Vendetta!

The presidential election is over. Huzzah!

My candidate of choice won. Double huzzah!

I’ve gotta say that election night was pretty sweet. Barack Obama ran a great campaign. Sure, it was full of lofty rhetoric, the majority of which I didn’t really buy into, but that’s not why I voted for him. I checked his name off on the ballot because his platform, for all intents and purposes, was diametrically opposed to the way things have been run during the past eight years. I won’t mention any names, but I’ll wager you have a good idea of what I’m talking about.

So, there I was election night, basking in the nascent reality of a Barack Obama presidency, and although I just said otherwise, I was swept up in the lofty rhetoric of Barack’s victory speech. Well, that’s not fair. It was a momentous occasion for both sides of the political spectrum: the vision of the civil rights movement had come to fruition and Americans had elected their first black president. Much has been written about the historic occasion, so I’ll let that be. But the main point was that I was quite taken by the historical enormity and occasion of the night. Yes, we can! Yes, we can!

Riding the emotional high, I did an about-face and headed into the dark and sordid catacombs of the internet: the forums on Sean Hannity’s website.

Now, allow me to provide you a little bit of background. I despise Sean Hannity. I’m very much a non-violent guy, but Sean Hannity is one of the few people on this earth whom I’d enjoy strangling. The weekend before Election Day, I registered a free account on his website so I could partake in the spirited political debate within. Oh, and by “spirited political debate” I mean “vile, baseless attacks on Barack Obama.” You see, what started out as an honest attempt to engage the other side in civil debate quickly devolved into portraying the Republican electorate as an uneducated, xenophobic group of outlandish reactionaries. I make no excuses for what I did, only that that’s the environment that Hannity fosters every single day he shows up for his radio and television gigs.

So my short stint on the Hannity forums was nothing to be too proud about, but around 12:30 am EST on November 5^th, I wrote and posted a scathing, but polite, criticism addressed directly to Hannity, accusing him of dumbing down the electorate and costing John McCain any realistic chance of election.

And it got me banned from the forum. For life.

I’ll be the first to admit that I was gloating. And I won’t apologize for it. After the low, low feeling that accompanied the 2004 results, the night of Obama’s election was like the combination of three Christmases and two birthdays from childhood. It was a great! But even though I was a dirty gloater, my post contained no profanities. I addressed Mr. Hannity, but did not threaten or insult him in any way. I simply criticized his lowbrow tactics and his role in creating a gaggle of inexplicably hysterical Republicans who would rather face electric shock therapy than an Obama presidency.

Yet, about 15 minutes after posting my screed, I refreshed the page and was informed that I had been banned from the forums for “contempt of host.” When would that ban be lifted? The window informed me that I would never be welcomed back.

Of course, the grand irony in this whole story is Hannity’s commitment to conjuring up the mythical bogeyman of talk radio: the “fairness doctrine.” This doctrine, which has been discussed in Congress, but has zero chance of ever becoming an actual piece of legislation, supposedly aims to eliminate the bastion of conservative thought (an oxymoron?) on the public airwaves. He loves to bring it up at every chance he gets in the hopes of illustrating how liberals are vehemently opposed to the First Amendment rights. Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth.

And so it is that this self-proclaimed champion of liberty and opinion has banned exactly that. On his own website. Hypocrisy much, Mr. Hannity?

My bold prediction is that freedom of speech will be fine. Hannity and company will be free to develop their asinine personas as Obama’s presidency progresses. If there’s anything Americans love more than firearms, it’s insipid blowhards who have opinions they can’t keep to themselves. But beware Hannity’s website. Unless you’re a god-fearing, socialist-hating Dixiecrat, you’ll be silenced.

And since I’m forever silenced on your website, Mr. Hannity, I’ll take the liberty of using my own webspace to give you a bit of advice: read a damned book, you moron.

Congratulations!

Congratulations, President-Elect Obama! Your election last night has been the best political news this country has had in a great long while. Now let's get the progressive agenda rolling throughout the land!

Lipstick on an insane person.

NBC Nightly News ran a fluff piece tonight about the parents of special needs children (read: children with Down’s syndrome) and their outpouring of support for Sarah Palin. I’m actually sort of convinced that it was a tongue-in-cheek piece, because earlier in the same broadcast Brian Williams presented us with the latest CBS News poll which has Obama absolutely destroying the Republican ticket by 14 percentage points.

Originally I was going to use this space to write about how hypocritical Palin is, as I had heard somewhere that she had actually slashed the budget for the Special Olympics in her first year as governor (before she gave birth to her Trig, her son with Down’s). However, I stand corrected on that issue, as it was apparently a false claim levied by the Daily Kos. According to http://factcheck.org she’s actually tripled the budget allotment since taking the reins in Juneau.

Nevertheless, the buzz surrounding this extraneous issue continues to irk me. Those on the right have stalwartly defended Palin’s decision to bring a fetus with Down’s syndrome to term, citing her as a modern day hero in the pro-life initiative. On the flipside, I’m shocked that the sheer irresponsibility of Palin and her husband would be lauded by so many. Far be it from me to dictate people’s procreative rights, but wasn’t four children enough? Especially with the rigors of governing a whole god damned state? And to not consider contraceptive measures in your mid-forties? That’s just playing Russian roulette, as countless medical studies have shown a correlation between birth abnormalities and older mothers. And don’t you dare pull the religion card in this debate. If you have a problem with the pill or condoms, there are several alternatives. Among these is abstinence, of which I’ve heard the governor is quite fond.

So Palin’s failure to grasp the fundamentals of sex education is conveniently overlooked, and in its stead is the charming campaign prop that is her special needs son. Palin seized the spotlight at the RNC and Vice Presidential debate by playing the compassionate, caring mother. When the inanity of her VP acceptance speech concluded and again when the furor of debate with Senator Biden subsided, she took a hold of Trig and thrust him before the lens of the cameras to show us all that she is a card-carrying member of the “culture of life” and that, above all else, she is a saint because her baby has Down’s syndrome.

In the arena of professional politics, admittedly a sport in which every action taken and word spoken is ultimately self-serving, has there ever been a stunt as shameless as this? I think you’d be hard pressed to top it.

So, with three short weeks until Election Day, the Republican strategists will continue to paint Barack Obama as the candidate of inexperience; the “elitist” out of touch with reality.

But, my friends (to borrow the disarmingly friendly rhetorical style of John McCain): Sarah Palin’s ignorance of the things most of us learned about in tenth grade has been spun into a campaign prop. To me, that emphatically shows us that she’s the inexperienced politician existing in her self-constructed reality.