrettable traits with these places, including racism, general ignorance, and hyper-fundamentalist religiosity, it has a populist streak not found in those areas.  Note that I said “populist”, not “progressive.”  It’s merely coincidental that some of the things that happen here politically look like the latter to outsiders; they without exception are the result of the former.

Thanks to that widespread misunderstanding, for the past month national publications have ballyhooed Arkansas’ status as “the first Southern state” to put medical marijuana to the vote.  It’s true; the Compassionate Care Act will appear on our Nov. 6 ballot.  But the first mistake in this media meme is the assumption that Arkansas is part of a monolithic South, which it isn’t and never has been; error the second is in assuming that the development in any way indicates that progressivism is gaining purchase in Arkansas or in other areas of the old Confederacy.

The fact is, the initiative almost didn’t make it to the ballot as a result of several rejections of the ballot title language by the state’s Attorney General, an initial insufficient number of valid voter signatures on petitions, and a late Supreme Court challenge after the other hurdles had been cleared.  Along the way, state lawmakers weighed in with the opinion that the measure was proof of the need to “reform” the initiative process – a concern that none of them voiced in regard to a casino amendment put forward by a private individual which, had it made it to the ballot and passed, would have allowed said individual to write into the state constitution a monopoly for herself on all casinos in the state, as well as set her own preferred tax rate, free from the interference of meddling officials actually elected by the people of the state.  It’s good to know our elected representatives have their priorities straight.

The court challenge came, as might have been predicted, from one of several religious political groups operating in Arkansas who see their mission as making sure that the rest of us don’t do anything that they believe might make God mad; apparently their belief is that God gets pissed when people with debilitating illnesses experience less pain and discomfort.  God gave them that illness – they should welcome it!  It is His divine plan that the only relief should come from billion-dollar pharmaceutical companies.

The court challenge has actually been the most entertaining part of the whole story so far.  Jerry Cox, head of the Family Council and someone I know from personal experience to be a less-than-honest operator, announced his group’s intent to challenge the initiative, under the pretext that the ballot title didn’t explain to voters all the problems that states which have passed medical marijuana laws have experienced as a result.  I, who am not an attorney, thought “wow, that’s some weak sauce;  that can’t be what he’s planning on arguing to the court, because they don’t care about that – they only care about whether or not the ballot title accurately describes what the law will do.”  I assumed there was some other argument with actual legal grounding that would be made; as it happens, I was wrong.  In a very unusual move, the Court announced that they didn’t want to hear oral arguments from either side; I interpreted that as being an indication that either they didn’t intend to give Jerry Cox a soapbox or they intended to bend intepretation of the law to the breaking point in order to toss the initiative from the ballot.  As it turns out, it was the former reason – the court handed down their ruling on Thursday and noted that the ballot title language was “free of partisan coloring,” which was exactly what Cox and the Family Council were arguing was the reason it should be rejected – because it didn’t make their argument for them in the ballot title wording.

So now, it’s on to the election.  My prediction?  I think it’s going to pass.  The only polling done on the issue was back in May or June; at that time, 47% indicated support vs. 46% who were against.  As I joked to my sister, half the people in the state have a family member or friend who’s farming in the national forest, which in and of itself should be enough to put it over the top.  But in all seriousness, while that may be a small factor, the bigger reason is that people here simply don’t like being told what to do by outsiders.  The Attorney General’s insistence that the ballot title language include a reminder that marijuana is still illegal under federal law will, if anything, persuade some voters to vote in favor of the initiative.  The old bootlegger vs. federal revenooers attitude is still alive and thriving in large pockets of the state.  That attitude is a double-edged sword, to be sure:  it’s the same one that gave rise to the Central High crisis of 1957.  But it continues to exert an influence that makes the state politically schizophrenic and impossible to pin down.

The other reason I think this will pass is purely anecdotal – over the past several months, in general conversation with several people who I would not expect to be supportive of the initiative, I’ve been surprised time and again when they not only bring up the issue but volunteer that they’re planning on voting in favor of it.  These are mostly people over the age of 50, some of whom are regular church-going folks, which leads me to believe that if the undercurrent of support is that strong in this group, it’s going to pass.

Which means that after November, this will be a state in which same-sex marriage is prohibited by the state constitution, while medical marijiuana is legal – putting us a mere couple of years behind California, politically-culturally-speaking.  This will surprise no one who knows anything at all about the state – we sent the first woman to the US Senate way back in the 1930’s, then several decades later produced the fine specimen of a state legislator who coined the term “barefoot and pregnant.”  Obama is currently polling at about 35% here, while at the same time we have the only governor in the region – a Democrat re-elected in the Teabagger high-water-mark year of 2010 by a landslide – who has embraced the Medicaid expansion under his health care plan.

