Mitt Romney is secretly a major asshole

So perhaps by now you’ve heard the news that Mitt Romney was really secretly one of those terrible schoolhouse bullies what drive people to kill themselves and suchlike. Let me just say that this news doesn’t shock me. It’s not a major intuitive leap to assume that the guy who made his fortune as a professional worker-layer-offer has a hard-on for acting like a macho tough guy.

Here’s the deal: while it’s true that kids do some stupid things all in the name of winning favor among peers, there is no excuse for being an antisocial assfuck. The proper thing to do now would be to issue a major public apology to anyone he may have treated like shit. This country is suffering a bullying epidemic, and having a major public figure who used to be part of the problem isn’t the right way to tackle this issue. If anyone seriously thought he had what it takes to run this country, I sincerely hope they’re reconsidering their position. Bullies are a blight on society, and people with a history of this brand of sociopathy ought not be holding public office.

I’m lucky in that I was never really bullied in school. Or, at least if I was bullied I was too oblivious to ever really notice it. Maybe I was bullied 24/7 and blacked out the memories, but since that sounds like psychoanalytical bullshit I doubt that’s the case. Anyway, I don’t think I ever realized how big a problem bullying and hazing were simply because I didn’t experience it. I feel like an asshole for assuming that everyone breezed through high school with as little hassle as me. If I could go back, I’d be that super-awesome gal who fights the bullies and rallies all the bullied kids together into a coalition of hope. However, I can’t do that, so I’ll do the next best thing: blog about assholes who got away with torture and are now within inches of become the most powerful person in the country. I do not want this man as my leader for many reasons, but right now, this seems like the biggest reason. Bullying is wrong, there is never any excuse, and Romney needs to recognize that, apologize, and give large sums of his money to an organization like You Are Not Alone at my school (a suicide prevention program) or a dedicated national antibullying program. Fucking inexcusable, jerk.


President Obama proves he has a heart

So I picked the best time to go for my afternoon walk: right as the news breaks that Obama has reversed his reversal of his stance on marriage equality. Anyway, now it’s all out of the bag and I’m back at home watching CNN do their obligatory four hours of commentary on a single sound bite. And now Mitchell Romney is talking his head about how gays don’t deserve equal rights. Lovely.

Anyway, let me just say that it’s about fucking time. For the past few decades, the queer community has had the backs of the democrats, and we just keep getting thrown under the bus. Granted, all of this jazz about major Democrats supporting gay marriage smacks of politicking, and I can see several reasons why it’s not until now that he’s growing a heart, but still, it’s nice that he’s getting with the times.

I like to think part of it is the fact that he’s the product of a mixed-race marriage, so he’s probably heard a thing or two about people in love not being able to get married because conservatives are a bunch of sex-obsessed purophiles who like to get their panties in a wad over people not acting proper-like. I also thought that it was pleasant that he mentioned that Sasha and Malia have friends with same-sex parents and that they don’t understand why some people should get the shaft just because of biology. Maybe it really is a generational thing. The average IQ goes up with each successive generation, and people with higher IQs are more likely to be liberal, so maybe we’re just collectively evolving to become cooler with difference. Maybe sometime in the future–hopefully in my lifetime–we’ll see an anti-Amendment 1 amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I’d be pretty cool with that.

Anyway, back to the politicking. It’s obvious that Obama is grasping at straws in a deadlocked election, trying to appease as much of his base as possible. One problem he may now face is alienating his black voters: black Democrats are slightly more anti-marriage equality than your usual Democrats. However, by coming out on one side of a major hot-button issue, President Obama is clearly drawing a line in the sand. It is us against them, and us is the U.S. Executive branch, the part of our government which is responsible for keeping the peace. If you’re a heartless bigot, your enemy is none other than the White House. That’s a major endorsement for queer little transsexual lesbians like me. That’s also pretty scary. The country will now be divided, and those wishy-washy neutral idiots will be forced to form an opinion. Granted, I’d love for them to form an opinion since there is no such thing as neutrality in the socio-political world, but this is shaping up to be Act II of the Civil Rights Movement. It already looks a lot like the Civil Rights Movement proper; all we need now is an eloquent and intellectual minister to unite the queers and allies.

Anyway, I’m starting to ramble a bit because I’m still half-watching CNN talk this story to death, so in closing, I’ma just leave you with my favorite sound-bite from this storm:

Welcome to the right side of history, Mr. President.

