Bungling Politicians Cast Dull Shadow Over Summer Fun
This summer, while Americans were casually lounging at the beach and relaxing in the sun, the “boys of summer” have been hard at work, and in most cases, working against the national interest. And no, I’m not talking about major league ball players, I mean the real boys of summer—politicians, candidates, and legislators who know that they can get away with more than usual while you are beating the heat in Somers Point or dipping your coins in the slot machines across the way in Atlantic City, cheerfully distancing yourself from the beltway and the campaign trail.
I am happy to present to you, the loyal readers of PoliticalGrind.com, a list of some of the wildest, wackiest antics of our politicos over the past few months. Zinc up your sniffer, lay back in your tanning bed, and prepare to be burned by these political shenanigans:
1) “Brownback takes aim at ‘Law and Order”
This headline, ripped from the pages of The Hill, highlights a story from July 12 about how United States Senator and presidential candidate Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) is pushing legislation aimed at preventing network T.V. stations from airing shows like Law and Order and 24 before 10 p.m.!
That’s right. The good Senator from Kansas has determined that in order to save the children, he must stop them from possibly viewing “indecent material” (Brownback’s words) on network television. Forget the national debt, the war in Iraq, Islamic terrorism, and illegal immigration. Some poor 12 year old kid in Blawnox, PA is being exposed to a Jack McCoy cross examination that will likely lead to nightmares and a long career as a gang member.
The sad part is that some people out there are still supporting Sam Brownback for president and that Kansans have actually elected him to hold public office. I suppose that nanny-staters like Brownback never really learn that parents should raise their own children, not the government.
2) “Cheney: Office not part of executive branch”
You have to thank the Washington Post for this gem of a headline. I recall learning in fifth grade of the differences between the legislative and the executive branches of the American governmental system. These concepts were reinforced in sixth, seventh, eight, ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grades. And in college. And in grad school. And through any efforts to read the newspaper on a regular basis. Could it be that Vice President Cheney, through his infinite wisdom, has proven that everything that every American elementary school student knows about the division of powers between the three branches of government is wrong?
Recall that this is the same Cheney who stated two years back that the insurgency in Iraq was in its “final throes.” A few thousand American soldiers later, we are still fighting this very insurgency. Doing a little basic fact checking, I consulting a primary source document called the United States Constitution, and for those who are curious or stupid, the Vice President’s office is in the Executive Branch.
3) “McCain Loses Two Iowa Strategists”
The intrigue here isn’t the A.P. article dated July 12, 2007, but rather the details, which unfortunately received very little discussion in the media:
“In more bad news for McCain, a co-chair of his Florida campaign—state Rep. Bob Allen—was arrested Wednesday after offering to perform oral sex for $20 on an undercover male police officer, authorities said.”
The same week that Rudy Giuliani’s Iowa co-chair was busted for dealing cocaine (or maybe it was crack—then again—does it matter?), John McCain’s male Florida co-chair was busted for offering to oral sex to a male cop. Do either of these cases seem to inspire the American people to trust Washington or politicians to look out for their best interests? Methinks not.
4) Inept Iraqi Government Antics, a “Surge” of Illegals, and Wiretapping Pandemonium
As Rome burns, Senator McCain deals with his oral sex-soliciting co-chair, Sam Brownback goes on the offensive against Sam Waterson, and Dick Cheney confuses school children everywhere, serious business is occurring in Washington. The Bush Administration, with the help of the Democrat-controlled Congress, has decided that they want to reserve the right to know exactly who you are talking to and when while simultaneously failing to handle their own jobs of securing victory in Iraq.
CIA Director Mike Hayden commented in a July 12 Washington Post interview that there is an “inability of the government to govern” in Iraq, which in his view is “irreversible.” Hayden went on to suggest that he could not “point to any milestone or checkpoint where we can turn this thing around,” and that “The government is unable to govern.” For clarification purposes, he was talking about the Iraqi government, not our own.
Basically, the Iraqi government cannot govern its own nation and has the opportunity to actually accomplish less during this calendar year than the Congress of the United States.
In the same breath, the Washington Post reported on August 1 that the Bush Administration has been, as suspected by many folks, and incorrectly denied by conservative pundits such as myself, seeking to spy on American citizens, not just Islamic fundamentalists who seek to restore the caliphate and destroy civilization as we know it. A few days after that report, the Administration received congressional authorization to expand surveillance without any sort of court order.
The Congress failed to deny the Bush Administration in their request to further intrude upon the American people. The right thing to do is to assert that the national interest seeks to weed out Islamists without stripping Americans of their most basic rights.
Also, illegal immigrants are still pouring into the nation at record levels, bringing poverty, disease, increasing crime rates, awful gang violence, and a desire for reconquista with them, not to mention that they are costing us millions in health care, public services, and expenses. Unfortunately, the Congress did not correct this problem, although they were able to pass the surveillance bill within three days of its introduction. Go figure.
