The Top 3 Reasons Why John McCain Has Lost His Friggin' Mind

"You WILL turn in your homework, fatbody!"

Watch the debate? Of course you did. Everybody did. And if you're anything like me, you watched for the express purpose of discovering what new disconnected-from-reality proposal Sen. John McCain, Arizona (R) would make. I can almost hear the collective sigh from his campaign staffers. "Aw, dammit! Now we have to fudge up some stats and examples of how this stupidity will work," they say. A sigh, a theme, which has permeated each of the presidential debates and is deserving of an official Al Can Blog examination. Voici! Three reasons why John McCain has lost his friggin' head:

First it was a spending freeze, basically treating the government of the United State like a Korean dry cleaners trying to stretch every last drop of chemicals until the short term loan comes through and they can fill the coffers. Spending freeze? That's what an IT department does to mask the fact that it has operated with a deficit for the last quarter. (To all potential future employers: I have never participated in nor do I endorse budgetary shenanigans. I have a proven record of budgetary prudence and always hit my line items right on the mark.) Agreed, government spending is out of control, but the hatchet/scalpel analogy is very apt here. There are some programs that the federal government has wholly ignored funding or are really underfunded. To freeze spending would be detrimental to the economy as a whole.

Next McCain said he would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to use $300 billion to buy up bad loans and renegotiate mortgages at a reduced value. Admittedly this sounded interesting to me at first, but then that cold, blue reason stepped in and brought me to my senses. Suppose I bought my house for $250,000. I can't pay for it. The bank is sitting on a loan it can't sell right now because of the market pressures and sheer stink of my loan. So in comes the government to buy that loan of $250,000 using tax payer money. Now the market shows that my house is only worth $150,000 so the government will sell it to me at that price and I can pay off a reduced mortgage using my own money. Who got bailed out here AND at what cost? I just paid for my own house both as a taxpayer contributing to the $300 billion and the reduced mortgage and further, my investment is worthless (granted values are supposed to go up over time, but I want equity NOW). Advantage bank. Disadvantage? Taxpayers.

So then there's tonight's debate. John McCain, in talking about education, said the following:

We need to encourage programs such as Teach for America and Troops to Teachers where people, after having served in the military, can go right to teaching and not have to take these examinations which -- or have the certification that some are required in some states.

To which I respond...

What the F@&$?!?

Seriously, John? Seriously? I mean, not only are you showing me a gross lack of understanding that the "Troops to Teachers" program is designed to HELP TROOPS GET CERTIFICATIONS, but also a gross lack of understanding of what qualifies a person to be a teacher.

Mr. Lawrence, Third Grade teacher

Now just in case some readers see this as an attack on the honor and capabilities of our service men and women, let me squash that crap right now. I am very grateful to those in uniform who make sacrifices I couldn't imagine, let alone be capable of making for our country. It is not their fault that they are currently fighting in unjust and pointless wars. Wars based on lies and false pretense. I don't blame them or hold anything against them and hope that when Barack Obama brings them all home they all return fully limbed and employed. There is no better way to "support the troops" than to ensure they are cared for once their service is completed and to remove them from harm's way.

Having said that, John McCain is an idiot if he thinks this chick should go into a classroom without obtaining the proper certifications.

P.E. teacher Lyndie Englund "pals around" with students

So there you have it. As I see them the top three reasons why John McCain is an unhinged, unfit old codger. There are many reasons, but these three are enough to get any other old person declared mentally unfit to live alone. Honorable mention goes to:

1. Believing Obama supporters are calling him a terrorist at rallies.
2. "Bomb, bomb bomb. Bomb bomb Iran"
3. Taking credit for suspending his campaign to bring party leaders together and pass a bailout package which contained oodles and oodles of pork.
4. Sarah Palin, V.P. candidate
   

To me John McCain seems to be making it up as he goes along. The description of him as being "erratic" is appropriate and sadly, his actions, speeches and stances in the last several weeks have really sullied the career of someone I had considered to be a great statesman. I hope the rest of the country realizes that while his service to this nation has been great, his leadership at the highest level is not what is being demanded at this point in history.

