Sexual Healing 4963
Tuesday, September 30, 2008-1:00 A.M.
I said "Fuck The Troops" on stage Saturday night and got a round of applause.
Here's how it happened; I was performing at the Cedar House in Skaneatles, New York with fellow comics Danny "D-Low" Brown and Joe Fico. At a point in my headlining set, I begin talking about politics. I preface the political material in my show by urging everyone to vote in November, because it sickens me that voter apathy has subjected us to lousy leadership in this country for much of the last 40 years (in other words, my lifetime). I mention that American fighting men and women lost their lives defending our right to vote, and if you stayed home on Election Day, you were basically saying "Fuck The Troops." The crowd of about 120 clapped and cheered.
Now, staying home on Election Day is NOT saying "Fuck The Troops." The right to vote is also the right to abstain. But I thought it would be a fun exercise to see if I could say what is possibly the most inflammatory statement you could say to a group of strangers (in a small, and from what I could gather, conservative town) and get away with it.
Joe had done some political material earlier in the show, and it was clear from their response that I was in a very red part of New York (a very blue state). Getting them to clap for me saying "fuck the troops" was all the more sweeter, because it proved that in the right context, with the right wording and inflection, you can get social conservatives to clap for almost anything.
Now, I mention all of this not to give myself a smug pat-on-the-back, but to set up the next thing, which is a question from the mailbag. The question comes from Ricky K. of Englewood, Florida, and he's not exactly a stranger; he's been one of my best friends for almost 20 years.
Ricky writes; "I'd like to see you write in your blog about Sara Palin and how she is quickly becoming another Dan Quayle and late night fodder for Dave, Jay and Saturday Night Live. I'd like to see your take on this."
Well, Ricky, I'd be glad to oblige.
The state of politics in this country has become so fragmented and divided that we'll likely never come together as a nation again. The infighting based on whether or not an individual is a Democrat or a Republican has gotten so ugly, it's made many of us feel like foreigners in our own country. The current state of the economy (disastrous) is a perfect microcosm of what we've become....a bunch of sorry finger-pointers who would rather assign blame (and therefore, shame) than roll up our sleeves and work together in a bucket brigade to put the fire out. This fragmentation was designed by Republicans, to pit us against each other and seize the power that by rights, should be held by Democrats as champions of the middle class, the largest class in this country (and by that I mean outnumbering both the "rich" and the "poor").
Now, as a Liberal, I must defend the Democrats as being more correct-not "totally" correct, but more correct, than Republicans in any given circumstance. Republicans are given to hyperbole, such as tearing down actors who give their political opinions as "Hollywood elitists," even though you never hear that tag given to Ronald Reagan or Arnold Schwarzenegger, ie: Hollywood elitists that they agree with. They are masters of double-speak, and will sell you as much bullshit as you are willing to buy.
And even the base of the Republican party is suspect; Republicans were always the party of the monied few, while the Democrats favored the working class; hence, the union support of Democratic candidates. The simple truth is that as more and more wealth is hoarded by the top one percent in this country, the Republican party needed to shore up their numbers (there are certainly not enough wealthy people left to win an election for a Republican candidate), and they did it by reaching out to evangelical Christians; ie: "Social Conservatives." The plot here seems to be that if you are an economic Conservative, you justtake a stance that abortions are wrong, flag burning is wrong, and gay marriage is an abomination, and you count those votes right into office. Politicians will say anything to get elected, sure, but this one is so easy an idiot could do it.
Calm down, I'm not up to Governor Palin yet.
You never hear anyone talk about "economic Liberals," do you? It's usually just social Liberals, because Liberals don't follow the money like Conservatives do. The general stance is that Republicans care about money, and Democrats care about people. Liberals are forced to deal with money in the form of taxation because they need that money to implement social programs which are designed (wait for it) to take care of people. Republicans want smaller government, smaller taxes, less governmental regulation and intrusion in business, and basically allow each individual's chips to fall where they may, which is a very cavalier attitude to take when you've already got plenty of money. Universal health care isn't very important to you if you're healthy and wealthy. Which begs the question, why isn't there universal health care in this country? Because we've only had two terms of Democratic leadership in the White House in the last 28 years, and that particular president (Clinton) had to deal with a Republican Congress that basically told him to shove universal health care up his blow hole (talking about health care and President Clinton actually makes the song "Sexual Healing" by Marvin Gaye come to mind, and I'm sure there's a good joke in there somewhere, but I got the punchline and can't figure out the setup). Another reason that Republicans shoot down universal health care is that dead people can't collect Social Security. If health care was available and people lived long, healthy lives, they'd be collecting Social Security up the wazoo, and George W. Bush and his cronies have already raided that fund and spent the money. Finally, universal health care would destroy a whole industry, the health insurance industry, and the pharmaceutical lobby won't sit back and watch their product get "price fixed" by a bunch of anti-profit Socialists. It's all in the money, baby. If the uninsured (yes, I'm one of them, thank you) could get some Political Action Committee money together to lobby Congress, we would. But if we had that money, we wouldn't need to lobby Congress, we could just go buy our own damn medication.
