Here's an odd story. Women in Kenya have decided to launch a protest against the divisiveness of the coalition government. The form of said protest? A sex strike.
I find this intriguing for two reasons. First, the activist groups are so dedicated to this "shutdown" that they're even considering paying sex workers to steer clear of men. Secondly, it actually made me recall Lysistrata, which I hadn't thought of in years. Junior year Drama class may well end up being more beneficial to my world view than History ever will be.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Friday, May 1, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
I Couldn't Let This Go...
Sam talked about it. Roland Martin talked about it. Al Sharpton was on Countdown talking about it (although to be fair, I imagine Rev. Sharpton will be everywhere talking about it, but he's getting a pass because he seems to be on a good tear right now...).
And the thing is that I really wanted to let this go. Keep in mind I will play devil's advocate for almost anyone. And in truth, had the both the Post and the cartoonist in question kept their mouths shut, I might have continued to. But both released statements and both statements together lead you to one of two conclusions.
1) the cartoonist and editor are racists that are bad at lying.
2) the cartoonist and the editor are short sighted and/or idiots.
Because really, at best they should offer a non-committal, "We're sorry if you were offended by this," statement. But no, they seem to imply that it's absolutely ridiculous to look at the image and think that somehow there was any racial overtone to it. But the problem with this, as is the case with many so-called "political satire" cartoons, is that in order to make that argument, there must be some other conclusion that can be drawn from your drawing. In reality, there should be a clear alternate conclusion, and not only was there not one, but it wasn't addressed by any of the defending parties.
Heck, I can do it if I apply myself hard enough. Earlier today I was noting that I often use the expression, "trained monkey" in sentences (i.e. "A trained monkey could do that job."). I'll note here for my own personal safety that I have been exerting a great deal of effort to cut that out of my dialogue to prevent any accidental or incidental offense of nearby ears.
So obviously, that's the clear and easy path to defusing this, right? Surely, someone at the NY Post thought to offer some explanation like that when referencing this, right? Right?
Nope. The Post's EIC notes that the carton was "...a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut. It broadly mocks Washington's efforts to revive the economy." Except that it fails as a parody, as it actually depicts the event nearly as it happened, and it fails to draw any logical connection (in parody or otherwise) to the stimulus bill in Washington. Really, if the cop was saying something like, "Maybe they'll forget about that stimulus bill now..." or "Maybe that stimulus bill will keep this off the front page..." I could get in your corner on this one.
But the fact is your defense makes no sense, and your explanation has no logic. And when you fail to successfully connect something like that logically, the first and only conclusion to be drawn is that you have an ulterior motive.
So sorry, NY Post. I was going to let this go, and not manage to ramble about it for half a page. But because you can't mount anything that resembles intelligent defense, and because your only outlet was to attempt to malign Rev. Al Sharpton (who, as I noted before, is actually presenting the calm, logical argument against you in this case), I just gotta say... What the **** is wrong with you? Can no one think before they publish something like this? Because if you're telling me that a small office full of people saw this thing, and none of them thought to say, "This might not go over well..." then I've got to say that you need new people in your office.
That's assuming, of course, that you care what the general public thinks. And it's obvious that you don't consider a certain percentage of them at all when you go to press.
And the thing is that I really wanted to let this go. Keep in mind I will play devil's advocate for almost anyone. And in truth, had the both the Post and the cartoonist in question kept their mouths shut, I might have continued to. But both released statements and both statements together lead you to one of two conclusions.
1) the cartoonist and editor are racists that are bad at lying.
2) the cartoonist and the editor are short sighted and/or idiots.
Because really, at best they should offer a non-committal, "We're sorry if you were offended by this," statement. But no, they seem to imply that it's absolutely ridiculous to look at the image and think that somehow there was any racial overtone to it. But the problem with this, as is the case with many so-called "political satire" cartoons, is that in order to make that argument, there must be some other conclusion that can be drawn from your drawing. In reality, there should be a clear alternate conclusion, and not only was there not one, but it wasn't addressed by any of the defending parties.
