Wednesday, March 30, 2011

What if _________ were gay?

It occurred to me recently that our history, our present, our future could be incredibly and unrecognizably different if certain prominent figures were gay. Dare I say it might be a better place? I don't want to offend you hets, but let's think about this for a moment.

Look at that suit. All he
needs is a little paisley scarf.
It's 1982 and President Reagan, out of concern for millions of gay men who are dying of mysterious affliction some doctors are calling Gay-Related Immunodeficiency Syndrome, has announced that he will increase funding to NIH and the CDC to try to learn more about the spectrum of illnesses and how to stop them. "I care about my fellow homosexuals," Reagan said in an exclusive interview with Barbara Walters. "I've known all my life that I was gay, and my partner Hank and I are dealing with a lot of loss right now -- our friends are dying, people's sons and fathers and brothers are dying. As president, I can help stop these needless deaths. Forget missile shields in space and other such boondogglery; I want to save lives."

Oh, if only. Let's keep dreaming, shall we? (Is "boondogglery" a word?)

Look at that impish grin. He's
probably thinking about Joshua
Fry Speed right now.
Oh wait. This one's kind-of a gimme. The guy didn't get all war-crazed and say "fuck the rebels! blow 'em to hell!" like, say, a moron hetero like Chimpy would've. Nope, he was sensible. Sensitive. Thoughtful. Gay, perhaps? He brought our nation through a bitter and bloody civil war; he helped bring an end to slavery. Let's face it -- probably gay! It's not like we haven't all heard the stories!

Let's keep thinking. Maybe a movie star...

WHAT IF TOM CRUISE WERE GAY?Oh wait. Yeah. Gay. Obvy! Okay. Let's think here. No more Hollywood. Let's go back east to the tough guys....

"Ooooh, watch where you point that thing, tough guy!"

Well, shit! This is really hard! Who else?

Editorial Note: I really DO wish Reagan had been gay, and not just gay but OPENLY gay. Of course, he'd never have been president -- unless we started our little game so far back in history that, by the time 1980 rolled around, homosexuality was completely accepted. So let's try that....


"Talk to me, Marky Mark."

Hmmm. I know the Greeks were always having man-sex, but what about the Romans? If my barely passable knowledge of the Roman Empire is correct, I don't recall any gay rumors among the Caesars or Marc Antonys of Rome. Still, there was that whole stabbing on the Ides of March thing. Jilted lovers? Gay drama? Bizarre love triangle? You decide.

Moving on through history...

Where IS that handsome Lancelot?
So after pulling the sword from the stone and becoming the boy king, Arthur Pendragon gets Merlin to set him up this hot guy named Lancelot. They hang out together, sword-fighting (ahem) and creating Camelot, decorating the castle just so. Guinevere is never able to turn Lance's head so none of that drama starts. Instead all people are allowed to love whomever they want, and they all drink from the grail at weddings both gay and straight.


Imagine her in some khakis,
a button-down shirt,
and some Hush Puppies.
Can you say "World Peace"?
Now THIS isn't hard. She'd still have remained single, still have kicked ass in battle, still have been the ruler of the free world -- and she would've gotten to wear sensible shoes and comfy clothes instead of that weirdo kabuki makeup and stuff. The Gay Virgin Queen! Bring on women's lib, Renaissance style! Pants for everyone! Some Italian invents Doc Martins and we all live happily ever after in a Shakespearean sonnet!

"Hey, Macarena--YEAH!"
All republicans would be officially gay, by order of the President. End of story.

"All I want is a REAL relationship with a hot and
loving man! Is that so much to ask, people?"

Then he wouldn't be such a fucking douche bag, now would he? He'd demand equal rights for all, collective bargaining rights for all unions, and a permanent social safety net -- all at the expense of bullshit military spending. Oh, we'd still have a military....But WHAT A MILITARY!

Editor's Note: I didn't link to any American soldier dancing videos because, well, how can I put this without insulting our brave men and women in combat? Let's just say that we really need some gays in the military, if only to teach these guys how to dance.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Today's top scary stories!

In no particular order:

--Infants shouldn't drink tap water in Japan due to radiation levels.

