"hope for change. prepare for disappointment"

[rmd]

and now, a moment of politics.

my probably-cynical possibly-realistic expectations for the next four years.

things i expect out of the coming obama presidential term: no improvement in the federal status of marriage equality. (the past few days, i'm seeing a bunch of queer folks notice that, in fact, the democratic party are not our friends. they're just not our enemies.) possibly some improvement in choice- and sex-ed-related things -- in particular, getting away from 'abstinence-only' requirements for education programs. probably not a lot of change in second-amendment-related stuff - maybe laws around trigger locks, maybe changes in private sale paperwork (the so-called "gun show loophole"); i'm hoping they let the OMGUGLYGUNS 'assault weapon' ban expire, but i suspect they won't. if anything happens with health insurance, it'll be a clusterfuck and probably not be great.

i'm skeptical about how much PATRIOT act and fearmongering BS will be rolled back. it's hard for government to give that sort of power up. i really really hope they do, however. if i don't see habeas corpus reinstated, tho, i'm gonna have to go to washington and start cockpunching people.

while i really want the feds to roll back DOMA, i think it would be an incredibly bad choice for obama to blow political capital on this (even if he were so inclined) for at least a year or two. the christian taliban wing of the republican party is all amped up and still hoarse from screaming that obama is the antichrist, so they'll be all set to start crowing 'WE TOLD YOU HE WOULD MAKE YOU ALL BE GAY CHILD MOLESTERS!!!' assuming we get at least one or two supreme court justices retiring over the next couple of years, this *does* provide an opportunity to put a couple of justices there who will agree that, in fact, loving v virginia applies just as well to laws making a massachusetts marriage (of any sort) illegal in other states. i'd rather see DOMA drop that way, because in one fell swoop it will take care of DOMA *and* all the state laws, rather than having to fight tooth and nail across each state in turn.

i expect to want the incoming government to worry more (or at least differently) about education. i want to see a pro-american-innovation pro-science push like we got after sputnik went up. instead, we'll probably get more standardized testing. because it's more important that we teach kids to pass this test than to learn other things. i am hoping that they worry less about carbon footprints, particularly in the LOOK! DISPOSABLE DIAPERS ARE KILLING THE EARTH! fashion of mediagenic-but-relatively-unimportant frothing, and more about getting more research in solutions and innovations. (then again, i think that if man-made factors are a notable part of climate change, that it's long past the point where minor changes will help. on the other hand, now is the time to start looking at how to keep or improve civilization as the climate changes.)

even if obama manages to find god's own economists for his economic advisers, i think the economy has still got at *least* a couple of years of ABSOLUTE SUCKING, so, i have no high hopes there. i'm mostly hoping he doesn't do anything that makes it much worse.

i would assume there are at least some democratic strategists arguing that they keep away from guns and gays until the mid-term elections, at least, since iirc historically there are strong minority party gains in congress in the midterm elections when the white house changes parties. (in particular, see the 1994 elections.)

i am fairly sure that the republicans - particularly in the senate - will be an .. active and adversarial, shall we say, minority party. they'd fucking well better be. i am *delighted* the democrats don't have a 60-member senate. (also, it lets the democrats tell lieberman to go fuck himself, which they'd damn well better do.) on the other hand, it would be good for the democrats to notice (as they haven't seemed to over the past two years) that they have a majority and can do more than write strongly worded letters before rolling over and doing whatever the republicans seem to want. (seriously, the past couple of years, they've done way too much of that. "NO! NO! ... okay, we're gonna write a letter. ... okay, whatever you want. go ahead.")

a thing that pleases me in particular about the white house changing hands: new talent available. if mccain won, who would he have staffed his administration with? there's NOBODY LEFT on the republican bench. i mean, seriously.

a thing that pleases me in particular about obama winning in stead of mccain: i am hoping that please, for the love of god, can we - as a country - move past the baby boomer obsession with the battles of their youthful prime. OH MY GOD IT'S LIKE THOSE DIRTY HIPPIES! OH MY GOD IT'S LIKE NIXON! stfu about the fucking sixties, people. really.

so, yeah, i'm glad obama won, but i'm already preparing to bitch and moan about him. :-)

Comments

[n5red.livejournal.com]

Gays with guns? Horrors!

[rmd.livejournal.com]

when i lived in bellevue (a suburb of seattle, not the looney bin), i was startled by the holy roller protestants out there. in particular, this airplane-hangar sized evangelical christian church that was not, iirc, part of any established sect. and the head minister there was ranting how 'WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE CITY OF BELLEVUE FOR CHRIST' and all i could think was that i was their worst nightmare: an armed queer agnostic woman.

[n5red.livejournal.com]

that's one of the things I really like about you.

[feste-sylvain.livejournal.com]

Ever heard of the Pink Pistols?
(http://www.pinkpistols.org)

[n5red.livejournal.com]

of course. I'm on "that mailing list". Doug is a cool guy!