Heck, I can do it if I apply myself hard enough. Earlier today I was noting that I often use the expression, "trained monkey" in sentences (i.e. "A trained monkey could do that job."). I'll note here for my own personal safety that I have been exerting a great deal of effort to cut that out of my dialogue to prevent any accidental or incidental offense of nearby ears.
So obviously, that's the clear and easy path to defusing this, right? Surely, someone at the NY Post thought to offer some explanation like that when referencing this, right? Right?
Nope. The Post's EIC notes that the carton was "...a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut. It broadly mocks Washington's efforts to revive the economy." Except that it fails as a parody, as it actually depicts the event nearly as it happened, and it fails to draw any logical connection (in parody or otherwise) to the stimulus bill in Washington. Really, if the cop was saying something like, "Maybe they'll forget about that stimulus bill now..." or "Maybe that stimulus bill will keep this off the front page..." I could get in your corner on this one.
But the fact is your defense makes no sense, and your explanation has no logic. And when you fail to successfully connect something like that logically, the first and only conclusion to be drawn is that you have an ulterior motive.
So sorry, NY Post. I was going to let this go, and not manage to ramble about it for half a page. But because you can't mount anything that resembles intelligent defense, and because your only outlet was to attempt to malign Rev. Al Sharpton (who, as I noted before, is actually presenting the calm, logical argument against you in this case), I just gotta say... What the **** is wrong with you? Can no one think before they publish something like this? Because if you're telling me that a small office full of people saw this thing, and none of them thought to say, "This might not go over well..." then I've got to say that you need new people in your office.
That's assuming, of course, that you care what the general public thinks. And it's obvious that you don't consider a certain percentage of them at all when you go to press.
Monday, February 16, 2009
"And in Other News, the Sky is Blue and Water is Wet..."
In a move that should surprise no one, the Republican party has decided to claim that President Barack Obama is failing to deliver the change and bipartisanship that he promised. Also, there are no gumdrop trees and it's not raining cupcakes.
Of extra note to me is that one of the spearheads in this commentary is Senator John McCain, who said this to CNN:
Now, what he and other Republicans mean to say is that President Obama and his administration aren't doing things the way that the GOP wants them to do it, which for some reason is their definition of bipartisanship. I'm not going to go hyper-political or anything, but I find it just a bit frustrating that the GOP, which has had a virtual stranglehold on the country for the better part of the decade (and yeah, "Democrats took over the Senate two years ago..." what the **** ever...), now suddenly are shocked that their ideas and concepts for what will be put into effect aren't being embraced. Really, they should be happy that anyone is even willing to give them the chance to speak on the matter.
And I know that sounds like me being a bit harsh, but let's look at the facts. In a perfect world, bipartisanship would mean that both parties argue the pros and cons of various points and come to the best middle of the road solution. But in reality, we all know that it's going to play out exactly the way that it is now, at least in the short term. The Democrats will attempt to give the Republicans a voice and probably concede some minor points while working their own agenda.
Furthermore, there's absolutely no reason to think that the nature of Congress would change itself overnight. Nothing else has, so why would anyone think that it would? If there is to be a change towards more bipartisan legislating, it will take place over time and through the efforts of both parties to be reasonable. Whining about how nobody's listening to you and your idea of a solution (which is a toss up between more of the same thing that got us into this mess and apparently absolutely nothing judging by the lack of ideas floated by the conservative side) is counterproductive and makes you look like... well, a bunch of whiners.
And finally, for some reason... McCain has just been pissing me off recently. He gives the sweetest concession speech I have ever heard, and then a few months later he's spearheading the same bull**** parade he was leading during the campaign. This Republican notion that their failures in the past few elections can be fixed by going back to basics and deeper into their conservative shells is destined to blow up in their faces. If nothing else, don't be so blatantly open with your bull****. If you're going to blow smoke up my poophole, I'd at least appreciate you not telling me to grab my ankles while puffing the cigar right in my face.
