Today, I spent a fair portion of the day doing relatively simple html work for a couple of scottgalvin.com's overflow clients. Since he didn't have time to do all of it, he passed some of the work on to me. Nice. More to come tomorrow, so I'm going to try to get to bed at a somewhat reasonable hour.

Politics on my mind lately. I've become more of a news junkie than ever, now that I seem to spend the majority of my waking hours in front of Argo, a significant portion of those hours surfing the web.

Here's a good little article to ponder. Politics Becomes a Rougher Game.

[sigh]

I broached the issue with my parents a few days ago, when I told them that I would be going to the Howard Dean meetup in Boulder this week, and that I was fairly excited about the campaign.

My mom actually says she somewhat likes Howard Dean, with some reservations. Everything he has said on tv has made sense, and he could make a good candidate.

My dad though.... "Howard Dean is a far left liberal. He's practically the most liberal of all the democratic candidates." (Of course, in the mind of a Rush Limbaugh follower such as my dad, the word "liberal" is practically the highest insult that could ever be applied to anyone.)

Oh dear. What was I going to say? Well, actually, he's quite conservative in many areas, especially when it comes to budgeting.

I told the truth, as best I know it: That despite lots of talk around both sides, Dean is basically a centrist overall. Fiscally speaking, isn't it curious how 10 years ago, Republicans were deriding Clinton and the Democratic congress for running up big deficits, but now that Bush and Republicans have power, with record high deficits to their credit, many Democrats (most notably Dean) are talking about getting the deficit under control and balancing the budget. The tables have turned.

Well, my dad thinks that Dean isn't serious about balancing the budget. That it's basicly an empty campaign promise, and unrealistic, especially if he plans to expand government funding for "universal" health care.

I explained the essence of Dean's health care ideas. Not overhaul the entire system ala the Clinton plan, but fill in the gaps by subsidising children and low income people while working to reduce costs by elimiting a lot of the bureaucratic inefficiencies.

My dad: "Well that's just the first step. Ultimately, they want to transform the whole thing just like Clinton and put it all under government control. Their ultimate goal is to turn this country into a socialist state. That's what Howard Dean would do."

Don't you just love slippery slope arguments? How do you counter the arguments of someone who just knows (without any objective evidence) the ultimate goals and motives of a particular person or group?

Oh well. I don't suppose this would have been an opportune time to explain that, although I support centrist candidate Howard Dean as a far superior alternative to Bush, I myself have become significantly more liberal in my views and philosophies than I was a few years ago.

Well, we had a nice little talk about a few of the recent events, such as the war, "national security", and tax cuts. I suspect that my dad thinks that I'm still more-or-less a "sensible conservative" at heart, but have just fallen in with the wrong crowd for the moment, having been deceived by those damn liberals.

Well, maybe so.

Sometimes, when I come to his apartment, he has right wing radio talk shows like Mike Rosen or Rush Limbaugh playing. I've listened in dismay during the past few days as they've gone into hystirical rants against the grave threat gay marriage poses to our society.

(Ok, so Mike Rosen isn't quite so hysterical. In fact, I generally consider him as one of the more reasonable, rational, and calm talk radio personalities. But when the subject of gay marriage comes up, his logic is just as spotty as any of them.)

What is it about the thought of two people who love each other and decide express their vows in matrimony that seems to drive some people (most of whom apparently fall toward the right end of the political spectrum) into a bigoted rage. Just because both partners happen to share the same anatomical characteristics, is this reason to deny them the same privileges as others? Why is this such a big deal?

Blah blah blah, now I'm getting into debate mode.

Speaking of weddings, according to my calculations, it's now been over a year since this couple got married, and I still haven't finished that damn epic. Increment priority. Maybe one of these days...

Grrrr. So much for a reasonable bedtime. Too much websurfing and fooling around in between writing these paragraphs.

Sleeeepy. So, despite the fact that I feel somewhat inclined to ramble on reduntandly about various matters, I think I'll sign off. Another day.