[xthread.livejournal.com]

That logo is wrong on so many levels, I'm not sure it runs out...

It's got a pink triangle, explicit sexual content, and guns! What's not to like?!

[lillibet.livejournal.com]

I just hope they figure out some way to stop the Republicans from filibustering every damn thing, as they have for the past two years. More filibusters than in any previous Congress. If they keep pulling that shit, then I hope that the Dems start making them actually talk it out--that might at least alert people to what is going on.

[rmd.livejournal.com]

oh yeah. i want filibusters to be real honest to god mister smith goes to washington filibusters. fire up the cspan, get the popcorn, and watch congresscritters reading the phone book.

THE ENTERTAINMENT VALUE ALONE, I TELL YOU.

[frobzwiththingz.livejournal.com]

Well, given that there's no automatic presidential veto in their way any more, the first thing is that Mr Reid can force the minority side to *actually filibuster*. Force them to spend days on end reading Craigslist personal ads for all to see. If you cant do that, Mr Reid, than step the f*ck down from your majority leader spot and find someone who *will*.

[frotz.livejournal.com]

What I'd really love to hear is the senate actually read some of the damn legislation that they're wanking about. I have a theory that when confronted with some of this crap, they'd step back and say "hey, wait, WTF? This says what?!" (I know, ever the optimist I am!) No need to resort to the phone book or craigslist; the Federal Register will do fine!

[bikergeek.livejournal.com]

I was going to write a post along these lines, but you've already said pretty much everything I was going to say.

I keep pointing out to people that Joe Biden wrote, in the 1990s, large parts of what later became the PATRIOT Act. It was a response to the Oklahoma City and WTC bombings, but it didn't have the political momentum to succeed. 9/11 gave Congress the incentive to put that old wine in a new bottle and it finally passed.

Minor nit: the assault weapons ban expired everywhere but Massachusetts, where it continued in state law. Allowing the AWB to expire may have been the one good thing to come out of the Bush administration.

[dpolicar]

That seems pretty accurate. Though mostly I think the mid-term elections (and 2012) will live or die on public perception of how the new administration deals with the "economy" (Dow, unemployment, inflation) and "national security" (Middle East, foreign terrorism on US soil, domestic terrorism).

Which reminds me -- am I the only one anticipating a trivial but treated-as-really-important wave of Oklahoma-style domestic terrorism as an expression of marginalized rage by white supremacists and their ilk?

[rmd.livejournal.com]

no. you are not. unfortunately.

[bikergeek.livejournal.com]

I can see that happening. Especially if the Republican Party drifts more towards the center and thus alienates its lunatic fringe.

[dpolicar]

I can see it either way, really.

If the GOP is perceived as drifting center-ward, crazies who identify as far-right will feel abandoned, alienated, and resentful, justifying violence. If it is perceived as drifting right-ward, they will feel supported and encouraged by a beleaguered minority, justifying violence.

Similarly, if it's perceived as working with the Democrats, the crazies feel betrayed. If it's perceived as fighting the Democrats, the crazies feel encouraged.

I think their way out of that trap is to be perceived as non-reactive... as standing for a positively expressed philosophy of government. (The crazies will still do crazy things, but the connection between self-identified right-wing crazies and the party will be less compelling.) But this is hard.

OTOH, they might embrace it.

The Democrats will be faced with the same dilemma soon; if they try to define themselves by opposition their popular support will crumble and we'll go back to 50/50 split elections.

[solarbird]

Don't worry about that:

Poll: 64 Percent Of Republicans Want Palin To Run In 2012
Huffington Post

Ninety-one percent (91%) of Republicans have a favorable view of Palin, including 65% who say their view is Very Favorable... When asked to choose among some of the GOP's top names for their choice for the party's 2012 presidential nominee, 64% say Palin. The next closest contenders are two former governors and unsuccessful challengers for the presidential nomination this year -- Mike Huckabee of Arkansas with 12% support and Mitt Romney of Massachusetts with 11%.

[bikergeek.livejournal.com]

I think a lot of that is because the Republican Party really doesn't have anybody else they can float right now as a serious contender in 2012. Other than John McCain, Sarah Palin seems to be the only Republican who's had her name in the papers in recent months in sentences that don't involve the words "indicted", "arraigned", "sentence", or "wide stance". (Rumor has it that she'll be appointed as Ted Stevens's replacement in the Senate.)

[sethg]

Alas, no. The majority of Republicans really do want to drive their party further into the nuthouse.

[babasyzygy.livejournal.com]

As Paul Begala quipped, "...and 100% of Democrats want Palin to run."

[tb]

Thanks for posting this. You give me hope :-).

[muffyjo]

I'm hoping that the republicans will continue to throw Palin under the bus and make her a candidate non-grata for 2012. And I'm totally on board for the Supreme Court to get some new blood that's more liberally minded. That would please me to no end. Amen, sistah. Amen.

