-
sponsorship
Rachael is so not our Elisabeth Hasselbeck! And seriously, Ellen, how are we divisive? Au contraire, I'd say we are a model of comity - the U.N. of blogs, really, only with no corruption and no Libya on the Security Council. We've been at this for a year now - come to think of it, why haven't we celebrated that? - and despite disagreeing on minor matters like abortion and war have hardly ever even gotten hot at each other. On no occasion I can recall has anyone been so much as borderline disrespectful, which has got to be some kind of miracle, if you believe in such things, which I do; see how diverse we are? (Or is that too Sarah Palin for ya? Maybe we are the Midwest of blogs!) I guess the bottom line is that I don't even believe there is an us and a them, and think Obama's right when he says that there's not this vast chasm between us at all; in fact, compared to political differences in other countries, our right and left are close enough to slow dance. For proof, just listen to the candidates last night, much of the time saying the exact same thing, even down to telling that one poor woman in the audience that she was understandably cynical. (I was thinking oh, Obama's lost her vote, until McCain came up behind him and called her the exact same thing.) Anyway, happy birthday to us, and to all of you who are off tomorrow, Tzom Kal. (OK, Emily B. just taught me that earlier today; see, we are still learning about each other...)
-
sponsorship
Ellen, that is how I felt after I read an interview with The Sopranos' creator David Chase way back when, explaining that every word out of every character's mouth was a lie. (Up until then, I'd spent the whole hour going, "Well, that's not true ... and that's not either.'' So with that off my shoulders, well, I was freed up for whole other levels of viewing enjoyment. Sad, really.) And yes, Rachael, you are our rightful Elisabeth—even if I'm guessing it would take more than a congratulatory note on the birth of your baby to get you to reconsider Hillary Clinton. So now that your guy John McCain has the nomination, he knows he needs to make nice with Republicans well to your right, as he did yesterday at CPAC. But I think I finally get their McCain hatred after hearing an interview with the American Conservative Union's David Keene on Diane Rehm the other day. (And no, it is not the same as Hillary hatred on the left, over policy disappointments, political hedging, and Iraq, Iraq, Iraq.)
Keene was explaining that sure, some of the conservative anger toward McCain is over the issues—campaign finance, for instance, and initially opposing the Bush tax cuts as a ridiculously good deal for rich people. But a lot of it, Keene said, is only personal, because McCain is the kind of guy who can't seem to resist poking his finger in your eye, especially if you're someone he really ought to be sucking up to. (Sort of how Galileo's real sin was not as much his maverick views on Copernicus as his glee in making an ass of his pal Pope Urban in print. There he was, so enjoying his own bon mots, right up until the Inquisition arrived.) Unlike Hillary Clinton, in other words, McCain is the opposite of ingratiating. Suddenly, listening to Keene, I realized why I like this guy with whom I agree on so little. And why folks who do agree with him but have often felt his elbow in their ribs—hey, what was that for?—can go to pieces at the sound of his name. Keene said he personally is working on getting past some of the old slights, and I'm sure the GOP knows it can't wait 300 years to forgive him.