Cultural Cuisinart

NY To Recognize Gay Marriages from Other States and Countries. Good for you, David Patterson. And yet, I can't help but worry, because there seems to be some unwritten rule that gay marriage (and gay civil rights in general) doesn't matter in this country except for once every 4 years. The timing of this is difficult, because it's an easy way to rile up the crazy right-wingers and get them out to the polls. I'm not sure why they are so opposed to gay people having a basic civil right, but whatever. The fact of the matter is, these people are not voting for Obama. In a critical election year, it's not great to have such a polarizing issue driving up poll numbers. I mean, this couldn't wait until after November, California Justices and David Patterson? Really?

In other news, Scott McClellan, Bush's former White House Press Secretay, is making the rounds, peddling his new book. I'm sure most of you are aware that it's a doozy - full of criticism for the man he previously served so loyally (to the point of absurdity). Not surprisingly, the White House is fighting back.

While I'm glad McClellan seems to have seen the light, the timing is all a bit convenient. He waits until the public is completely against Bush, and then comes out with a book bashing him (thus riding public sentiment to higher book sales) . But really, he's spewing the same bullshit as all the rest of the Bushies (former and current): "Oh, I was deceived. It's not my fault people lied to me and didn't give me the right information. Blah blah blah." Apparently, there's no responsibility to do any critical examination of oneselves anymore. I mean, it was pretty fucking obvious what was going on, so don't give me that crap. Which will it be, Scott: 1) I'm a liar and knew exactly what was going on and what lies I was selling, or 2) I'm a moron who can't see the obvious truth in front of me?

You can argue that this guy has no leg to stand on, because he probably never voiced his concerns to the President at any point. However, you can also argue that Bush has shown an insane pattern of crushing dissent and purging those who have an opinion that isn't convenient to him. So you can say that ultimately, while all these advisers (McClellan, Feith, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc), epically failed in their civic duties, the ultimate blame has to be on Bush for fostering an environment where his people were too scared (or misinformed) to make sound, reality-based recommendations to him.

I'm updating this to post this unbelievable quote from the Slate.com article on McClellan's book:

It's also hard to feel bad for the treatment McClellan is getting when he said this about Richard Clarke's tell-all book in 2006: "Why, all of a sudden, if he had all these grave concerns, did he not raise these sooner? This is one-and-a-half years after he left the administration. And now, all of a sudden, he's raising these grave concerns that he claims he had. And I think you have to look at some of the facts. One, he is bringing this up in the heat of a presidential campaign. He has written a book and he certainly wants to go out there and promote that book."

This is almost word-for-word what the administration is saying about him now. The irony is just delicious.