Hey, an ankle-grabbing reference. I'm Bizarro Rush Limbaugh. There's a scary thought...
Of extra note to me is that one of the spearheads in this commentary is Senator John McCain, who said this to CNN:
"It was a bad beginning because it wasn't what we promised the American people, what President Obama promised the American people, that we would sit down together," McCain told CNN's "State of the Union With John King."
Now, what he and other Republicans mean to say is that President Obama and his administration aren't doing things the way that the GOP wants them to do it, which for some reason is their definition of bipartisanship. I'm not going to go hyper-political or anything, but I find it just a bit frustrating that the GOP, which has had a virtual stranglehold on the country for the better part of the decade (and yeah, "Democrats took over the Senate two years ago..." what the **** ever...), now suddenly are shocked that their ideas and concepts for what will be put into effect aren't being embraced. Really, they should be happy that anyone is even willing to give them the chance to speak on the matter.
And I know that sounds like me being a bit harsh, but let's look at the facts. In a perfect world, bipartisanship would mean that both parties argue the pros and cons of various points and come to the best middle of the road solution. But in reality, we all know that it's going to play out exactly the way that it is now, at least in the short term. The Democrats will attempt to give the Republicans a voice and probably concede some minor points while working their own agenda.
Furthermore, there's absolutely no reason to think that the nature of Congress would change itself overnight. Nothing else has, so why would anyone think that it would? If there is to be a change towards more bipartisan legislating, it will take place over time and through the efforts of both parties to be reasonable. Whining about how nobody's listening to you and your idea of a solution (which is a toss up between more of the same thing that got us into this mess and apparently absolutely nothing judging by the lack of ideas floated by the conservative side) is counterproductive and makes you look like... well, a bunch of whiners.
And finally, for some reason... McCain has just been pissing me off recently. He gives the sweetest concession speech I have ever heard, and then a few months later he's spearheading the same bull**** parade he was leading during the campaign. This Republican notion that their failures in the past few elections can be fixed by going back to basics and deeper into their conservative shells is destined to blow up in their faces. If nothing else, don't be so blatantly open with your bull****. If you're going to blow smoke up my poophole, I'd at least appreciate you not telling me to grab my ankles while puffing the cigar right in my face.
Hey, an ankle-grabbing reference. I'm Bizarro Rush Limbaugh. There's a scary thought...
Friday, January 23, 2009
The Daily Show: A Closer Look at Joe
I might as well drop a Daily Show clip while I'm at it. You knew they'd have to take a different tack with the new administration, but the Daily Show crew is already finding adequate joke fodder.
And while someone will find this offensive or something, I don't care. I appreciate it for the puppet work that starts to fall apart near the end.
And while someone will find this offensive or something, I don't care. I appreciate it for the puppet work that starts to fall apart near the end.
"It's a Metaphor and a Lie..."
This is a solid example of a good Stephen Colbert interview. Stephen acts like the idiot he is prone to be. The guest (poet Elizabeth Alexander) manages to drag him across a vlid point or two while entertaining his insanity. And to top it all off, at some point things take an insane turn that I'm not even sure that Stephen was expecting. But in spite of that, but parties maintain their composure... somewhat.
So for those studying at home, this is how you properly handle an interview from Stephen Colbert. Entertain his notions for a few minutes, drop a valid observation or two, ride out the crazy part, and then wait for him to eventually steer the topic back towards something reasonable and related to you (which Colbert will actually do at some point because, well, he's not actually insane).
So for those studying at home, this is how you properly handle an interview from Stephen Colbert. Entertain his notions for a few minutes, drop a valid observation or two, ride out the crazy part, and then wait for him to eventually steer the topic back towards something reasonable and related to you (which Colbert will actually do at some point because, well, he's not actually insane).
Friday, January 9, 2009
Why Can't Some Things Go Away?
You know, the fact that I may never in my lifetime achieve anything that resembles widespread noteriety is both relieved and antagonized when things like this occur:
Joe The Plumber is putting down his wrenches and picking up a
reporter’s notebook.The Ohio man who became a household name during the presidential
campaign says he is heading to Israel as a war correspondent for the
conservative Web site pjtv.com.
Why? Why, of all the human beings on earth you could pick to send overseas to do reporting, would you send Joe/Samuel/Dumbo on said assignment? The man has zero credentials, and the only television appearances he's made thus far have only gone to confirm that he's a blithering idiot. That's rhetorical, of course. The obvious answer is ratings. A second rate site will no doubt pull in tons of viewers who are either fans of Joe, enemies of Joe looking for ammunition, or random observers who need to sate their idle curiousity. I mean, hey, look at me. I wasted time talking about it this week.
I guess at least now when he decides to talk about Israel being in danger, he can maybe have some idea of what he's talking abou... nah. Nah. Can't do it. I can't find a positive way to spin this. Maybe if he took Joe Six-Pack and the rest of his buddies and formed an actual news cabal over there. JoeTV: all Joe, all the time. Hmm. Nah, that won't work either.
But I guess one day, when I bother to sell three copies of a book or get some random screen time as an aside on some third rate cable show, I'll have to accept that the world just isn't a fair and balanced place. And a small-minded nobody from the midwest can end up having to file for a passport and going on a trip across the ocean. Only in America.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Wanda at Large... Indeed.
So, I'm sitting on a slow news day, as usual, and something inevitably comes out of the blue and clobbers me. Case in point, in the aftermath of the Prop 8 vote in California, Wanda Sykes has decided to come out in favor of gay marriage. Actually, she's decided to come out. Period. Here she is at a rally speaking her mind:
This falls in pace withan old familiar pattern with me. Because unlike every woman in America who is lying, I actually do find a sense of humor attractive. Which is why I am almost bummed to run into of female comedians that I have found in some way attractive only to find out later that they are lesbians. But it's not like I had a real shot with her to begin with it, so it's not a huge loss.
(Thanks to Sam Johnson for the news link above. You're my buddy, and I commiserate with you and point that although we both had no shot, you had even less of one. Because even in a girl-on-girl world, the lure of the Mocha King still eclipses all other males.)
This falls in pace withan old familiar pattern with me. Because unlike every woman in America who is lying, I actually do find a sense of humor attractive. Which is why I am almost bummed to run into of female comedians that I have found in some way attractive only to find out later that they are lesbians. But it's not like I had a real shot with her to begin with it, so it's not a huge loss.
(Thanks to Sam Johnson for the news link above. You're my buddy, and I commiserate with you and point that although we both had no shot, you had even less of one. Because even in a girl-on-girl world, the lure of the Mocha King still eclipses all other males.)
Sunday, November 9, 2008
"Venting the Plasma" on the Upcoming Presidency
In the spirit of my associate Sam Johnson, his associate (who will hopefully be my associate at some point, too) Ivan, and no doubt any number of other people who are in the same boat, I'm going to attempt to turn the page on any major poilitcal ramblings for a while. I'm going to go one last round with all of this stuff, and then hopefully be done with it for a good long while. Yeah, hope springs eternal.
Now, speaking of hope... I'm about to speak to all of my fellow Obama supporters. We've all had proper time to celebrate, reflect, contemplate what has happened and what will happen. I hope that you're still feeling good, but this is the part where I speak to the people that should know better.