So the next time you’re tempted to lump us in with the lunatics in Texas, Mississippi, or Oklahoma, just….don’t.  We’re an island of sanity in comparison to the reactionary ignoramuses who surround us.  That’s a frightening thought, but we do get things right sometimes, though it’s for different reasons than you might expect.

Puzzling Evidence

March 12, 2012 1 comment

This comes courtesy of John Cole at Balloon Juice.  I don’t recommend watching the whole thing, but there is one bit that’s almost inspired in its lunacy at about 10:30 into the clip.  This comes from the floor of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, which should come as no surprise to anyone who knows anything about Oklahoma – a state which, I have long averred, would be where God would stick the tube should He decide in His infinite wisdom to give the United States an enema. 

Of course, I was reminded of this:

Not surprising that Oklahoma bellies right up to the part of Texas featured in True Stories; folks in more enlightened lands might not have realized it when the movie was made back in the late ’80’s, but it was a very accurate representation of that part of the country.  In the 25 years since, the views of the majority of people in this area have not moderated; if anything, they’ve only grown more extreme.  Oklahoma and west Texas rival South Carolina for the title of most reactionary area of the country.

Imagine My Parents’ Pride

September 9, 2011 5 comments

The following are the top search engine terms that found our site:

Search Views
perry and corndog 4
rick perry corndog 3
rick perry eating corndog creation of adam 2
rick perry eating a dick 2
perry corndog adam 2
rick perry penis corn dog 2
choad 2

Since I see no reason to break this streak, I give you the following:

Anticipation….an-ti-ci-payay-shun…

I haven’t done any political consulting since way back before the dawn of the Internets, but even then, I would have never allowed any of my candidates to eat a corndog in public.

It’s just too….obvious.

Also, Too

August 20, 2011 5 comments

Rick Perry fights a losing battle with Adam's Little Soldier

Courtesy of Gen. JC Christian.

Phallic Fair Food Fetish Continues

August 17, 2011 1 comment

When you are courting the votes of homophobes while battling rumors of your own homosexuality, corndogs probably aren't the best option on the menu for you

Alternate porn-y title:  “Rick Perry gives his all as he wrestles a giant foot-long into submission.”

You gotta admit, he looks like he really knows his way around that thing.

PERRYPALOOZA!

August 14, 2011 4 comments

Well, it’s official now:  the GOP has the obligatory dumb Texan candidate for the presidency; this one gets bonus points for conspicuously aping the last dumb Texan to run in both diction and physical gesture.

In keeping with my long tradition of trying to help out GOP candidates whenever possible, I’ve put together a few bumperstickers for Mr. Perry:

One that asks, “remember how you felt 4 years ago?”
One to remind people that Perry’s hair is an entity unto itself – and probably a smarter and more competent one than Perry
Another one to remind people of our recent brush with disaster

Expect relentless media fellating of the Texas goober’s record on “job creation”; absent, of course, any mention of the fact that all the jobs created were of the minimum wage variety.  If’n it’s good enough for them heartlanders, by gum, it’s good enough for the rest of us!  Also expect to hear no mention of the fact that, for all of Perry’s appeals for divine intervention to end his state’s drought/improve our economy/etc., the Almighty has turned a cold shoulder.  Yeah, that’s right – God hates Rick Perry, and He’ll hate the rest of us too if we make him president.

 
And we’ll deserve it.

Step Aside, Jimmy Carter…History Has a New Greatest Monster

June 30, 2011 16 comments

Step aside, Jimmy Carter…your many misdeeds, including all those houses you’ve built for Habitat for Humanity and the almost-completed initiative to eradicate the horrifying scourge of the guinea worm have been overshadowed by the malevolent designs of our current president.

This least of God's creatures will soon be extinct, thanks to the evil machinations of Jimmy Carter

President Obama, in a an attempt to show gays & lesbians once and for all how much he hates them, yesterday held an event at the White House to ridicule and demean LGBT Pride Month.  Taunting the assembled activists by refusing to make an unequivocal statement in support of legalizing gay marriage nationwide, the president went on to enumerate his many offenses against the gay community – and how they do add up.  There’s the hate crimes law, named after Matthew Sheppard to diminish and exculpate the suffering he endured at the hands of homophobic bigots.  There’s the executive order Obama issued prohibiting any hospital accepting Medicaid or Medicare funds from keeping gay partners from the bedsides of ill loved ones.  Then there’s the end of the HIV travel ban and the first-ever national strategy for fighting HIV/AIDS.  Last but not least, there are the biggest slaps to the face to the LGBT community – the repeal of DADT and his refusal to order the Justice Department to vigorously defend DOMA.

