|
|
|
October 28, 2010
If it's all about sex, can we just have sex instead of taxes?
We pay taxes, and politicians are elected to figure out how to manage the tax money, and the country is just about bankrupt. But over and over, we are told that that the real issue is sex. In terms of politics, this generally takes the form of the culture war. One party says sex is good, so do it! The other party says sex is bad, so be celibate! Both parties are populated by people who have sex, which means that the people who say they're on the side of sex tend to come out ahead of the people who say they're against it. Everything goes according to stereotype. And even when we're on the verge of bankruptcy, it's still about sex. By mutual consent of both parties. It's easy to see why they do this. What's harder to understand is how they get away with it. You'd almost think the sex scam was working. MORE: Thanks to Memeorandum for the link! posted by Eric on 10.28.10 at 10:31 PM
Comments
Celibacy, chastity, abstinence -- I am not saying these things are the reality so much the popular stereotype. The reality is that the Democrats are more against sexuality than the Republicans; most sex scandals consist of Democratic scoldings directed against Republicans -- for alleged sexual misdeeds which are deemed "hypocritical." I am personally tired of it all, but it provides fuel for the blog! Eric Scheie · October 29, 2010 11:19 AM Too close to the election for much real politics. Funny thing about this sex story is that the people involved did not actually have sex. How desperate are "they" getting to run with a no sex sex story? I did hear that there may have been some nudity involved so there is that. In fact I was told that there was a Bush involved. Or maybe a bush. I can't exactly put my finger on it but there is something fishy here. M. Simon · October 29, 2010 11:43 AM BTW sleeping naked with a woman was one of my favorite dating techniques. I'd say "Sleep with me naked. I promise no sex. I just like the contact." And I'd keep my promise. About 3/4s of the time the lady in question would later put the moves on me trying to figure out if it was me (was I gay?) or her (she was unattractive). I always preferred sex with a VERY willing partner. And that little trick just about insured it. And the times it failed? I got to sleep naked with a naked woman. Which is not bad. M. Simon · October 29, 2010 11:54 AM Your entire premise is incorrect. It isn't, nor has it ever been, about sex. It is about scandal, and sex is merely one subtype of scandal. Other types include the illegal nanny, ethics scandals, draft-dodging scandals, etc. They have identical effects, so there is no logical reason to single out only sex. For too many reasons to list, incumbency has become a powerful advantage - so powerful, that often nothing less than a scandal can nullify it. THAT is the heart of the problem. Scandals: * Bypass all forms of campaign "reform" (controls) and therefore the more controls, the more powerful scandal is compared to other tools. * Can often be timed so that it's foremost in voters' minds when they go to the ballot box. * Even if it's untrue or a partial-at-best truth, it has the advantage all lies do... it will travel across the world while the truth is still tying its shoelaces. * Retractions are printed on page Z12 five days after the election. Ryan Waxx · October 30, 2010 05:42 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
October 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
October 2010
September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• We have always been at war with partisanship
• Witching Hour • Low Ratings • Forgive me if I don't gloat over the sweep • If it's all about sex, can we just have sex instead of taxes? • Chickamauga! Chickamauga! • The difference between crime and, you know, crime-crime • Present President's Poor Performance On Par With Presidential Precedents • Post Election Scandal? • Time to sober up and let the truth be trolled!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Er, which party pushes celibacy? Is there a Shaker party I've overlooked? Thought they died out.