Wednesday, July 26, 2006

From Washington to Chicago

Welcome back for another shotgunning session.

First up, it looks like even certain members of the GOP are starting to realize just how the public is currently viewing the Republican party. In fact, a Senate candidate in Maryland is acknowledging that his party affiliation alone could make it difficult to win the election. In fact, Michael Steele is so disillusioned with his own party that he doesn't want GDub to entertain the notion of campaigning for him, and that he feels that the GOP-led Congress needs to start getting more accomplished to help the country. Of course, Democrats feel that Steele isn't playing hard enough with the Republican party, and are trying to make him appear weak in standing up to the President. Maybe I'm completely offbase here, but wouldn't being too weak to stand up to the President and the GOP make someone a Democrat?

Moving on, Stephen Colbert's "The Colbert Report" was recently called into question by the hard-hitting reporters on, um, Good Morning America and NBC's Today Show. Right, the same people who devote half-hour segments to the newest fashion in baseball caps have started to wonder why politicians (or anyone, for that matter) would bother to appear as guests on "The Colbert Report". So, of course, Stephen fired back. As for why politicians (or anyone) would want to appear on "The Colbert Report" or "The Daily Show", well, they're both incredibly hip programs that appeal to younger voters. They both have charismatic hosts that are also good interviewers. They both give an opportunity to show that you have a sense of humor about the subjects being asked. After all, people in the public spotlight have to be aware of these programs, and the tones of such. Well, except for Pat Robertson. But he's still waiting for the Rapture to take him away to the place where all little hate-mongers go.

Finally, the city of Chicago is taking drastic steps to curtail unhealthy, annoying, or immoral activities. Sure, outlawing cigarette smoking in public places makes good health sense, and even smokers will eventually go along with the plan. Stopping the use of trans-fat by restaurants also leads to good health results. And banning the use of cell phones while driving will cut down on the number of accidents and should help ease traffic in an overly congested city. But seriously, banning foie gras? Because of how it's harvested? This particular measure seems a little drastic. I mean, has Chicago found a way to prevent all crime? (Nope.) Was there maybe something else that could use the focus? (The scandal in City Hall, maybe.) Is micromanaging every portion of a citizen's life through laws really in the best service of the people of the city? (Apparently Chicago thinks so.)

But maybe I'm being a little drastic. Maybe what will result from the foie gras ban is that Chicago will become a more enlightened city, a shining beacon glimmering against the oppression and hate that is the world outside of Illinois. Or maybe, just maybe, they'll realize that they've started down a slippery slope that can only end with a law preventing people from trimming their toenails on Thursdays during Must See TV.

No comments: