Hey John Edwards, Learn to When to Stop Talking

I know just how Jon feels. He is disenchanted with New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, whose poor showing in the recent “gay debate” left Jon revisiting his early support.

In a job interview you’re not supposed to say that you’re late a lot or call in sick when you’re not. Does anyone really need this explained to them? Apparently Edwards does.

Like Jon I’ve been cringing but over John Edwards, my early favorite. It started with the monumentally idiotic criticism of Hillary Clinton’s jacket during the YouTube debate. For a man trying to shake off the “vain and shallow” characterization by Republicans to cluck his tongue and cock his head over the senator’s suit was dumb, dumb, dumb. Especially after making the case that he could represent women better than a woman can. Way to not get what women are up against, John.

And it’s not like Edwards didn’t have time to prepare his response, waiting as he did for Mike Gravell and Chris Dodd to go first, and following Dodd’s ovation for refusing to say anything negative about Edwards. John started out fine, admiring Clinton’s work as a senator and her husband’s service. No need to go further. But he did.

Does he not get that when you are asked to, “Say what you don’t like about the person to your left,” that’s your cue to say you don’t like how smart they are, or how good they are at golf? It’s like being asked in a job interview to name your flaws. You’re expected to say you work too hard or that you’re too much of a perfectionist. You’re not supposed to say that you’re late a lot or call in sick when you’re not. Does anyone really need this explained to them? Apparently Edwards does.

And now he’s done it again. Edwards was talking about the recent comment by Bush’s new war czar about possibly reinstating the draft.

“Enough is enough,” the Democratic presidential candidate said. “Let there be no doubt that the Bush administration’s new talk of a draft is a profound measure of how much this President has failed our brave men and women in the military, and the American people. This is exactly the wrong way to go.”

If only he had stopped there. But alas, no.

“Our all-volunteer force has helped make America what it is today.”

Yeah, they have. Along with all those who answered the call when they were drafted during World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, and oh yeah, the Civil War. They had a little something to do with making America what it is today also.

There are those who think the reason there aren’t mass street protests ala Vietnam over Iraq is precisely because there is no draft. Edwards is right that for Bush to bring it back would be yet more proof of how badly this invasion was planned, and for five long years, executed. But John, please learn to stop talking while you’re still right.

Poll: Over 90% of Gays Voted in 2004 – Proves Americans Will Vote When Their Rights Are At Stake

Could this trend be a harbinger of things to come?

Consider that last statistic for a moment: a turnout rate among gay men more than twice that for the nation’s voters as a whole.

A recent study by San Francisco-based Community Marketing Inc. found an eye-popping 92.5 percent of gay men report they voted in the 2004 presidential race, and almost 84 percent said they cast ballots in the 2006 midterm election. Among lesbians, the results were almost as impressive; nearly 91 percent in 2004 and 78 percent in 2006.

By comparison, the Washington-based Committee for the Study of the American Electorate puts the turnout for all Americans eligible to vote at about 61 percent in 2004 and roughly 40 percent in 2006.

Consider that last statistic for a moment: a turnout rate among gay men more than twice that for the nation’s voters as a whole.

The survey questioned more than 12,000 gay men and more than 10,000 lesbians, giving its results a minuscule error margin of plus or minus 1 percent.

What this shows is that people will vote when they feel like they have something at stake. It speaks to the central point in “Sicko,” Michael Moore’s documentary about the corruption of the American healthcare system. Moore suggests that in Europe, where universal healthcare is, well, universal, voters control the politicians. Governments there are vulnerable to the citizens’ displeasure, both at the ballot box and from civil unrest in the streets.

But in America, says Moore, the politicians control the voters — or rather corporate interests control politicians who run the government to benefit the corporations at the expense of citizens. Voting is considered a waste of time and boring, and protest is only fashionable among scruffy vegan ruffians.

In 2004, Republicans were using gay rights as a wedge issue in the states to gin up the homophobe vote in their base. Feeling under assault, gays answered with the weapon available to all: they voted.

Perhaps the good news here is that we gays are considered to be trendsetters. Who knows, maybe this voting thing could catch on.