Obama is not going to change everything. The man himself has said that much, and it should be pretty obvious. When he gets into office, he's going to have his hands full just trying to keep things afloat. Over the course of this term (and possibly, hopefully the next) I'd like to believe that there's going to be some change. And you most definitely are going to see it. But this bizzare notion that things like racism, discrimnation, and having to listen to "white folks" is out the window because the man was elected is not only ridiculous, but makes us all look bad by comparison. (And by "us", I mean Obama supporters, not just people on my side of the Mocha Line).
If you do want to walk with a little more swagger in your step, so be it. It's your moment, it's your time, it's your right. But please, please remember that you have no special exemption/protection from idiots and small-minded people on the other side of the fence (this is especially true for anyone in my neck of the woods in the Deep South).
Now then, I'd like to take a minute or two to talk to all the people who supported that other guy. First, I know you're disappointed. That's only fair. But life goes on, and there are worse things in the world than not being in the majority of a popular vote (and yeah yeah, not truly popular, electoral college, etc. etc...). Now is the time to do as your candidate told you and give your support to the man that has been elected. That's my message to the rational part of this group.
Now, for the other part of the group that, like I stated in my earlier breakdown, should know better. First of all, take a deep breath. There yet? Take another one. All right. Feeling a little better? Good.
Now suck it up, and deal.
I get that you bought into the hype, and you somehow think that the country is coming to an end. Get over it. The only reason the country hasn't gone completely in the crapper yet is because even with all of his power and influence, the President can only do so much damage from the White House. That you somehow instantly think that this man (and yes, he's just a man like you or me; not some secret Muslim (like that would matter) or hidden monster (where do you get this **** from?) or whatever) will run the country through a worse crap-storm than it's already in amazes me.
But even if you did, the fact remains that he was elected. He will be the President, and you might as well embrace that. Saying that he's "not your President" means that either you don't believe in the democratic system that you claim is your heart and soul or that you only believe in it when it does what you want it to. That's a great thing to teach the children of the country, by the way.
So deal with it. Mope if you must. Groan quietly if you have to. But please stop acting like this is the single worst thing that's ever happened in life, because when you do with little to no basis for it, it just exposes how shallow you can be. Give the man a chance to do the job before you start up with all the negativity and every talking point you've willingly swallowed the past few months.
And if you really can't do that, and embracing President Obama is something you truly can't deal with... you know where the exits are. You have Canada, Mexico, or your choice of oceans. Don't let the country hit you in the @$$ on the way out. (That's the single meanest thing I hope I ever have to say with regards to this matter.)
I think that may have done it. I'm going to try to stick out of the main issue at least until Obama's term starts. Wait, one more thing. The next person that tries to point out to me the percentage of white people that "voted for Obama, too" as if I or anyone else owes them a thank you card will taste a blazing fist. You'll hear the "Shin-" the "Shouryu-" and then possibly if you have enough life bar left, you'll hear the "Ken" right before the screen starts flashing.
Have hope, people. And don't fear change so much. There. Now I'm done.
Now, speaking of hope... I'm about to speak to all of my fellow Obama supporters. We've all had proper time to celebrate, reflect, contemplate what has happened and what will happen. I hope that you're still feeling good, but this is the part where I speak to the people that should know better.
Obama is not going to change everything. The man himself has said that much, and it should be pretty obvious. When he gets into office, he's going to have his hands full just trying to keep things afloat. Over the course of this term (and possibly, hopefully the next) I'd like to believe that there's going to be some change. And you most definitely are going to see it. But this bizzare notion that things like racism, discrimnation, and having to listen to "white folks" is out the window because the man was elected is not only ridiculous, but makes us all look bad by comparison. (And by "us", I mean Obama supporters, not just people on my side of the Mocha Line).
If you do want to walk with a little more swagger in your step, so be it. It's your moment, it's your time, it's your right. But please, please remember that you have no special exemption/protection from idiots and small-minded people on the other side of the fence (this is especially true for anyone in my neck of the woods in the Deep South).
