An Important Question to Ask Before Voting for a Republican

While I'm opposed to most of the policies of the current party in power, don't assume all Republicans are necessarily a big improvement. Some will pay lip service to being concerned about spending and then will move to DC and then play along to get along. One question to ask to get some insight into the candidate is to ask them whether they will listen to former senator Trent Lott (lobbyist on behalf of the ruling/spending class) or Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC). Here is an article to get a sense of what Lott thinks of the Tea Party movement.

Any possible shred of doubt remaining in anybody's mind about former Senate GOP leader Trent Lott's true allegiance have now been definitively removed: Lott is a paid tool of the Washington Establishment who hates the Tea Party and all other insurgents who have had it with politics-as-usual.

"We don't need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples. As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them," Lott told The Washington Post in an incredibly revealing story.

Sen. Jim DeMint, of course, is the South Carolina conservative Republican who last year formed the Senate Conservatives Fund to back precisely the kind of insurgent conservative Senate candidates most feared by the Lotts of the world. . . . . It's the same old story that such GOPers want the votes of "the base" but they don't want to do what the Tea Partiers and a clear majority of their fellow Americans, want them to do.

Several of the Republican senators are of Lott's ilk and not much better than the Democrats. John McCain and Lindsey Graham among others will talk the talk every few years when concerned about reelection. However, once safely back in DC they go back to thinking they know better than the rubes who voted for them.

Politics of Sexual Blackmail

The Other McCain links to an article by Steve Benen in The Washington Monthly deploring someone opposed to Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-SC) position on immigration alluding to Graham allegedly being gay.

McCain's post dealt with the hypocrisy angle of a leftist decrying the outing of an allegedly gay Republican since the left hasn't hesitated to out gay Republican politicians when it suited their purposes.

In my opinion, the underlying issue is much more problematic. I don't really care if boys decide to like boys or if girls decide to like girls. However, it becomes a potential problem when one is in politics and attempts to lead a secret life. Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) can't be coerced into changing a position or vote based on a fear that the voters will find out he's gay. If the people of a state (say, South Carolina) elect a senator based on a belief he is relatively conservative they expect that senator to vote a certain way. If some people in Washington, DC find out that a supposedly conservative, straight, male, senator has a boyfriend it doesn't take much imagination to think that information would be used to influence his stance on key issues.

It may be naive of me, but I believe politicians have a moral obligation to ensure they can not be subjected to sexual blackmail. You can NOT be blackmailed about something that is NOT a secret.

For clarification purposes, let me unequivocally state I have no knowledge of whether Sen. Graham is gay. I also have no idea whether he has been unduly influenced to take ridiculous positions on cap and trade or if he really believes in the goofy global warming scam.