                           –LZ Granderson

The U.S. Congress: Rich folks telling you what’s right

Just saw an interesting news item on CNN about the median net worth of the U.S.’s congresspeople. I looked on their site to see if they had a post about it so I could double-check the numbers, but I can’t find it, so you’ll have to trust my memory (I scored 142 on the WAIS-IV scale, so don’t worry, I’m good for it):

  • Republicans: $953,000
  • Democrats: $879,000
  • Avg American: $96,000

The crazy thing is that the congresspeople’s net worth did not include houses owned! (Net worth is the sum of your assets–including houses owned, usually–less the sum of your debts.) The average American only has a net worth of $96,000 including their house!

For me, this seems to highlight a major issue in the American political system: only rich, well-connected people can get elected. It seems like whoever raises the most money wins the race, and it’s easy to raise money if you’re well-connected, and the best way to become well-connected is to become rich. This is why there is such a disconnect between our leaders and the average American: the people in congress usually haven’t been average Americans for quite some time, if they ever were.

I suppose if you don’t like these numbers, you could always vote Green in November.

‘Bout time we got some luv

So I’m blowing up this blog thing today to make up for lost time from the busy hectic-ass semester. Which brings me to the latest thing: Have you been watching CNN today? The news is all crazy about people in the White House coming out in favor of same-sex marriage. It started with Vice President Joe Biden coming out in favor of gay marriage yesterday, and now a few more Obama folks have voiced their support, including education secretary Arne Duncan and HUD secretary Shaun Donovan. (Although, to be fair, Donovan has supported gay and trans rights for some time.) Why’s it taking so long for the President himself to come out in support of us?

Sure, there’s the politics thing: gay marriage is a touchy issue for some folks, and he’s got a hard election to win. However, according to CNN’s little poll thing this morning, 53% of Americans actually have a heart. Why can’t the Pres get in the game here? It’d be a wise move. He won in 2008 by offering change and hope. If he came out in favor of marriage equality, he could create a platform of hope for queers and help us feel like we’re actually part of the tent. Sure, he repealed DADT, but that’s just one battle in the epic war for equality.

And why do only 53% of Americans support marriage equality? For me, that number is way too low. Sure, we’ve got the majority, but still, I can’t believe that 47% of my neighbors are that closed-minded. If gay marriage is against your religion, you don’t have to do it! Find a church that suits your bigoted needs and go there instead of more open-minded churches. Your marriage will be in no way weakened because people who love each other are able to express that love. How would that even work? It seems to me that more people getting to share in the love would strengthen marriage. If anything, Evangelical Christians getting married at the age of 20 and divorced by 25 are the ones weakening marriage.

Anyway, I’m glad to see that we’re getting more powerful allies. Hopefully it’s only a matter of time before the President throws his hat in with us.

Biblically qualified to be president…

Superstitious Iowans are not sure which compulsive liar prospective candidate to back in the GOP primary, according to the Boston Globe.

I’m sick of these woo-worshippers acting like atheists are “morally bankrupt,” as this particular article puts it. As Richard A. Weatherwax said, “You don’t need the Bible to justify love, but I know of no better tool to justify hate.” But that’s beside the point. Who should voters vote for?

Really, it doesn’t matter. Politicians are usually either intentionally dishonest or vague, due mainly to the fact that their primary concern is getting power and holding onto that power. Social scientists believe that there are two types of needs everyone has: primary needs, i.e., need for affection and to feel like one belongs, and secondary needs, i.e., the need for power or influence. These needs are what drives us to form or join groups. Politicians, I believe, are weighted heavily toward the secondary needs side of the spectrum. True, some of them (maybe even most) really have the best intentions, but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

The best way to cast a vote is to think logically about which candidate has the greatest probability of working for the greater good. The greater good is, by definition, secular, because it would be contrary to that greater good to dictate religious or spiritual concerns. The greater good can usually be determined using some sort of utilitarian logic (hedonistic or negative, it doesn’t really matter). Remember, a society should work to make the largest possible percentage of its constituents happy.

I won’t mention who I’m voting for, because I haven’t decided. I honestly don’t like anyone. I voted for Obama in ’08, but then he turned into a soft-spined centrist so now I am regretting my decision. (Honestly, I was terrified of Palin and wanted to do anything I could to keep her away from the White House, so I would have voted for any opposition; I liked Gravel the best, but the media ruined him.)

Whatever you do, don’t vote for someone just because you think they’re “Biblically qualified.”