--You'd better hope you're not deemed a "terror suspect," what with the government's latest assault on personal rights.

--Miss Shell-Shocked Bachman announces she's interested in being president. Because Sarah Palin wasn't fucking scary enough.

What's scaring you today?

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Our latest adventure in empire

Tough to know how to feel about this latest (ahem) entanglement we're getting ourselves into. I feel for the Libyan rebels who, fresh from watching the Egyptians take out Mubarak with little or no blood, set themselves the task of taking back their country from Muammar Gadhafi (spell it however; it doesn't matter). They had a few days of success, followed by a flexing of the military muscle Qaddafi (whatever) got from (who else?) us, the Russians, whoever.

The rebels started out saying they didn't need anyone's help; now they're begging for help.

So we've gotten a UN resolution (1974, bring back Jerry Ford!) to go in and clear the decks for a no-fly zone. Only a few weeks ago, Hillary and others were screeching about how there was no WAY we'd do that because it would involve bombing!; now it's bombs away, everyone! France bomb! Britain bomb! Everybody bomb!

But remember that our role is limited! Obama's assertions that he won't involve any ground troops remind me of Georgie Sr's "read my lips: no new taxes!" pledge, especially when I read what the military guys are saying:
Vice Admiral Bill Gortney, director of the U.S. military's Joint Staff, said of the U.S. role: "We are on the leading edge of a coalition military operation. This is just the first phase of what will likely be a multiphase operation."
"first phase"? "multiphase"? Well, shit.

And what of budget cuts and government shut-downs and deficit hawks? Hey, folks, this is MILITARY spending we're talking about here. That's off limits. Now you old people and sick people and poor people -- get ready to bend over and take it up the qaddafi because we've got to cut this deficit!

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

When did up become down?

When exactly did the change happen -- the change during which democrats became republicans and republicans became assholes?

Let's look at a few noteworthy elements. During the Civil War and Reconstruction, republicans -- the party of Lincoln -- were fighting for the rights of freed black slaves to own property, vote, work for money, and other rights that only whites had previously. Republicans were pro-Union (USA, that is) and fought to keep everyone working as one nation. Democrats (Dixiecrats) were shouting "states' rights!" and Jim Crow-lawing the fuck out of freed slaves and black people right into the Civil Rights era, trying to keep alive the old ways of slavery, persecution, and lynching of blacks. Granted, republicans were always pro-business, but labor unions leveled the playing field and made sure that everyone made a fair wage for their work.

Today, it's the democrats who embrace the minorities, who fight for the little guy, who help the businesses but still support the unions. Republicans are now completely in the corporations' pockets, and corporatocracy favors the white man and all the money he can steal from pretty much everyone, black or white. Far-right republicans, or "tea party" supporters, are now the ones who shout "states' rights!" whenever a democratic president wants to do something they don't like. Gay marriage? States' rights to stop that perversion, no matter what Washington says! Legal abortion? States' rights to prosecute those baby-killing doctors and put 'em to death, no matter what the federal laws are! Labor unions? States' rights and "right to work" (i.e., right to be unemployed at the company's will) forever!

When did the switcheroo happen? Why did it happen? When did the republicans become the party of whiteys and the dems become the party of the rest of us? When did republicans say "fuck the Union!" and start hollering "states' rights!" everytime something didn't go their ideological way? I know that George "segregation foe-evah!" Wallace was a republican; my parents hated that guy! But when did that switch happen?

Did republicans, the party of anti-slavery, tap into the racism of the south in order to win the south's vote? Was that it? Or maybe they were always racist, and perhaps I'm unduly equating anti-slavery with anti-racism. Perhaps I'm generalizing that all northerners, and thus all northern republicans, were all pro-integration, pro-civil rights. Maybe it was just the poor ones, the ones NOT in power, who favored treating the black man fairly.

I'm no history scholar; I know only a little, albeit about a lot of things. But this has been rolling around in my brain for a while, as we watch the union battles in Wisconsin between the corporatocracy's republicans versus the common people's democrats. Why do republicans hate unions? Is it pure greed, pure pro-business at the expense of everything else? Hell, democrats are taking a lot of the same corporate money as republicans, but they're still largely supporting labor unions.

So what gives?