Am I a political blogger? Honestly, I don’t mean to be, as I have hated politics for years. The more tired I get of it, the more I hate it.
It doesn’t help much to read about stuff like this:

WASHINGTON–President Barack Obama intends to use Wednesday’s State of the Union address to put a new focus on his jobs agenda as he tries to regain the confidence of a disheartened electorate. He will make small-business hiring the centerpiece of that message, pressing Congress to act on a slate of tax cuts that have languished for months, administration officials said Tuesday.

Etc. but puhleeze!
Must we? Does there really have to be a State of the Union Address? And if there does, do I have to notice it? Worse yet, am I obligated to “live-blog” it? Why? Because others do? (Sorry, but that doesn’t cut it after nearly seven years.)
When does it all end? The sense of political urgency is seriously neurotic, and it’s tough not to be taken in by it. It’s as if I am by my position given daily marching orders — not by any person, but by the simple passage of current events, which I cannot stop, to which I have not consented, and and over which I have no control.
Not that it matters to anyone but me, but seriously, it’s as if we’re politically stuck in a permanent state of election. A political priapism. The United States of Viagra or something. The more “they” run for office, the more “we” run. Against them! And the more I want to run. Away.
As the saying goes, “Lead, follow, or get out of the way!” (Which is decidedly more polite than Obama’s “Shut up and get out of the way!“) Except I don’t lead, nor do I follow, nor do I obey orders. (Besides, whose “way” could I possibly be in? I see no way even in theory that the opinions expressed on this blog could “obstruct” anyone. From doing anything.)
Anway, I keep telling myself I don’t need or have to blog about politics, because I don’t. There are no rules.
What I can’t figure out is why I feel so strongly about stuff I’m so sick of. Why do I fucking care about things I fucking hate? Caring is hating, and I am tired of both. To hate is to care, and to care is to hate.
See, a paradox like that is worth exploring for its own sake.
Fortunately (or unfortunately) my blog is my psychiatrist.
MORE: I’m not as alone as I thought in finding the State of the Union address tedious. Ann Althouse is polling her readers, and 97% of them find the Apple Tablet announcement more exciting than the SOTU address. I find the Apple Tablet more exciting too, and I’m not even interested in getting one. (Via Glenn Reynolds, who also links this preview of the coming unattraction, which I thought I should link in case there are political junkies who might be in need of serious analysis. (Pun unintended, but maybe I should have said in need of a fix. I love political junkies, although I try to keep my habit at a modest “chippie” level.)
MORE: Thanks Sean Kinsell for the link.
Perhaps because people looked so unenthused, it now appears that the SOTU is going to include a pitch to Congress to get rid of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Washington (CNN) — President Obama will ask Congress Wednesday night to repeal the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that bars gays and lesbians from openly serving in, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod told CNN.
The request will be included in the president’s State of the Union address, Axelrod said.

Now, while I support getting rid of DADT, it’s something the President (as Commander in Chief) has the power to accomplish largely by executive orders (something he has not done. Many have observed that he has been in no hurry.
So what’s with the sudden drama? Why the “DADT SOTU”? Via a last-minute Axelrod announcement to CNN?
I certainly hope the goal is not to use the gay issue as a political football.
And what about this statement from last year?

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said recently that if the ban were lifted, it would be difficult for the military to restructure its units to accommodate homosexuals.

How and why would units need to be restructured?
MORE (1/28/10): From the president’s speech:

…what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day. We can’t wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about the other side — a belief that if you lose, I win.

He’s right, of course. In fact, he’s saying what I said earlier.
Except he’s waging a perpetual campaign!
There was a time when such a statement would have been called hypocrisy.