5) Hot on the Trail
Finally, a quick look at what you mercifully missed on the presidential campaign trail:
- Hillary vowing to take away money from those who make too much
- Mrs. Obama attacking Hillary’s sham marriage
- Mrs. Obama complaining about the “Obama Girls” on the internet
- Mrs. Edwards attacking Ann Coulter on Hardball
- John Edwards attacking Ann Coulter in all speeches as if she were a candidate
- Ann Coulter’s book sales increasing thanks to Edwards’ family attacks
- A Democrat candidate debate every 24 hours
- Ron Paul continuing to make more sense than everyone else combined
- GOP officials trying to ban Ron Paul from debating
- Ron Paul continued to win or place better-than-expected in numerous straw polls
- Rudy Giuliani’s daughter endorsing Barrack Hussein Obama
- John McCain’s amnesty-triggered campaign implosion
- Tom Tancredo threatening to bomb Mecca and Medina
- Fred Thompson wearing Gucci shoes to his first rural Iowa visit
- Senator Gravel declaring that the Spartans fought better in combat because their soldiers were encouraged to be homosexuals.
As you can see, the summer winds came blowing in, and brought with them a plethora of political baloney, lunacy, and claptrap.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically each day to your feed reader. If you don't have a feed reader, you can always have these articles delivered to your email inbox every day. Click here to sign up.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
Comments
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>





fuck censorship and fuck brownback for trying to censor.
woah woah woah!! If the government stops raising our children, how will we have time to watch reality tv shows. Dancing with the Stars is on, can't the government help my kid with his math homework? hehe great recap of the Washington silliness
The wind appears to blow from one direction for the most part, why is that? Zero from the Left to talk about?
Immigration has emerged in the last several years among the most controversial issues in American public discourse. On the one hand, there people who claim, like Nathan, "illegal immigrants are still pouring into the nation at record levels, bringing poverty, disease, increasing crime rates, awful gang violence." On the other hand, there are people who understand that the entire economy of certain sections of the country (most notably California) would be destroyed if there were no immigrant labor–no illegal resident from Mexico, Nicaragua, and the like to do the dirty work of serving the food and cleaning the toilets and trimming the hedges. The white middle class of California would not know what to do if all the brown-skinned waiters and janitors and ditch diggers and gardeners suddenly disappeared. It is is in the interest of the rich in the U.S. t keep the borders permeable in order to keep the cost of labor down. It is in the interest of African-American, the descendants of the slaves, to keep the Mexicans out so that they can get the minimum-wage jobs which immigrants are presently taking away from them. If there is a depression in the U.S., the Immigration and Naturalization Service (one of the most backward and cruel agencies of the U.S. government) will simply start shipping lots of brown-skinned people back across the Mexican border. At the moment, with full employment, there is no need to do so.
Hey X, It's good to see you again!
Thanks, Simmons.
Welcome back X. I deleted the duplicate comment that Simmons replied to… I think the Intense Debate team is working on a fix for the duplicate entries. I wish I could just re-associate your reply (Simmons), to X's original post.
For the last 12 months on this blog I have picked on liberals in every single article that I have composed. You can check the archive to see what I mean. Unfortunately, the most recent humiliations and blunders have been from the Republicans in the Beltway (or in Minnesota airports) as I have detailed here. The wind cannot possibly be blowing from the left since I have not articulated any liberal views in my post… only conservative, constitutional positions. Ones which have been abanonded by the GOP majority in DC a long, long time ago. Please note that the traditional definition of conservatism does not include the likes of moralist nut job Brownback, nation builder Cheney, or Wilsonian Democrat Rudy Giuliani.
middleXeast, You could not be more misguided with your position here and your typical. leftist interpretation of my views. You have done what most liberals and Marxists do well… attempt to turn an honest position into a racial argument. I, along with most of those who oppose illegal immigration, do so for a few reasons. None of which include skin color, race, or ethnicity as you suggest. Those reasons include 1) respect for the rule of law, 2) respect for American workers, 3) respect for the national interest. Illegals who are found to be here in violation of the law should be arrested and deported. I don't care about where they come from or their skin color. You lefties are so damn good about turning this into a racial issue because you are pre-programmed to do so. It's what you do. You know no other way to debate. Race or nothin'. Accuse the conservative of being a racist and take the high ground. Those who are here illegally do not love America. If they loved America, they would respect her by not being here illegally. They have broken into our home and should be booted out without hesitation.
Most of the things the right calls "leftist" and makes fun of are very good things–for example, the New Deal, the civil rights movement of the fifties and sixties, and the welfare state, including John Dewey as well as Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, and so on. My friend Shrader, I see what you mean about the need for respecting the rule of law, but I don't think that the immigration problematic is to be explained in those terms.