I had a very interesting conversation with a guy after a show in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania last month about universal health care. This individual was ex-Army, and worked for the government in a civilian capacity. His argument against universal health care (after damning the newly minted Democratic VP choice of Joe Biden as a "Socialist" [the new bad word for "Liberal"]) was that the same long lines and poor service that we recieve at the Department of Motor Vehicles would be the same that we would receive under socialized medicine. Although at first blush, I would say as an unisured person that if I could vault over high medical bills by standing in line, I would find the time to do that, but I reject this logic because people at the Department of Motor Vehicles are bureaucrats who are issuing licenses, collecting money and handing out plates. Folks who work in medicine do so because they are healers, wishing to help people and take oaths to do so. I'm not saying that the billing and records aspect of hospitals and clinics would be less rigmarole than they are now, but actually, yes they would, because there wouldn't have to be any billing to speak of, it would just be maintenance of health records. So yes, I disagree in that respect.
So we've got a hornswoggled populace who are getting shoved around, manipulated by Republicans who beat the socially conservative drum, lining up all the simps who care way too much about the abortion issue, gay marriage and gun rights (and the sad truth is that overturning Roe v. Wade wouldn't abolish abortion, it would just revert the ruling on the issue back to the states, so you'd have really, really, really conservative states like South Dakota and Alabama saying "no" to abortion, then Becky Sue would have to take a long bus ride to the next abortion-allowing state to get her procedure done, or Billy Ray would have to do a back alley coat hanger job on her or face raising a little bastard for 18 years) and marching Conservative politicians into office to the detriment of their fiscal health and welfare. For the most part, social conservatives are not of monetary substance to afford the fiscal policies of the Conservative Right. It would be much more to their advantage to vote with the Left, but the thought of allowing gays to marry and live together (even though this would fall under the allowance of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness...remember that from History class?) makes most social conservatives (the real ones, not the ones pretending they are to curry favor and get votes) vomit. And I mean, those that weren't in the airport bathroom already, playing footsy under the bathroom stall with another guy.
But neither do Liberals vote their wallets....Sean Penn and Barbara Streisand have plenty of money, and vote with a party that would most likely tax them handily, but they do so because they understand that to whom much is given, much is expected (that's from the Bible, in case you don't recognize it). And while the teachings of Jesus Christ almost always smack of Socialism, only a few people (and it's usually artists, people who spend time examining the human condition) that understand the natural beauty in helping one another. And they do it because it's the right way to act.
So that, in an overly-simplified explanation, is why I am a Liberal. Now on to Governor Palin.
By now, I'm sure you've heard a lot about the good Governor and her fine work up there in Alaska, and had quite a few opportunities to size her up for yourself and decide if she is indeed a good choice for Senator McCain as a running mate.
From the beginning, when Senator McCain emerged victorious over a weak Republican field to garner the nomination of the party, most Conservatives were beside themselves. I remember listening to Rush Limbaugh and hearing how much of a disaster this was for the party (he's seemed to have come around as of late) and all I could think of was that the George W. Bush campaign painted McCain as the worst possible choice in the world back in 2000, and now he's the next coming of Ronald Reagan. Remember when Karl Rove got a bunch of volunteers on the phone in South Carolina back in 2000 and asked people "Would it make you want to vote for Senator McCain less if you found out that he fathered a black child out of wedlock?" And the truth was that he handn't, the truth was that he and his wife, Cindy, had adopted a black child and McCain had to hide the child lest people think the rumor was true, and many folks in South Carolina didn't vote for him over George W. Bush based on that lie alone. When McCain was named the eventual Republican nominee this year, many folks on the right were very disappointed, hoping for a Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney (Giuliani never had a chance) and in the absence of those candidates, McCain was like a bitter medicine and the choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate was quite the thumb in the eye to Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, or any of the other rich, white men who were supposed to be in line for that job.
