Welcome statement


Parting Words from Moristotle (07/31/2023)
tells how to access our archives
of art, poems, stories, serials, travelogues,
essays, reviews, interviews, correspondence….

Friday, November 2, 2012

Fish for Friday

October surprise! All this week I've been fretting over "Romney creep" (as distinct from Romney the Creep). With each new day of polling data, he seemed to inch higher. Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin—all seemed to be slipping into his camp.

Worst of all, the Rasmussen daily tracking poll gave Romney a lead in Ohio. But out of nowhere and none too soon came an October Surprise—Hurricane Sandy!
    Not a happy development for millions of Americans on the East Coast, but a miracle for Obama. There he is, looking leaderly 24/7 on all the TV networks. Free air time, too. And there's Chris Christie, the Keynote Speaker at the Republican National Convention, the man who said that "Obama can't find the light switch," praising Obama for his leadership, cooperation, and steadfast help! And there's Romney, refusing to acknowledge reporters who ask about a campaign assertion that FEMA should be taken private! It's hard for me to imagine how Romney can now pull off an election win.
    Maureen Dowd, in her New York Times op-ed piece on Tuesday ("The 'I' of the Storm"), nailed Christie's probable motives for sabotaging Romney. I'm always delighted when Dowd sees things the same way I do. [personal communication]


The New Yorker magazine has endorsed President Obama for reëlection in a "Talk of the Town" piece that is well worth reading. Here's how it concludes:
The reëlection of Barack Obama is a matter of great urgency. Not only are we in broad agreement with his policy directions; we also see in him what is absent in Mitt Romney—a first-rate political temperament and a deep sense of fairness and integrity. A two-term Obama Administration will leave an enduringly positive imprint on political life. It will bolster the ideal of good governance and a social vision that tempers individualism with a concern for community. Every Presidential election involves a contest over the idea of America. Obama’s America—one that progresses, however falteringly, toward social justice, tolerance, and equality—represents the future that this country deserves. [personal communication]
Very interesting take on a Romney Presidency: "Why the GOP Should Fear a Romney Presidency," by Jack M. Balkin, The Atlantic, Oct 25 [personal communication; excerpt:]
The predicament of a Romney presidency is that he may make George W. Bush look good by comparison. During most of Bush's eight years in office, the Republican Party was united and willing to follow his lead. Romney will not be so lucky. The party he heads has become so rigid, radical, and unrealistic that, despite his best efforts, he may end up as the last of the Reagan-era Republican leaders—a disjunctive president like John Quincy Adams, James Buchanan, Herbert Hoover, or Jimmy Carter....
    The next Jimmy Carter will be a Republican president—a Republican who, due to circumstances beyond his control, unwittingly presides over the dissolution of the Reagan coalition. If Obama is reelected, we might decide in hindsight that George W. Bush best fits that description. But if Obama loses, the president who finally unravels Reaganism could turn out to be Mitt Romney.
My Vote: Until recently I had been planning to sit out this election and cast no vote for President. However, two recent events have changed my mind. The first was the glowing and succinct endorsement by General Colin Powell, a moderate Republican, of President Obama. The second was Obama's reference to Mitt Romney as a "bullshitter." Regardless of what you may think of Obama's policies, one thing is for sure—he tells like it is. So the real question for this election is do you want another Republican bullshitter as your president or the incumbent who tells it like it is? My vote will go to President Obama. [personal communication]

Karl Rove checks
the polls he's skewed
Morris, thanks for sending me the trestina challenge. After seeing what you did with the trestina for "Thor's Day" today, I decided that I had to meet your challenge, which was to write a triptina using the three words election, Romney, Obama:
People's Election: Romney-Obama?

With Rove and ravening wealth for Romney—
Their lying ads skewing the election—
2012's doubtful for Obama.

Citizens First confounds the election:
Cash turns thoughtless voters off Obama
And scares them to the clutches of Romney.

