The Other GM Issue

It's hardly surprising that the GOP presidential candidates have strong views on the topic of same-sex marriage. Nor should it surprise us that these views are typically negative. What is amazing, though, is the wild abandon with which the candidates express those views, usually with a profound disregard for logic and reason (not to mention facts).

Had she not withdrawn from the race after a poor showing in the Iowa caucuses, top prize would certainly go Michele Bachmann for proclaiming that gay people could get married as long as they got married to people of a different gender. Among the surviving candidates, Mitt Romney would seem to be the obvious leader based on the sheer volume of positions he's taken in the course of his political career, generally depending on what political group he's trying to woo at any given moment, but I think Gingrich is probably the real winner.

His comments last year describing same-sex marriage as something that "fundamentally goes against everything we know" seem straightforward enough, but the former Speaker of the House saved his "A" game for the end of the year. When asked at a December campaign event in Iowa how he'd engage members of the gay community who want the right to marry, Gingrich told the man that those people should vote for President Obama. On the surface, that sounds fairly sensible until you remember that the President is actually ambivalent about gay-marriage as opposed to civil unions.

I could continue by talking about Rick Santorum's views, but if you're reading this you probably have access to Google, where a quick query will render any such recap superfluous. To what extent any given candidate's comments are expressions of genuine principle or political expediency is hard to say. Whatever the case may be, I can't shake the over-riding feeling that at least some of their opposition to gay-marriage stems from their insecurities about having another half of the population reject them as hateful people that no one would ever want to share their lives with them.

Eating Their Own

The all too true joke about how Democrats like to indulge in circular firing squads is getting a fresh spin from the GOP in the current presidential campaign. Not surprisingly, it stems from one of those subjects that we're advised to avoid in polite conversation - religion.

Watching the ongoing discussion about (or, more tellingly in some cases, refusal to discuss) Mitt Romney's faith in and around the Republican Presidential candidates inspires mixed feelings for me. The debate over whether someone who's a Mormon is truly a "Christian" as opposed to a member of some kind of "cult" is troubling in the same way that the late-2006 uproar over Congressman Keith Ellison's decision to swear his oath of office on the Koran was troubling (i.e. something that shouldn't happen in 21st century America). At the same time, there's a certain pleasure in watching a political party that supposedly wants to be more inclusive shooting itself in the foot over something that should be an entirely personal matter while they seem unable to articulate a coherent policy on the things that most Americans care about such (e.g. the economy, the long-term future of social security, etc.).

In any case, assuming that either Mitt Romney or Rick Perry gets the Republican nomination, we're looking at two fun scenarios for the general election. Obama vs. Perry gives us the guy struggling to find a way out of the mess he inherited against the hypocrite who criticizes the first guy's approaches while reaping the benefits when it suits his political needs. Obama vs. Romney, on the other hand, would be a contest between people who share a similar vision on how to approach at least one key issue (i.e. health care) and that some portion of the Republican Party doesn't believe are Christians. I'm not sure which of those is better for President Obama and by extension America, but it does make me wonder if I have the intestinal fortitude to deal with another year of this.

Stay Classy, Governor Perry

As a character once said in a very bad movie, "Anyone who could swallow two Snowballs and a Ding Dong shouldn't have any trouble with pride." I'm sure they weren't talking about politics, but as we reflect on this picture of Texas Governor Rick Perry enjoying a corn-dog it certainly seems more than a little applicable.

Now, That's How You Do a Failure!

Texas Governor (and 2012 Republic Presidential Candidate) Rick Perry would probably be among the first to tell you that the 2009 Recovery Act (aka "the economic stimulus package") was a failure. He would, however, probably be the last to tell you how much his state benefited from that supposed failure.

According to a recent article in the Atlantic, the national Conference of State Legislatures reported that Texas was able to fill 97% of their budget deficit for the fiscal years 2010 and 2011 by using money from the Recovery Act. In dollar terms, Texas used $6.4 Billion (yes, with a "B") to help plug a $6.6 Billion hole in their finances.

There's a reasonable debate to be had that the Recovery Act wasn't as successful as it should have been, but that reasonable debate is never going to happen when its loudest critics are also among its largest beneficiaries. I'll stop short of calling Perry a liar, but things like this leave little room for doubt that he's a Grade A hypocrite.