Now then, I'd like to take a minute or two to talk to all the people who supported that other guy. First, I know you're disappointed. That's only fair. But life goes on, and there are worse things in the world than not being in the majority of a popular vote (and yeah yeah, not truly popular, electoral college, etc. etc...). Now is the time to do as your candidate told you and give your support to the man that has been elected. That's my message to the rational part of this group.
Now, for the other part of the group that, like I stated in my earlier breakdown, should know better. First of all, take a deep breath. There yet? Take another one. All right. Feeling a little better? Good.
Now suck it up, and deal.
I get that you bought into the hype, and you somehow think that the country is coming to an end. Get over it. The only reason the country hasn't gone completely in the crapper yet is because even with all of his power and influence, the President can only do so much damage from the White House. That you somehow instantly think that this man (and yes, he's just a man like you or me; not some secret Muslim (like that would matter) or hidden monster (where do you get this **** from?) or whatever) will run the country through a worse crap-storm than it's already in amazes me.
But even if you did, the fact remains that he was elected. He will be the President, and you might as well embrace that. Saying that he's "not your President" means that either you don't believe in the democratic system that you claim is your heart and soul or that you only believe in it when it does what you want it to. That's a great thing to teach the children of the country, by the way.
So deal with it. Mope if you must. Groan quietly if you have to. But please stop acting like this is the single worst thing that's ever happened in life, because when you do with little to no basis for it, it just exposes how shallow you can be. Give the man a chance to do the job before you start up with all the negativity and every talking point you've willingly swallowed the past few months.
And if you really can't do that, and embracing President Obama is something you truly can't deal with... you know where the exits are. You have Canada, Mexico, or your choice of oceans. Don't let the country hit you in the @$$ on the way out. (That's the single meanest thing I hope I ever have to say with regards to this matter.)
I think that may have done it. I'm going to try to stick out of the main issue at least until Obama's term starts. Wait, one more thing. The next person that tries to point out to me the percentage of white people that "voted for Obama, too" as if I or anyone else owes them a thank you card will taste a blazing fist. You'll hear the "Shin-" the "Shouryu-" and then possibly if you have enough life bar left, you'll hear the "Ken" right before the screen starts flashing.
Have hope, people. And don't fear change so much. There. Now I'm done.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Made of Win.
I know that I haven't posted anything else thus far today. And to be honest, I may not post anything else the rest of the night, either. But as sure as post this, provide a link, and know full well the people who may show up to read this (the number of which I can likely count on one hand), I think... nay, I know... that I have won the night with this one.
Ladies, gentleman, other assorted creatures... I give you... Super Obama World.
Yeah. Yeah.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Official First Results are In!
For everyone who cares (and I know noone does), the first results are as follows:
Barack Obama: 15
John McCain: 6
Thank you, Dixville Notch.
Barack Obama: 15
John McCain: 6
Thank you, Dixville Notch.
Monday, November 3, 2008
You Need to Vote.
I was going to have a long drawn out post for this, but by the time I finish that one it'll be sometime Thursday. So instead I'll just go with this makeshift message that says that you need to get out and vote.
You need to vote because it's important to express your opinion. I could tell you it's important to have an opinion, but that's its own discussion. But as a general rule, I refuse to even listen to the political or social opinion of anyone who doesn't have the common decency to at the very least go out and vote for the most important political office this country has. There are going to be a lot of so-called "politically-vocal" individuals going onto my ignore list shortly, and no doubt they'll be a few going onto my "Do not respect" list, too. That's also being determined by your capacity to vote.
You need to vote because this may well be the single most significant election in your lifetime. I know people toss that around, but look at how things were 8 years ago. Or 8 years before that. Or even 4 or 12 years before that. Granted, I've lost some people because they were barely walking at that point, but the fact remains that the past few decades of presidential elections haven't had nearly as much at stake. With the possible exception of 4-8 years ago, where some might argue that all of this downturn started (I won't for the sake of brevity), there may well be no more important a time in our country than right now. The person we elect on Tuesday will be in charge of helping us out of this mess. I say it that way because no one can reasonably think that one man can singlehandedly solve the crisis that we're in. But still, this is an important choice.