If five Supremes overrule Obama,
And as they gave it Bush give it Romney,
Citizens end up last this election. [personal communication]
You have to see this, it is hilarious [personal communication]:




Too strong for fish?: "A Fan Letter to Certain Conservative Politicians," by John Scalzi, October 25. Note that Scalzi's piece is fictionial, intended as satire and, as he explains in "A Few Process Notes on 'Fan Letter'," is not meant to be funny. [personal communication; excerpt:]
Dear certain conservative politicians:
    Hi! I’m a rapist. I’m one of those men who likes to force myself on women without their consent or desire and then batter them sexually. The details of how I do this are not particularly important at the moment—although I love when you try to make distinctions about “forcible rape” or “legitimate rape” because that gives me all sorts of wiggle room—but I will tell you one of the details about why I do it: I like to control women and, also and independently, I like to remind them how little control they have. There’s just something about making the point to a woman that her consent and her control of her own body is not relevant against the need for a man to possess that body and control it that just plain gets me off. A guy’s got needs, you know? And my need is for control. Sweet, sweet control.
    So I want to take time out of my schedule to thank you for supporting my right to control a woman’s life, not just when I’m raping her, but for all the rest of her life as well.
    Ah, I see by your surprised face that you at the very least claim to have no idea what I’m talking about. Well, here’s the thing. Every time you say “I oppose a woman’s right to abortion, even in cases of rape,” what you’re also saying is “I believe that a man who rapes a woman has more of a right to control a woman’s body and life than that woman does.”....


Limerick of the Week:
Tamar was a priestess of Isis,
Who endured the heartbreak of psoriasis;
    Her doctor, the brute,
    Was far less than astute,
He said it was hypocondriasis.

7 comments:

  1. That bit on fairness and integrity from the New Yorker magazine when it comes to Obama cracked me up. I don't consider Obama using his presidential drone "kill list" to kill an American cleric without trial and then later his 16 year old son in a separate strike an account of "fairness and integrity." Blind party voting in our nation is just disgusting. In my own case, I support gay marriage and I am pro-choice and those are two main selling points for me, but with the number of Obama's current policies, his own "intolerable acts" as I like to call it, and the way he has spoken of small business along with his stronger central government sentiment lead me to give my vote to Romney.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sir (or Madam), one would think that if you disapprove of such drone strikes as you indicate, then you'd have less reason to vote for Romney, who said in the third debate that he pretty much approved everything that President Obama was doing foreign policy-wise. And that would be a best case, for he has also said (when he thought it was what his audience at the time wanted to hear) that he firmly believes in American "exceptionalism" and would be tougher on our enemies than Obama has been. And if you oppose blind party voting, then you should be not only disgusted but nauseated by the Republican Party. So, if you haven't already voted early, use your noggin and vote reasonably, for President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.

    ReplyDelete
  3. My point was not focused on American exceptionalism, but was based upon the grounds that Obama had not done what he said he would and he has "taken the nation for a ride" so to speak. Obama has turned out to be a real sham. Instead of inferring from critique of Romney's doings and sayings, try going out and truly and embed yourself in the full weight of alternative arguments/views. And while on topic of flip-flopping, how about what Obama claimed in 2008, that he supports the “basic concept of using medical marijuana for the same purposes and with the same controls as other drugs.” and that he was “not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws.” What happened then? Well, the pace of the raids picked up while Obama increased the drug war budget. Now i'll introduce another point, well if you are an advocate for your rights imposed on, then go ahead and vote for Obama; look, gather round while Obama has extended the patriot act, without reform, signs the NDAA, appeals the federal court decision that "indefinite detention" is unconstitutional, he granted immunity to CIA torturers, failed to close gitmo as he claimed he would, violated the war powers act of 1973 and he even granted the FBI access to private electronic communication without warrant. Might I deference my earlier mention of killing an American citizen and his adolescent son without a trial? So yeah, tell me again that voting for Obama is the responsible thing to do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Relative to voting for Romney, yes, voting for Obama is the responsible thing to do.

      Delete
  4. My correspondent who contributed the triptina titled "People's Election: Romney-Obama?" misnamed the Supreme Court case that opened the gates to unlimited contributions to so-called Super PACs, which supported individual candidates.
        The misnaming seems to have been a case of poetic license.
        The "Citizens United" case is discussed in The New Yorker magazine's May 21 article, "Money Unlimited: How Chief Justice John Roberts orchestrated the Citizens United decision."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, thank you. "Citizens First" actually was not for poetic license. I simply mis-remembered the name of the case. Here's a revision to the sestina:

      People's Election: Romney-Obama?

      With Rove and ravening wealth for Romney—
      Their lying ads skewing the election—
      2012's doubtful for Obama.

      Citizens United taints election:
      Cash turns thoughtless voters off Obama
      And scares them to the clutches of Romney.

      If five Supremes overrule Obama,
      And as they gave it Bush give it Romney,
      Citizens end up split this election.

      Delete
    2. Sorry, I meant revision to the triptina!

      Delete