Poot The Vote
By Mitch Berg
“Rock the Vote” is urging supporters of socialized, government healthcare rationing to go all Lysistrata on their purported pro-free-market paramours:
Just when every tactic in the book had been seemingly exhausted in the health care debate, Rock the Vote comes along with a new one: if you want health care reform, don’t sleep with anyone who opposes it until his or her mind is changed.
The youth advocacy group is pushing the campaign in a Web video and pledge on its Web site, which asks supporters to “hold out” for health care.
The campaign isn’t just absurd; it’s an example of incredibly poor market research. Given that most lefties, especially the young ones, regard politics as their religion, “not being a fellow statist” is often as not a showstopper for young relationships; a young Barbara Boxer supporter is staggeringly unlikely to be dating someone with an independent streatk anywhere in his/her mind.
But I have a better idea: People who support the free market? You withhold sex from people who support Obamacare! Because liberals crave instant gratification and lack conservatives’ calm and patience, they’ll cave in long before you do.
Oh, yes – and American Left? Stay classy. Really:
The subtlety of the online pledge, though, is completely undone by the video, which employs zero rhetorical devices, except for a couple of bleeps, to get its message bluntly across.
“We pledge ourselves to the health and liberty of young Americans and to government for the people … and to never f—ing you if you are against us,” the team of actors in the video says.
“We will vote against you, work against you, and once again, just in case you forgot, never ever, never ever, never ever, never ever f— you.” .
Fear not, commercial starlets (a couple of flavor-of-the-month actors from some current flash-in-the-pan series); pretty soon, you’ll discover your agents and management have taken care of that for you. And then you’ll be doing the same thing on one casting couch or another until your plastic surgery gives out, and you won’t give a Flaming Pelosi what the casting agent’s take on healthcare will be.
(And if I were a young person, I’d be pissed that the Left figured I was such a slave to my desires that that would work on me anyway).
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:03 am
This scheme sounds as if it was thought up by the Piranha Brothers.
We won’t sleep with you if you don’t support global warming, aid to Africa, health care reform, immigration amnesty . . . by the time they get done listing the causes, the desire has fled.
They should try The Other Plan: we Will sleep with you if you support X, Y or Z. Everybody would have a much greater incentive to support the cause, there’d be far more happy people, and we will call you. Really.
.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:09 am
Prostitutes need universal health care. Politicians need prostitutes. I think they may have something here.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:18 am
I’ve got a message for Rock The Vote: F— you and the Prius you rode in on. Arrogant little S— stains.
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:37 am
Well, I guess I get the satisfaction of watching these healthy little punks paying thru the nose for their free health insurance, should they get their way.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Maybe their afraid that any non-support of the government health insurance scam will force the Free Clinic to close its’ doors.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pm
The idea of updating Lysistrata has been used in other contexts.
It was used in Africa to stop civil war. The women on both sides got together and agreed not to sleep with their warring partners/spouses until they stopped making war. It worked.
“There is no new thing under the sun.” Ecclesistes 9.1
But for political persuasion? It does rather point out the failure of abstinence only sex ed, that people generally do not in fact choose to abstain.
But I would disagree with you Mitch when you write: ” Because liberals crave instant gratification and lack conservatives’ calm and patience, they’ll cave in long before you do. ” That is simplistic demonizing of an opposing view point without any factual support.
And “Given that most lefties, especially the young ones, regard politics as their religion, “not being a fellow statist” is often as not a showstopper for young relationships; a young Barbara Boxer supporter is staggeringly unlikely to be dating someone with an independent streatk anywhere in his/her mind.” is more of the same. I don’t know anyone who dismisses people from consideration for anything (including sex) on the basis of politics — what, you ask them to fill out a questionnaire on their politics before dating? And then rule them out as worthwhile human beings for a potential relationship if they don’t agree with you?
What are Scarlett Johansson’s politics Mitch? Or is this something that applies only to real people someone might date and not to fantasies?
