how the word "cunt" helped me decide not to vote for mccain
"At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt."
[brandt]HAH. hah. huh. that's marvelous.[/brandt]
now, i've long been a believer that sen. mccain didn't deserve his reputation. from the infantile temper-tantrum letter he sent to sen. obama after a falling out over lobbying reform (personally, i think sen. obama did the right thing), to his whole "maverick" bullshit which falls apart when you actually look at what counts: the votes. he's voted with his party 88% of the time in the current congress. right up there with trent lott. he's no 68% arlen specter, i'll tell ya that. as of september 2007, he voted with the party a full 6% more often than the republican average. yeah, real maverick, there, senator mcangrypants...
but aside from thinking the guy's a fake d00shbag, i'd vote for him if i thought he'd go for the policies i'd prefer. which... might be possible. sometimes.
but then it turns out he pulls this "c-word" crap. now, let me clarify something first: it's not the actual use of the word that is the issue with me. i actually use it. i got it from my feminist ladyfriend. i use it as a gender-neutral insult. it's a sort of "taking it back". like the swastik i have up on my wall that i picked up in india. i'm doing my part to help the hindus take it back.
although, of course, the swastik is the diametric opposite of an insult. but the idea is similar. it stems from one of the few things that's stuck with me that my mother tried to imprint on me in my childhood: why let them have that power over you? when i'd come home upset from getting picked on or fucked with in some manner, my mom would ask me why i let them get to me "like that". why i let them have that power over me. and i slowly started to simply not let them. it wasn't that i'd hear an insult and think, "oh swell!" it's that i'd hear the insult, and smirk, and think, "i've got you, you fucking jackass. you think you've got me... but i've got you."
eventually i started coupling that with retaliation. :)
but i digress...
no, what bothers me about this, as with most things political, is the thought process that must have been involved. the guy dropped a C-bomb in front of 5 people. three of which were not on his "crew". regardless of how you feel about the word, when you're a politician you have to always consider what the reaction will be. and either he did, and did it anyway... or didn't, and is a moron. and aside from how he dealt with the question by marty parrish about whether or not he really did it (answer: he didn't answer. wouldn't the first thing out of your mouth, for an accusation like this, be "i would NEVER" if you would never?)... mccain's actual excuse was that it had been a long day.
a long day? REALLY? well then! i guess it's completely acceptable to display questionable judgment! it was a long day!
i suppose it's not a big deal then. i mean, how stressful could the presidency be really??
stupid cunt.
[brandt]HAH. hah. huh. that's marvelous.[/brandt]
now, i've long been a believer that sen. mccain didn't deserve his reputation. from the infantile temper-tantrum letter he sent to sen. obama after a falling out over lobbying reform (personally, i think sen. obama did the right thing), to his whole "maverick" bullshit which falls apart when you actually look at what counts: the votes. he's voted with his party 88% of the time in the current congress. right up there with trent lott. he's no 68% arlen specter, i'll tell ya that. as of september 2007, he voted with the party a full 6% more often than the republican average. yeah, real maverick, there, senator mcangrypants...
but aside from thinking the guy's a fake d00shbag, i'd vote for him if i thought he'd go for the policies i'd prefer. which... might be possible. sometimes.
but then it turns out he pulls this "c-word" crap. now, let me clarify something first: it's not the actual use of the word that is the issue with me. i actually use it. i got it from my feminist ladyfriend. i use it as a gender-neutral insult. it's a sort of "taking it back". like the swastik i have up on my wall that i picked up in india. i'm doing my part to help the hindus take it back.
although, of course, the swastik is the diametric opposite of an insult. but the idea is similar. it stems from one of the few things that's stuck with me that my mother tried to imprint on me in my childhood: why let them have that power over you? when i'd come home upset from getting picked on or fucked with in some manner, my mom would ask me why i let them get to me "like that". why i let them have that power over me. and i slowly started to simply not let them. it wasn't that i'd hear an insult and think, "oh swell!" it's that i'd hear the insult, and smirk, and think, "i've got you, you fucking jackass. you think you've got me... but i've got you."
eventually i started coupling that with retaliation. :)
but i digress...
no, what bothers me about this, as with most things political, is the thought process that must have been involved. the guy dropped a C-bomb in front of 5 people. three of which were not on his "crew". regardless of how you feel about the word, when you're a politician you have to always consider what the reaction will be. and either he did, and did it anyway... or didn't, and is a moron. and aside from how he dealt with the question by marty parrish about whether or not he really did it (answer: he didn't answer. wouldn't the first thing out of your mouth, for an accusation like this, be "i would NEVER" if you would never?)... mccain's actual excuse was that it had been a long day.
a long day? REALLY? well then! i guess it's completely acceptable to display questionable judgment! it was a long day!
i suppose it's not a big deal then. i mean, how stressful could the presidency be really??
stupid cunt.