An important question:  I dunno. My wife is kinda a social libertarian who voted Obama.  She loves Ayn Rand.  Related: Bruce Jenner.  There’s a bit of talk of conservatives having retreated on this, so as to not inflame a cultural battle that they’ll lose and be poorly reflected in doing so.  Maybe…  I speak for myself, I don’t care much, I have never been moved passionately to defend ‘traditional values’ against the march of gay rights, never got ignited at any point in my life about guys who wanna kiss guys and guys who wanna wear dresses.  Ya know, my immediate family used to be Democrats and now they’re Republicans.  Formatively, I recall there was a city council race in the late 70s, say 1977, in the ward where my parent’s first house was in St. Paul.  An open seat, and kind of an old biddy vs a younger man who had a kid in my class at my Catholic elementary school.  These were both Democrats no doubt, but the contentious question was over I think an equal housing ordinances re gays.  The old gal was against the equal housing ordinance.  My mother was moved by this whole thing, told us why the guy there, the classmate’s dad, ought to be the proper victor.  He did lose then though I think he ended up on the council later (name was McMahon).  Anyway, like I say, formatively….  There’s a lot of lapsed Democrats with liberal social instincts in the Republican party now who are truly not inflamed by Bruce Jenner.  Other thing:  if Republicans lose the culture war and a bunch of wedge issues are settled, that’s bad news for Democrats actually.  Makes Republicanism palatable for a lot of new people who basically agree with it economically now.  Other Other thing:  I’m not terribly worldly, as disclaimed previously.  But, I’m confused by this notion that the transgenders fit neatly into the other issues of gay and lesbians, and what I mean is…  This establishment of identity for these people does not seem primarily about sex, whereas with gays and lesbians it is at least a criteria by which those people are defined.  Other other other thing:  I have some vague associations on the FB who are parroting a Rush Limbaugh line about a Johns Hopkins mucketty muck saying reassignment doesn’t bring happiness.  I don’t know to what point that’s to be persuasive.

Jots w/ dots 6/8 

I said that:  contemporary socialism is not about putting the means of production in the hands of the state or the workers.  But such that it’s not that, it’s still socialism what with its pursuit of egalitarianism through the tax code.  I like this discussion that Bernie brings!

Misanthropic, that’s been my word for it….  Here and in the original NYT piece.  they don’t like people, can’t get along with people

Horse race:  I have got some sense it’s going to be Rubio.  He’s actually not compromised in some way like the rest of the Republican field.  Then, he probably wins the Presidency.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s