(chortle!)

Er … um … right.

Gay Republican Plans to File for Young Seat

Thank you, Abby Livingston.

(chortle!)

(titter!)

(sigh ….)

Okay, now that I’m done being childish … well, okay, I’m not done being childish. But it’s also because the short article doesn’t explain what the headline means; is Nick Zoller homosexual, or does he come from a place called Gay? I mean, no, really, it’s just a funny headline, but I don’t get its connection to the article.

Anyway, turns out he’s from St. Petersburg, Florida.

Good men with honor

Just how far have we come? When you’re a child, twenty years is a theoretic span; as an adult, that period is a paradox. What seems so far away passed by so quickly. What seemed so familiar recedes into strangeness, transforms into myth.

I don’t remember what I said. I mean, it had something to do with the Reagan administration, and characterized someone, or some people, within that cadre as criminals. I despised Reagan; my political conscience came online about the same time he was elected. I cannot recall ever thinking nice, or merely positive things about the man.

I was seven when he was elected. The only thing I remember clearly from that election was that Reagan struck me as condescending and dishonest, exactly the kind of person my parents would repeatedly through my childhood tell me I didn’t need. And that stuck with me. By the time we got to Iran-Contra, the pretense (that later proved at least partway true) of Reagan’s senility was insufficient to excuse him in my eyes.

What? It was how I was raised; those conclusions reflected the principles impressed upon me especially by parents, but also teachers, my pastor, and any number of talking heads inside the idiot box.

But this isn’t about indicting Reagan. He’s dead. He’s gone. Whatever.

This is about a moment that stands out despite the dissolution of its details. My father, disgusted, glaring at me. “You can’t say that about people,” he stormed. “These are good men. They’re trying their best. You can’t say that about people.” It was not an explanation. It was not a retort. It was an order.

Whatever condemnation I had poured over the Reagan administration had upset him. And, yes, there is also a story to the difference between the man I remember and the one I know today. Maybe someday I’ll try to tell it.

Perhaps it had to do with an adolescent daring to condemn the president. Maybe he was so fiercely Republican during those years that he could not face the possibility that his president was a sack of shit. Maybe it had to do with respecting elders, and respecting authority. Maybe, maybe, maybe ….

Quote of the Week — LaHood on Congress

So this just came across the Time “Quotes of the Day“, which at present provides the content for the “So they say” RSS widget in the sidebar:

“The strategy is to lay low and then blame them for not getting anything done. The truth is, we all lose.”

That classic line is attributed to Rep. Ray LaHood (R-IL), “when asked about congressional Republicans resisting initiatives by their Democratic colleagues”. The Internatinal Herald Tribune carried the same quote with the identical attribution in its own “Quotations of the day” on Friday, and Google News coughed up an associated Press article from the same day by Charles Babington:

Democrats, who sometimes seem incredulous at their inability to budge the GOP on tax, spending and war issues, say Republicans will pay dearly at the polls. “There is a sense they are digging their own grave,” Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said.

Some Republicans agree there is a risk in repeatedly blocking Democratic-crafted bills, especially if the chief beneficiaries appear to be big oil companies or wealthy investors.

“The strategy is to lay low and then blame them for not getting anything done,” Republican Rep. Ray LaHood of Illinois said in an interview. “The truth is, we all lose.”

“We trash each other and end up making the institution look bad,” LaHood said. “That’s why Congress’ approval ratings are so low.”