Sorry, but I think there are plenty of people who are drop dead sexy, and who are people of intellect and character, regardless of their politics, and I have no reason to believe this is an age specific attitude.
I object to the idea of sex under most circumstances as a means to manipulate someone, especially someone one presumes to love. Stopping the horrors and devestations of a tragic war might be the one extreme that is a valid exception, if all other attempts fail.
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Dognagit wants the Federal government to teach YOUR children how to have sex.
“fellow statist” indeed.
Only an idiot would deny that abstinence is the best prevention.
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
What I would do, tell a leftie girl that I support Obamacare get her in bed and then after sex i’d say “By the way, I don’t support Obamacare”
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Only a blind ideologue would ignore all of the factual information to the contrary and insist on abstinence only ignorance.
People do not abstain from sex, they have never abstained from sex throughout history. It is folly and idiocy to believe that abstinence will be practiced without alternatives being provided.
People figure out how to have sex without being taught. What IS important is that they are taught that if you don’t practice abstinence for all the reasons presented, then at least practice SAFE sex.
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Palomino!
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Mitch, bingo:
“fellow statist” or Liberal Fascist
or useful idiot
DG, your desire that the Federal government teach very young children how to have safe anal sex and how to safely fist is appalling.
….
“factual information to the contrary”
DogNAGit, put up or STFU, show us proof that abstinence does not prevent pregnancy.
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:03 pm
“DogNAGit, put up or STFU, show us proof that abstinence does not prevent pregnancy.”
One example comes to mind…
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Merry Christmas and may God bless you and yours.
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:03 pm
you continue to try to make straw man arguments KR by incorrectly framing the discussion.
Abstinence only sex ed results in higher pregnancy rates than equivalent rates of preganancy among teens who have had the benefit of comprehensive sex ed, with the difference in lower rates of pregnancy correlating strongly to use of contraception more so than not engaging in sex. Data includes the comparative birth rates for women 15 -19 years old, drastically higher in countries with abstinence only sex-ed, such as the UK and the USA, in the 90+ per thousand, contrasted with the comparable rates in countries with comprehensive sex ed (including contraception) in countries like the Netherlands, at 8 per thousand.
So, when you come up with something more realistic than ‘do as I say, not as I do’, that actually produces a better rate of performance than abstinence ONLY SEX ED compared to comprehensive sex ed, let me know.
But only if you can do so without being offensive. If you can’t, please don’t bother me with your thoughts until you can express them more courteously and articulately.
I will not “stfu”, an abreviation for shut the fuck up (as defined by the urban dictionary, not just by me), nor will I meekly tolerate abusive and offensive language like being called a bitch. You may find this an appropriate way to treat other people, especially women, KR, but I do not. An abbreviation or an acronym is a shorter way to write a word or words; it does not make those words different than the longer form or any less offensive.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Guess Mitch is going to have to find new loves……….Marisa Tomei and Scarlett Johansson are both liberals (if you define that by Marisa being an Obama supporter, and Scarlett donating to Hilary Clinton in the last election).
But all hope is not lost, maybe Mitch can convert them to conservativism. As a neutral centrist and platonic friend, I would describe him to either woman as a tall attractive intelligent man of character and charm, regardless of his politics.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Here’s an article referencing a study from Scotland contradicting the claim that comprehensive sex ed reduces teen pregnancy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7687450.stm
…just as one would anticipate from the past 40 years of the same from the United States, really. The article also demonstrates that, contrary to Doggone’s claim, they’ve got comprehensive sex ed in the UK, too.
And nobody can abstain? Sorry, DogGone, but there are portions of the population who do. Present them with facts about fornication–like the fact that 50% or more of young, sexually active people will come down with an STD–and that percentage will rise.
For example, i took a look at a couple of studies. The first, the Wolfram study, did a few weeks of abstinence education at age 11 or so and then tried to see a difference several years later. To no one’s surprise, small input, negligible output.