The initial response was that Palin was an answer to disenfranchised Hillary Clinton supporters who were upset that Barack Obama didn't choose her as his running mate and the Republicans decided to give them a female that they could vote for and make the medicine go down easier. But Hillary Clinton's supporters weren't supporting her because she was a female, they were supporting her because she stood for the things they wanted their elected officials to stand for; health care, help for working families, relief from the high cost of living, a woman's right to choose, equality in the workplace for women and other Liberal ideas. Palin is a pro-life (unless you're a moose, I guess), pro-gun Conservative who shares few if any of Clinton's views, other than that a woman can and should compete for one of the two highest offices in the land.
It is to Governor Palin's eternal misfortune that she has a talented Doppelganger in the form of Tina Fey, formerly of Saturday Night Live and now of 30 Rock on NBC. Fey has lampooned the Governor twice in the last two weeks on SNL, and this last go-around, she didn't even have to memorize funny written dialogue. In a sketch featuring Amy Pohler as Katie Couric and spoofing a recent interview Governor Palin did with her, Fey merely delivered the lines Governor Palin did when questioned on her foreign party credentials. The disjointed response generated gales of laughter without much comic exaggeration, and THAT, my friends, is quite unfortunate indeed. It is far unfortunate for us as a nation that this situation has been allowed to happen, that a woman who appears to be, while strong, STUNNINGLY unqualified for the position of Vice President, has, in fact, been offered by one of the two major political parties as fit for that office.
Dan Quayle, for those of you that remember him, was chosen by the elder President Bush to show some balance on the ticket by featuring one of the young rising stars of the Republican party. Quayle was a senator from Indiana, and was famously skewered for his correction of a student who spelled "potato" correctly, insisting that the word actually featured an "e" at the end. Quayle had several other gaffes as well, but none more memorable than that one.
Sarah Palin hasn't even ascended to office yet, and she's already barfed up quite a few doozies for the late night comedians to work with. There's a photo making the rounds on the internet of her in an American flag bikini, holding an automatic rifle, but it's actually Palin's head photoshopped on to another woman in that pose (please don't believe stuff you read on the internet.....there's also no money waiting for you in Nigeria from your dead uncle you didn't know you had).
The choice of Palin is bad, and probably not McCain's, although he definitely has a history of reckless behavior. McCain has a damaged reputation among evangelicals (leftover from his 2000 presidential bid in which he basically told the religious right to go fuck themselves) and the Palin pick seems like an attempt to assuage them. Whether or not there are women dumb enough to follow the logic that if they can't vote for Hillary Clinton, they can vote for McCain and get Palin into the White House as the first female to hold the veep job, remains to be seen. I can't imagine that Clinton supporters are that obtuse, although she has strong support in the Appalachian states, and those folks aren't exactly world-famous for their "book lurnin'."
Any politician that McCain chose as his running mate was sure to be eviscerated by the late night comics, Letterman, Leno, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and others. The sad truth is that Palin is such a bad choice, her jokes write themselves, and now even Republicans are dog-piling on and calling for her removal from the ticket. And this is two months away from the election!
But let's face it, the ghost of Abraham Lincoln could descend from heaven and he'd lose the presidential election in a landslide. The blue states wouldn't vote for him because he's a Republican. The South wouldn't vote for him because he's from Illinois. And the evangelicals wouldn't vote for him because they'd see his beard and think he was Amish.
Our only hope as a nation is to happen along a charismatic leader who can unite us, make us all proud to be one country again, like Reagan did after the financial crisis of the recession during Jimmy Carter's presidency. We were on the ropes as a nation back in 1979, with hostages in Iran, gas shortages that only allowed you to buy fuel on odd or even days depending on your license plate, and a withering sense of national pride. Reagan, although flawed, was able to bring us all together for a time. Who will do that for us now? We can pin our hopes on an egotistical bastard who's running for President to correct the screwing he got from Bush eight years ago, and tolerate his angry, caustic style and hope that he unites our country and improves the value of a dollar to most of what it used to be, or we can try the other guy, who seems popular and magnetic, speaks softly, and doesn't care to approve "attack ads" or sling the mud. I shudder to think that a group of people who can be lead by me, a standup comic doing his act in a bowling alley, to applaud the phrase "Fuck The Troops," can be lead to think that John McCain and Sarah Palin are a good choice to be Captain and First Mate on this Titanic that the United States of America has become.
You do what you want to, I think the choice is clear.
Ralph Tetta
Rochester, NY