Republicans Are Against Your Girlfriend Putting Out For You

Quick riddle - what's the difference between Mike Huckabee and Dan Quayle? Huckabee criticized an unwed mother who exists in real life.

...of the things that's troubling is that people see a Natalie Portman or some other Hollywood starlet who boasts of, 'Hey look, you know, we're having children, we're not married, but we're having these children, and they're doing just fine.' But there aren't really a lot of single moms out there who are making millions of dollars every year for being in a movie. And I think it gives a distorted image that yes, not everybody hires nannies, and caretakers, and nurses. Most single moms are very poor, uneducated, can't get a job, and if it weren't for government assistance, their kids would be starving to death and never have health care. And that's the story that we're not seeing, and it's unfortunate that we glorify and glamorize the idea of out of children wedlock.

Thank God there isn't also a problem with unwed fathers!

Notable weasel wording here - there is absolutely nothing wrong with unmarried mothers as long as they can afford nannies. You go Bristol! It's odd that someone that practical doesn't support the right to abortion, because abortion is much less expensive than raising a child.

Also left unsaid but implied, we can solve all these problems if we simply cut the government assistance, which is a conspicuous plank in the Republican platform. Let 'em starve! Take away their health care! Chicks, VOTE REPUBLICAN!  You too, Mexicans. And all them gays out there. One day when you're rich, they'll leave you alone.

We ARE Listening, Now Shut Up

I've been hearing a lot of whining from Congressional Republicans that they're not being allowed to participate in the lawmaking process by those mean Democrats. Here's a sign that perhaps they're mistaken.

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats are likely to jettison family planning funds for the low-income from an $825 billion economic stimulus bill, officials said late Monday, following a personal appeal from President Barack Obama at a time the administration is courting Republican critics of the legislation.

Several officials said a final decision was expected on Tuesday, coinciding with Obama's scheduled visit to the Capitol for separate meetings with House and Senate Republicans.

...Under the provision, states no longer would be required to obtain federal permission to offer family planning services — including contraceptives — under Medicaid, the health program for the low-income.

..."How you can spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives how does that stimulate the economy?" House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio said on Friday after congressional leaders met with Obama at the White House. "You can go through a whole host of issues that have nothing to do with growing jobs in America and helping people keep their jobs."

Mr. Boehner's point is well taken, that this legislation doesn't belong in the stimulus package. However, it belongs somewhere. If you want to shrink government spending, it's just a fact that contraceptives cost less than poor people. Since they most likely won't buy them on their own, it behooves us as a nation to pass them out.

The acceptable alternative from a Republican standpoint is abstinence education, but that's not exactly 100% effective with the teens. It's a lot like locking cocaine addicts in a meth lab and telling them all they have to do is not touch the cocaine. So by itself, abstinence education just results in more kids on welfare. So let's eliminate welfare! That will stop poor people from breeding!

No it won't. It's just make America better resemble a third world country. If you like flies, let the poor fend for themselves.

Getting back to the stimulus package: enough with the tax cuts! We've had plenty of tax cuts over the last 8 years and I don't know if you've looked at the economy lately, but it doesn't seem to have helped much. Besides a third of the package IS tax cuts. That's probably as bipartisan as we need to be this month.

Nobody Wants A Free-Market Solution For Everything

Over at WAMK, we've been knocking around the whole "why are we in Iraq" question. For some reason they all insist it's to fight terrorism, even though we didn't go in for that reason and the only reason any terrorists are there now is because they know where to find us. Maybe the real reason is this, courtesy Republican congressman Chris Shays: we're there because we can't afford to let any other country control the oil. H/T to Crooks and Liars for hosting the video.

Isn't that fascinating? Whether true or not, this notion illustrates that no matter how much you believe in free-market capitalism, you think the government has to step in somewhere. In this example, we are afraid to allow foreign interests to control the price of our oil. Well, why not? If the price goes up, won't the market compensate by forcing us to find alternative energy sources, or restructure society so we use less oil? What's the matter, McCapitalist? Chicken? So rather than allow the market to correct itself, Rep. Shays is willing to endorse an expensive government entitlement that involves trillions of dollars and untold American lives.

This is an economic example, but most Republicans part ways with deregulation at the point where morals enter it. It's government meddling, for example, that suppresses prostitution. I mean, what's wrong with that deal? A man and a woman (or a man and a man, or rarely a woman and a woman) enter into a business deal which involves sex. They both agree to the terms up front. Why is this against the law? Or maybe it's a drug deal instead. And sure sometimes people are killed by the drugs, but so what? You want a nanny state?

Lead-based toys? If people stop buying them, the problem solves itself. Child labor? How is it the Government's business to protect children? It's the business of parents! Besides, some kids like to sew. The FDA is the biggest thwarter of free-market solutions ever, after the FBI. Crime itself is an efficient free-market solution to a host of conditions.

Even libertarians I've talked to say that they're okay with public roads.

So ultimately, your tolerance for government interference is a question of degrees, not absolutes. And everyone wants the government to control SOMETHING. The only disagreement is where and how much.

Meat is Murder -- Delicious, Juicy Medium-Rare Murder

I'm reading a piece on the podcast tonight about PETA, and their picks for the sexiest vegetarian celebrities. I think it's Carrie Underwood and Kevin Eubanks this year. Whatever.

Periodically I wrestle with the idea of becoming vegetarian, simply because I'm certain I'd lose weight. Meat isn't inherently fattening but limiting your dietary choices inherently is. The second you start questioning every snack over whether there is dairy in it, or wheat, you're forced to also think "is it worth the trouble to eat this?" Boom! There goes 10 pounds. Which, by the way, would put me within actuarial tables' opinion of what I should weigh.

A lot of people object to carnivorism on moral grounds. Either it's bad for the environment because you're artificially raising the population of cows and feeding them, instead of just making cow feed into human feed, or you're taking the life of a creature with a brain and a soul.

You are, you know. Can't be helped.

There have been studies which suggest that plants also posses intelligence. If you limit your diet to things without intelligence, you won't be sexy for long. You'll be food for one of those other things. It's the circle of life. Can you feel the love tonight?

Nice guy that I am, even I recognize that you gotta either kill or be killed. What you kill is a matter of choice; if I could afford it and it wouldn't clog up my arteries my choice would be Kobe cow about once a month. Well-done, with a horseradish sauce and a side of once-lively vegetables, and a red wine made from the life-force of happy central-California grapes. I'd savor the well-marbled deeply browned flesh of this animal for the full month until nothing was left but the bones, which I would happily give to my faithful dogs, who demonstrate their affection by not eating me instead.

Instead I cheerfully enjoy chicken, turkey, and lesser quality beef on a daily basis. Thus do I remain nourished and confident that I'm at the top of the food chain.

For now.