Another one from here in Minnesota had no control and no actual statistical test, but proudly proclaimed that the course had no effect. I looked at the first chapter, put together a (admittedly imperfect) control, and found…
…over 95% confidence that those in the study had a reduced likelihood of premarital sex vs. teens as a whole. Now correlation ain’t causation, but the “abstinence education doesn’t work” argument is….strongly manipulated and overrated, to put it mildly.
Part of the difficulty here, IMO, is that whatever sex ed course is used, nine weeks of one hour per day in high school is unlikely to overcome the 24 hours per day, 365 days per year pervasive sexuality of our culture epitomized by….
….idiots like “Rock the Vote” who bizaarely think it’s a GOOD idea to encourage people to make political statements with their sexuality, thus trivializing it.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:10 pm
Abstinence only sex ed results in higher pregnancy rates than equivalent rates of preganancy among teens who have had the benefit of comprehensive sex ed
Actually, the results are mixed. I’ve seen studies that show worse results, and some that show equal results. Beyond that, and moving beyond teenage pregnancy, there’s evidence that kids exposed to abstinence education make other key choices better as they grow up.
There’s a case to be made that abstinence programs don’t have a chance to succeed in this country; so much of our society glamourizes sex (and, worse, sells it as devoid of consequences) and extols instant gratification to an extent that no program that demands self-discipline and denial of overpowering urges has a chance.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Marisa Tomei and Scarlett Johansson are both liberals
I’ll keep withholding sex until they change their minds.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Stay strong Mitch! Stay strong.
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:51 pm
“incorrectly framing the discussion.”
Just the facts, as in how abstinence does prevent pregnancy. Fact!!! Only a dumbass would claim otherwise.
BTW, dogNAGit, I am against the government not allowing parents to teach their kids sex ed.
I also disagree with you that the Federal government should teach very very young children how to have sex, safe anal sex, and safe fisting.
…. ….
“…especially women…”
Bullshit dogNAGit, that accusation is absurd. Just stop acting like an ignorant fool and you might gain some credibility.
Again, please stop making crap up.
DG, you have a pattern of making shit up on SitD. Several, including ‘lil ol’ me, have called you on it and taken you to task.
I can spot that Liberal Fascist tactic of playing the race card or sexist card a mile away, don’t be such dumbass.
Now put up or STFU.
Offended? Like I said, if your skin were any thinner you would have a reservoir tip on your head.
.
My Karma just ran over your Dogma
8)
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Mitch Berg Says:
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Marisa Tomei and Scarlett Johansson are both liberals
I’ll keep withholding sex until they change their minds.”
Mitch, both of those women could do far worse with the selection of men out in tinsel town than to give in and change their minds for you, LOL!
Sadly, I doubt that you will find either of them in your Christmas stocking, begging for sex, so it is a good thing you are a man of such………iron resolve.
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:30 pm
To use your own phrase, KR, “only a dumbass would claim” that something worked when in fact very few of the targeted group of people practice it………(including hypocrites identified here).
“BTW, dogNAGit, I am against the government not allowing parents to teach their kids sex ed.
I also disagree with you that the Federal government should teach very very young children how to have sex, safe anal sex, and safe fisting.”
Good for you KR. And fortunately for you while the overwhelming majority of parents are in favor of comprehensive sex ed, the government has never suggested that parents NOT teach their kids about sex. In fact most comprehensive sex ed programs involve parents as partners in teaching age appropriate sex information. Nor am I aware of any comprehensive sex ed program that endorses teaching how to have sex, anal sex,or fisting to very young children –because it is not something that schools do. Is this just another example of extremist paranoia? Or are you really just obsessed with homosexuality for some other reason?