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

It's a good idea to have realistic expectations.

On marriage equality, we should realize that mainstream politicians have never advocated for civil rights until forced to, and they are always well behind the curve. I think marriage equality will advance over the next 4-8 years, but not because of Obama or the Democrats. It will advance because people who support equality will work for it and make it happen, bit by bit. Obama will at least stay out of the way, which is all I would realistically ever expect from a Democratic president. I reluctantly agree with the strategy of waiting to lift DOMA, though saying that makes me cringe because I don't think anyone should have to delay the fight for their basic civil rights. I think state-level efforts can repeal Prop 8 and similar measures, and incremental marriage-like rights can be implemented in other states, setting the stage for a repeal of DOMA. I can only imagine how badly President Obama would be attacked for repealing DOMA before the country is firmly on the road to economic recovery. The ideal time would be early 2011, I think, because the occupation of Iraq should be over by then, the economy should be on the mend, it's after the 2010 midterms, and it's early enough that the political backlash can be absorbed before 2012. But it will only happen even then if we stay focused and don't take anything for granted. The mistake of the Clinton years on gay rights and other issues was assuming that electing the Democrat was enough. It's only a start.

I do have confidence that Obama will do well on ending the Iraq War, and fixing the economy with spending on infrastructure and alternative energy. I think he will move us on a path of actually addressing climate change. He'll appoint good judges and repeal the gag rule. He'll give the tax cuts he promised, and probably delay the repeal of Bush tax cuts until the economy is doing better.

I do think that he's dangerously likely to get us embroiled in a big mess in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Russia will also push back against him, and he'll have a hard time choosing between needlessly entering a new Cold War or doing too little. I hope I'm wrong, but I think foreign relations are going to be a mess for the foreseeable future.

[tinlail.livejournal.com]

"probably not a lot of change in second-amendment-related stuff - maybe laws around trigger locks, maybe changes in private sale paperwork (the so-called "gun show loophole"); i'm hoping they let the OMGUGLYGUNS 'assault weapon' ban expire"

Plans for doing all of those things are up on Obama "change" website. The "Assault weapon" ban has expired, you may not have noticed in Massachusetts, and there is no signs that a repeat of the ban would have a sunset provision. So much for the second amendment.

In addition, the is language suggestive of a fairness doctrine, form the FCC. So much for the first amendment.

And his mandatory "volunteer" corps is appears to run counter to the thirteen amendment. I guess that is sort of a whole only Nixon could go to China thing.

But if the notion of a country of laws, isn't your thing. It's going to be a great time.

[rmd.livejournal.com]

this is part of why i'm *very happy* that there is not a 60-democrat senate. and it's why i'm want the republicans to be an aggressive minority party. i fully expect them (and *hopefully* some of the new democratic pick-ups from traditionally republican areas) to step up and make sure that things stupid gun laws are blocked.

i do think if the democrats could drop their phobia about guns, they could win over a lot of people who are otherwise fairly dissatisfied with the republicans but fond of the second amendment. this is similar to how i think if the republicans could get out of bed with the hardcore evangelical christian dominionist folks and the folks who want to roll back griswold v connecticut and returned to those long-ago days of being a party of smaller government, they could win over a *lot* of people who are dissatisfied with the democrats.

[tb]

You may have just summed up why I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat.

[rmd.livejournal.com]

yeah. it's why i stay unenrolled.

[madbodger.livejournal.com]

Us? Cynical?

[lil-brown-bat.livejournal.com]

I'm going to offer the somewhat heretical opinion that a lot of gay people don't exactly have their heads screwed on right when it comes to "marriage equality". Waaaay back when, in...oh, say, the 1980's and before, politically active gay people worked for equality -- just plain equality. It wasn't popular work even in the gay community, but it needed to be done and it resulted in some advances that a lot of gays today take for granted.

Then along came the m-word. Please understand that I'm not disparaging the efforts of those Massachusetts couples who brought the suit that cracked the first egg in this omelet; I find no fault whatsoever with what they did. I do, however, find a very great deal of fault with gays and lesbians whose notion of equality has narrowed to the scope of matrimony. My view is that the Massachusetts case was a hugely significant advance not because it allowed two people of the same sex to stand up before a justice of the peace, but because it did so as part of a more general affirmation of the rights of gays as citizens. A distressing number of gays and lesbians completely overlooked that fact, never understood it at the time and don't really give a damn about it now. Whatever, world's full of stupid people.

I say bah humbug to the m-word. It ain't worth a pint of piss, except insofar as it serves also to more generally establish gay and lesbian rights. And if you're losing the m-word battle, what then? Cry in your beer, bring yet another suit based on marriage...or put your shoulder to the another wheel. God knows there are plenty that need a shove.