So get out there and do your thing. I'll assume that most people have made up their minds by now, but if you're still undecided, all I can ask you to do is look at the issues, look at the measure of the candidates, and look inside yourself. You know what you'll need from your next president, and I have to believe that even the least of you have a fairly competent B.S. detector. So I think that if you go with that, you'll be able to find the person that fits best with your ideals, viewpoint, and state of mind.
Personally, I'm voting for Obama. I don't dislike McCain, or at least I can say that I didn't when this election cycle started. But honestly, I cannot in good conscience vote to elect the man into office when he has spent few months doing nothing but being divisive, deceptive, and just downright bitter with regards to his opponent. His campaign strategy has been erratic at best and ill-conceived even by the kindest of standards. His choice for a running mate is so fundamentally incompetent that she can't even grasp an appropriate interpretation of the Bill of Rights. I can't conceive of putting someone like that into the number 2 spot of our country, and I can't grasp how someone could make the choice to add her to their ticket.
As far as I can tell, McCain is either completely out of grip with the state of the country or is surrounded by too many advisors telling him the wrong thing to do and is unable to properly shut them down. Neither case makes him a good choice for Commander-in-Chief.
Love him or hate him, Obama has been the guy who has shown steady direction for the majority of this election. He seems cool, composed, sensible, and even receptive to what others have to say. He's reached out to younger voters while still keeping in touch with the older generation. He's had a message of change tempered with hope and guided by intellect. He has faced an almost unprecedented number of attacks from all of his opponents over the past two years and has managed to maintain his composure and his sense of dignity.
Even if I were to believe that he's not as good as he comes off most of the time, I believe the man has done what any good leader must do. He's surrounded himself with intelligent people and allowed them to guide in the right direction. I know this because his opponent has so blatantly surrounded himself with the wrong people.
I could spend another page and a half outlining how I feel about both candidates, but I'll just break it down to this: if I measure the attitude, words, and behavior of the two men currently running for the office of president, there is only one man at this point that I still respect. That man's name is Barack Obama.
Now darn it all, I didn't mean to turn this into a political endorsement, so I'll close this the same way I started it. No matter how you feel or who you plan to vote for, you need to vote. You owe it to yourself and to your and everyone else's future to make your choice known while you have the chance to.
You need to vote because it's important to express your opinion. I could tell you it's important to have an opinion, but that's its own discussion. But as a general rule, I refuse to even listen to the political or social opinion of anyone who doesn't have the common decency to at the very least go out and vote for the most important political office this country has. There are going to be a lot of so-called "politically-vocal" individuals going onto my ignore list shortly, and no doubt they'll be a few going onto my "Do not respect" list, too. That's also being determined by your capacity to vote.
You need to vote because this may well be the single most significant election in your lifetime. I know people toss that around, but look at how things were 8 years ago. Or 8 years before that. Or even 4 or 12 years before that. Granted, I've lost some people because they were barely walking at that point, but the fact remains that the past few decades of presidential elections haven't had nearly as much at stake. With the possible exception of 4-8 years ago, where some might argue that all of this downturn started (I won't for the sake of brevity), there may well be no more important a time in our country than right now. The person we elect on Tuesday will be in charge of helping us out of this mess. I say it that way because no one can reasonably think that one man can singlehandedly solve the crisis that we're in. But still, this is an important choice.
So get out there and do your thing. I'll assume that most people have made up their minds by now, but if you're still undecided, all I can ask you to do is look at the issues, look at the measure of the candidates, and look inside yourself. You know what you'll need from your next president, and I have to believe that even the least of you have a fairly competent B.S. detector. So I think that if you go with that, you'll be able to find the person that fits best with your ideals, viewpoint, and state of mind.