Clearly, the man is hell-bent on the destruction of our gay and lesbian friends, and must be stopped.  Just watch this clip, and note the hatred emanating from his every pore:

We have no choice but to primary his black ass if he does not give in to our demands to say what we must hear if we are to believe his intentions are anything other than sinister.

I am reminded of this

Ok, enough sarcasm.

 My ass is chapped a bright red today thanks to being lectured on my lack of “morality” and my “bigotry” and my desire to “blame gays and lesbians” for any electoral loss the president may suffer in 2012 if he comes out in full-throated support for same-sex marriage legalization.  I was given quite the dressing down on how “principles are paramount” and how, apparently, the principles an individual subscribes to can best be gauged by their words rather than their actions.  And you know – it REALLY pissed me off.
 
There’s a faction on the left that doesn’t know how to disagree with people who share their goals, without impugning their motives or morals, when they have a difference of opinion on how best to reach those goals.  Because this discussion took place on someone else’s blog, I restrained myself from responding in kind, instead just asking in the hypothetical, “would it be FAIR for me to assert that YOU are actively trying to derail marriage equality in states like mine for the next several decades with your demands that the president’s words are more important than his actions, and that if he doesn’t say what you want to hear, then he shouldn’t be re-elected?”  Because the simple fact is, same-sex marriage is not going to be legal for a long time to come in places like Arkansas, Texas, Georgia, Alabama, etc. if we don’t secure a majority on the Supreme Court.  You just aren’t going to get a referendum passed in a state that 7 years ago amended its constitution to outlaw gay marriage with a 75% majority vote.  You also aren’t going to get a law through a legislature in a state where opposition is running that high.  The only way equality is going to come to these states any time soon is through a friendly court.  And the only way we’re going to get a friendly court is with a second term for President Obama.
 
So if your insistence is that ONLY a statement of support by the president will suffice, and said statement leads to 1% or 2% of the voters in a place like OH, IN, VA, CO, NC deciding to vote against you or stay home on election day, causing you to lose the state and, as a result, the election, you can kiss the Supreme Court goodbye for the next decade at least – and any chance for marriage equality in most of the red states along with it.  And for what gain?  So you can feel good, or be reassured that your “principles” are being upheld?  Because there’s no gain in the gamble if you win it, but there’s a hell of a lot to lose if you don’t.
 
Perhaps the social climate where some of these folks live is so different that they can’t conceive of an election turning on this one issue.  I’d advise them to think back to 2004, when the Republicans used anti-gay marriage referenda in a number of states to drive turnout and drag their already-a-loser-of-a-president over the finish line.  Demanding that Obama make a supportive statement – right now, this instant – is the same thing as demanding that he hand the Republicans everything they need to get out the vote.  If you’re sitting in the northeast or on the west coast, maybe that’s not that big of a deal to you, because it’s not impossible where you live that your state will address this issue on its own within the next several years, should Republicans re-take the White House.  But it’s a very big deal to your comrades in places where that’s not an option.  Their right to equality comes before your desire to hear pretty words.  This is not the hill upon which anyone should choose to die.  Suck it up, and stop being such assholes to people who are on your side.
 
P.S.  There was one amusing point in the conversation, which came when I demanded that one of the purists tell me HOW she planned to get marriage equality passed in Texas if we lost the election, and with it, the court.  Her plan?  Obama should do “arm-twisting” like LBJ did on the Civil Rights Act.  Yes, that’s right – the plan B was for Obama to go twist the arms of a bunch of reactionary yahoos elected to office by teabaggers, and…voila!!…they would all get on board.  Even though opposition is running at 70% or more in their states.  It’s almost like a twist on the Underpants Gnomes formula:
Step 1:  Twist arms!!!
Step 2:  ????
Step 3:  Victory!!!

It would be funny if the rights of real people weren’t at stake.

Update 7/2:  Ok, this cuts it.  I was willing to overlook all of Obama’s other hateful actions against the gay community, but this…this cuts it:  “Today, the Department of Justice filed a brief in federal court employee Karen Golinski’s federal court challenge, supporting her lawsuit seeking access to equal health benefits for her wife and arguing strongly that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional in terms unparalleled in previous administration statements.”  Why won’t Obama just make a big speech about how he supports gay marriage instead of all this pussy-footing around?  HUH?