Man up KR and take responsibility for your own use and abuse of language.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Bubbasan wrote:”Part of the difficulty here, IMO, is that whatever sex ed course is used, nine weeks of one hour per day in high school is unlikely to overcome the 24 hours per day, 365 days per year pervasive sexuality of our culture epitomized by….
….idiots like “Rock the Vote” who bizaarely think it’s a GOOD idea to encourage people to make political statements with their sexuality, thus trivializing it.”
I agree with both of your above comments, and Mitch’s most recent observations. Nor do I mean to suggest that no one abstains either, but it is not alone as reliable as instruction in contraception, both in preventing unwanted pregnancies or stds, and clearly from the number of young women with stds under voting age, there are a lot of these women who are not abstinent.
I have also looked at a number of studies, and while some do support mixed results for abstinence only, if you look at a greater number of studies over time, it tends to be consistently less effective than comprehensive sex ed. The UK has switched over to comprehensive sex ed faster and earlier than the US, so checking the dates of studies is important. One of my biggest complaints about abstinence only is that it promotes not only a narrow religious viewpoint, but outright misinformation in many instances.
Certainly, using sex or witholding sex to punish or manipulate one’s chosen partner is wrong (no matter how much admiration I have for Mitch’s, ahem, iron resolve).
I may (or may not) have finally finished laughing at KR’s comment however about credibility and ignorance.
I’m assuming he doesn’t want to measure either by the yardstick of how many blogs he has been banned from, or how many times he has been banned from blogs, or how many comments have been deleted…….(too many).
While KR may have his few fool followers, on my worst day commenting on SitD, I’d bet that I have better credibility and that fewer people find me ignorant, no matter how much anyone might disagree with me on specific topics.
But even if that weren’t true, if I am wrong, so long as I continue to have Mitch’s respect and friendship, I can live with that.
December 23rd, 2009 at 11:22 am
I have been lurking on Shot for a couple of months and my impressions are that Dog Gone is well meaning but often very deeply misinformed and occasionally driven by predjeudice. I’m not a huge Sara Palin fan, but calling her a “popsie” was just plain sexist.
While on the other hand K Rod tries to substitute volume and browbeating and namecalling for an argument. Dude, if “I know you’re right”, I’ll say “you’re right”; your sayin its so dosn’t make it so. I call it a tie.
December 23rd, 2009 at 12:42 pm
dogNAGit, I challenged you to put up or STFU. You seem to be incapable of doing either. You failed. (Sorry if I don’t sugar coat reality, it seems like such a bitter pill for you to swallow.) 😉
….
“…volume…”
😆
….
“…and namecalling for an argument. Dude…”
“Dude”?
😆 😆 😆
…. …. ….
Since, y’all just love to talk about ‘lil ol’ me, I had ham soup for supper last night and am planning on having meatloaf tonight.
*that ought to keep them busy for a while*
December 23rd, 2009 at 2:02 pm
KR, I have no interest in you, not in talking to you OR about you, and I won’t make the mistake of doing so further.
December 23rd, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Deegee, you would make a great Black Knight!
December 23rd, 2009 at 2:09 pm
jnovak Says:
December 23rd, 2009 at 11:22 am
“I have been lurking on Shot for a couple of months and my impressions are that Dog Gone is well meaning but often very deeply misinformed and occasionally driven by predjeudice. I’m not a huge Sara Palin fan, but calling her a “popsie” was just plain sexist. ”
Popsie is a pretty innocuous and extremely mild term. Sexist? I find the woman superficial and trivial, if you prefer that to the shorter ‘popsie’, and it has nothing to do with her gender, so I would dispute the sexism you accuse me of harboring.
If you find me misinformed on some subject, I do at least make an effort, and also make the effort to be open minded about additional information that might contradict what I have previously seen. If you in future have such documentation, please post it here (or that information from any past post for that matter) OR if you prefer, post it over on Penigma. I just wrote a seasonal post, Across the Great Divide, about seeking out different points of view, and about self-examination in striving to have an open mind.