tap dancing

"I believe in the constitutional principles of limited federal government, free enterprise, private property and individual liberty and responsibility. I will defend these principles on behalf of the citizens of the state of Idaho, the West and the Nation."
-- hypocrite and former senator, larry craig

ask any republican what their political beliefs are and the answer will resemble this statement. maybe without the eloquence and passion of mr. craig, but to some degree their answer will look like this. at some point the american revolution may be mentioned and depending on the queried individual's level of intelligence, you may hear mention of one or both of the thomases - paine or jefferson, but don't count on it. the republican party claims that it's central ideology is this, "individual liberty" which mr. craig mentions. this translates into the subjective and arbitrary human value of "freedom." "freedom" to republicans essentially means that the individual is able to live his/her life according to his/her set of values or desires, free of interference from a centralized entity, typically the government, but this centralized entity could be something else. thomas jefferson was ardently against the idea of a centralized entity dictating behavior among his new country's constituents as the english crown had done in america prior to the american revolution. the church of england was also a centralized authority, also guilty of prescribing behavior and beliefs to the english and forcing those with different views to flee to the colonies or face persecution at home. thomas jefferson was well aware of the dangers to liberty that the church posed, so much so that he is credited with being the one who coined the term "separation of church and state", when referring to the first amendment of the us constitution. in the age of the american revolution, there were 2 realistic options for the fledgeling government - monarchy and republic. he obviously chose the latter, hence his installation as archangel of libertarians and educated republicans. as an aside, republicanism in thomas jefferson's day was considered very radical and even among the american revolutionaries, there were those who wished to install a monarchy. baruch spinoza is another example of a traditional republican. he is a major figure in the "age of enlightenment" with his books the ethics and his political-theological treatise, in which he proves christianity and judaism as being nothing more than elitist dogma. yet another famous republican is adam smith. he, along with larry craig, was interested in "individual liberty", which he believed could be achieved through something called "mutual interest" and was eager to implement this theoretical freedom through his invention, free-market capitalism.

larry craig is not allowed to have sex with other men while being a member of the republican party, which believes, above all else, in the right of the individual to live their life as they see fit, without interference. i have no pity for this man - someone who would harass and intimidate gays on the one hand and on the other seek their solace and services.

regarding the particulars about his predicament - sex in a public bathroom - which i can't seem to find information on whether it was a truck-stop(privately owned) or rest-stop(publicly owned), how many "straight" idahoan men have seen some hot girl in wal-mart and immediately fantasized about fucking her in the furniture department? how many "straight" men have had fantasies about fucking girls in public bathrooms, on airplanes, in cars and other public places and would had they the opportunity? bill clinton had that opportunity and took it and got impeached for it. i've had sex in public places, anyone who's ever had a fulfilling sex life has. why would gay men be any different?

if republicans were really republicans, he would be able to stand up and demand the respect every gay man deserves with the full backing of his party. but he won't because he is a hypocrite, coward and a fraud and his party is full of people just like him. i am to believe this person will defend my liberty, when he won't even defend his own?

contemporary republicanism is thomas jefferson's, adam smith's and baruch spinoza's worst nightmare. it bears little resemblance to the republicanism of yesteryear. now we have a highly centralized political entity, whose ideology is dictated and enforced by religious fanatics. it's hard to believe that this was the party that ended slavery.

--

as an aside, democrats are typically viewed as a bunch of pansy homos, yet their sex lives, which often make the evening news - bill clinton, antonio villaraigosa, gavin newsom - involve men having sex with women. the last two "sex scandals" i can remember involved republicans men soliciting or having sex with men, or in the case of mark foley, boys.

i remember awhile back, around the time when bill clinton's sex life was being examined by the united states senate, a co-worker had seen an ad featuring bob dole touting the benefits of viagra for old folks like him - old republicans, who couldn't get a hard-on anymore. she made a great analogy - "republicans can't get it up and democrats can't keep it down."

link | rss | share | posted: 2007-09-11 12:55:01