An Important Issue This Election Year

I was recently asked by a Fox 26 reporter whether I felt this election was the most important of my lifetime. Her question was obviously about the presidential prospects: the economy, the world standing of the U.S. and all the lovely things that bring people to the polls every four years. My answer was, of course, yes, but not for the reasons she thought. Beyond the classless campaign of Senator McCain and the skin color of Barack Obama, hiding under the radar like a stealth bomber ready to wreak havoc on California and the nation is a Civil Rights issue that makes this November truly the most important voting opportunity of my life.

You have seen them. Driving around town they sit, decorating roadsides, house fronts and the like. They look very innocent, to me at least. Yellow signs with calm blue imagery and text. They show a family, Mom, Dad, Jr. and Little Sis. They hold up a banner that says “Yes on 8, Protect Marriage.” Ahhh… What can be more positive? A family. Ahhh… With the economy in the dumps, and two wars having taken the lives of more than four-thousand of my fellow Americans (let’s not even start on foreign losses), if there is one easy little thing we can protect, dammit if it isn’t marriage.

But then there is the small print. You see, in “protecting marriage,” we are only protecting a certain kind of marriage. We are only protecting some marriages. The language of the amendment reads as follows: Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fourteen sinister words to define our state’s collective conscience.

And so we have it. This positive affirmation of “marriage” is specifically a restriction. It is an explicit denial of marriage to anyone who wishes to marry someone of the same sex. A red rubber DENIED stamp to anyone who wants to enjoy the rights and privileges of marriage with someone who has the same body parts. Proposition 8, is a state Constitutional amendment (or revision) that tells an entire group of Californians that they are less important, less worthy, less deserving of the rights and responsibilities of marriage than anyone else simply because of their sexual orientation.

I was not here in 2000, when California made its first attempt a Jim Crow legislation. I was shocked to find out that 61% of voters said that they will only tolerate marriage between a man and a woman, but the gays can have their “civil unions.” They can have all the rights of married couples, well most of them anyway. They are different (separate) but equal. And then I was proud to see the machinery of our government in action, the checks and balances in place, when earlier this year the State Supreme Court ruled this law in violation of the State Constitution. These are not “activist judges” as the rhetoric would have you believe, but men and women who are doing their jobs to ensure that no law is enacted that violates the very charter that makes us a state in the Union.

Want to read more rhetoric? Okay:

1. That gay marriage is okay will be forced on our children in schools. WRONG. In California we have the woefully irresponsible choice to “opt out” of any given lesson. So if your school were foolish enough to teach an opinion of marriage (vs. say that marriage is a contract/institution/whatever between PEOPLE) then you can be equally as foolish and say, “Send my kid to the ligh-berry during all that gay talk.”
2. Churches will lose tax exempt status.WRONG. “Finally, affording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 4.)” That’s the court ruling, Son. Deal.

I could argue rhetoric all day. That’s not boasting, mind you, I’m just saying it would get exhausting. In fact, I would love to hear a single argument that doesn’t root itself in religious dogma. Then we could have a reasoned discussion.

To me it comes down to a simple question of equal rights. The drafters of this revision/amendment want us to call it “Marriage Protection Act.” Protection from what? Terrorists? Communist ideology? Zee Germans? Shenanigans. It’s about civil rights. Civil rights and their unwillingness to have uncomfortable conversations with their own kids. If you are undecided about Prop. 8, ask yourself one question. Am I willing to amend the state Constitution for the express purpose of RESTRICTING CIVIL RIGHTS to a section of my community? If you don’t think this affects you, you’re wrong. If you don’t think you have a say in this matter, you’re wrong. Prop. 8 is a direct attack on Reason and Enlightenment. It is a way for a dogmatic section of society to impose their will on another section of society.

Please, recognize that Marriage is a sacred rite as much as a legal right. While the two concepts have much in common they are fundamentally different. One is an act ordained by God to be performed under certain conditions which are arguable, definable and certainly interpretable based on the faith/church to which one subscribes. The other is a legal status defined and protected by the State such that, “the right to marry is not properly viewed as simply a benefit or privilege that a government may establish or abolish as it sees fit, but rather that the right constitutes a basic civil or human right of all people.” Proposition 8 seeks to impose the intention of the former onto the latter, a direct violation of the separation of Church and State. Please, PLEASE vote NO, on Proposition 8.