THE FUNNIEST EPISODE OF GROWING PAINS EVER

Holy cow, that Mike Seaver is funny!

I bet Mike lost a bet with Boner and so now he has to star in this video making ridiculous statements like "our kids can no longer pray in public" with a straight face. Hilarious!

--Junichi

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

Apparently, one year is enough

I have spent the last year convincing myself that Glenn Beck, teabaggers, Sarah Palin, birthers, people who think President Obama is a Muslim socialist who wants to kill your grandmother, Rep. Joe Wilson, Rush Limbaugh, and William Kostric represent only the extremist fringe right and speak for a very small percentage of Americans.

In essence, I chose to believe that their popularity was due to the fact that a lunatic minority of Fox News worshippers were outraged, among other things, that the president is a black man from Chicago who appointed a Puerto Rican from New York to the Supreme Court and, also, that the South lost the Civil War.

They needed an outlet for their frustrations and Glenn Beck et al. were more than happy to capitalize on their frothing animus.

As such, I've tried to ignore these voices in an effort to marginalize their lunacy and minimize the possibility that my head will blow up.

My instinct was largely fueled by polls showing that the Republican party hasn't been this unpopular since the Clinton impeachment.

I suppose last week's election might have served as a wake-up call, but the few races didn't really suggest any alarming nationwide trend. (Even in places where Republicans made gains, many exit polls indicated significant support for President Obama.)

However, today's Gallup survey makes me realize that the loudest voices on the right are making headway -- both in terms of control of the Republican party, as well as the national dialogue.

In some ways, this is good. I'd rather have Sarah Palin be the GOP nominee than, say, an intelligent thoughtful conservative like Senator Susan Collins.

But this is bad news when it comes to trying to pass any progressive legislation after 2010.

Alas, many independents (who initiate most of the swings in these polls) have either forgotten the lessons of Bush/Cheney or they've concluded that one year of Democratic control over the White House and Congress is so bad that they're ready to turn the tide back again.

--Junichi

THE LONG ROAD STAYS LONG

Some quick thoughts this morning.

First, it is really hard to believe it's been an entire year since Obama's election. I'll say this much - in politics (as it is in sports), it's more fun playing offense than defense. The 2010 midterm elections are likely to be a clusterf--- of remarkable proportions but at least we have a year few months before we'll be subjected to how those races will shape up.

Second, the passage of Maine's Prop 1 is dispiriting (not to mention surprising) and suggests that the road ahead is still long. The one bright spot is to note that a 4 point differential is slim enough that you can imagine that as American voters undergo a generational shift, it will shrink year by year.

I thought TNC had some good points to make here. He's interested (in this post) in debating the idea that those voting against gay marriage are not, in fact, bigoted. And Coates turns to the history of the Civil Rights Movement and the tenacity of White voters to hold onto Jim Crow voting practices and suggests that the same "logic" that defended those White voters from accusations of racism is similarly in place regarding anti-gay marriage voters. To wit:

"Hence the notion that those voting against gay marriage, are not actually, in the main, motivated by bigotry, but a belief in tradition and family. But very few people would actually ever describe themselves as bigots. We think we know so much about ourselves. This is a country--like many countries--which is deeply riven by ethnic bias, gender discrimination. And yet we don't seem to know any of the agents of that discrimination."

I would add one thing, because I've been reading Andrew Cherlin's The Marriage Go-Round and that is, when it comes to issues around marriage, Americans are caught up in a way that few other Western nations are. And what it is notably about this debate is that while there's likely a larger number of people opposed to any kind of state-sanctioned homosexual union, it's really the term "marriage" that makes the biggest difference here (and as Cherlin suggests, only here relative to other, similar nations). Therefore (and this is my conclusion, not Cherlin's per se), what would have to change socially is that both/either 1) the definition of marriage expands to include gay couples and/or 2) our premium on marriage subsides. I would suggest both are happening but I'm curious to ponder which (if any) is moving "faster". My guess is the former; I think marriage is still a widely held value and ideal amongst Americans but I think, over time, there has been less and less priority put on the idea that marriage is exclusively a heterosexual institution.

--O.W.