Personally, I'm voting for Obama. I don't dislike McCain, or at least I can say that I didn't when this election cycle started. But honestly, I cannot in good conscience vote to elect the man into office when he has spent few months doing nothing but being divisive, deceptive, and just downright bitter with regards to his opponent. His campaign strategy has been erratic at best and ill-conceived even by the kindest of standards. His choice for a running mate is so fundamentally incompetent that she can't even grasp an appropriate interpretation of the Bill of Rights. I can't conceive of putting someone like that into the number 2 spot of our country, and I can't grasp how someone could make the choice to add her to their ticket.
As far as I can tell, McCain is either completely out of grip with the state of the country or is surrounded by too many advisors telling him the wrong thing to do and is unable to properly shut them down. Neither case makes him a good choice for Commander-in-Chief.
Love him or hate him, Obama has been the guy who has shown steady direction for the majority of this election. He seems cool, composed, sensible, and even receptive to what others have to say. He's reached out to younger voters while still keeping in touch with the older generation. He's had a message of change tempered with hope and guided by intellect. He has faced an almost unprecedented number of attacks from all of his opponents over the past two years and has managed to maintain his composure and his sense of dignity.
Even if I were to believe that he's not as good as he comes off most of the time, I believe the man has done what any good leader must do. He's surrounded himself with intelligent people and allowed them to guide in the right direction. I know this because his opponent has so blatantly surrounded himself with the wrong people.
I could spend another page and a half outlining how I feel about both candidates, but I'll just break it down to this: if I measure the attitude, words, and behavior of the two men currently running for the office of president, there is only one man at this point that I still respect. That man's name is Barack Obama.
Now darn it all, I didn't mean to turn this into a political endorsement, so I'll close this the same way I started it. No matter how you feel or who you plan to vote for, you need to vote. You owe it to yourself and to your and everyone else's future to make your choice known while you have the chance to.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
"Are you there, Joe... It's me Ras John!"
I get losing track of facts, losing track of your talking points, or even losing track of where you are in your notes, but how do you lose track of an entire person?
I can actually accept this, but when the lyric popped into my head that way I just had to post it.
I can actually accept this, but when the lyric popped into my head that way I just had to post it.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
"I'm Joe the Plumber."
After hearing about "Joe the Plumber" for the past two weeks, I've decided that I don't rightly care what he has to say about anything, how he feels about life, and especially his views on politics. He was cute when he was just this Joe Everyman that was asking a question about his life and getting an answer that he should have listened to (note for future reference: people only tend to hear what they want to out of a conversation).
Now, thanks to John McCain and his incessant need for repetition, he's been elevated to mock superstar status. And by that, I mean he's been mocked by a good many people at this point. Not only is he not officially a plumber, he doesn't make anywhere near the 250K a year he'd need to in order to be affected by an increase in tax rates. And that's just the start of why Good Ol'Joe isn't quite what he made himself out to be.
And if it just ended there, I'd probably be fine. But no, we've got to be beaten over the head with Joe the Plumber. He's the unofficial "Tippecanoe" of the McCain campaign, and it's gotten ridiculous.
I'm forced to be subjected with commercials showing, ahem... "average Joes" (I can't get out of this death spiral) proudly proclaiming, "I'm Joe the Plumber." And while it could be a catchy phrase, it only serves to remind me how stupid a premise the story of the original Joe the Plumber is. You might as well just say something more relevant, like, "I can't do simple mathematics..." or, "I lack listening comprehension."
And Joe himself isn't helping things, either. He almost seemed like he was just going to bow out gracefully until he noted that he wouldn't mind running for political office. And while there's nothing inherently wrong with running for office ("he said with a straight face"), it's a little telling of how this Joe Six-Pack (you know he ties a few on) doesn't know when discretion is the better part of valor.
But I do have one positive thing to say about Joe. He has been consistent in one thing that he's said since the very beginning. The facts are out there, and people should get out there and find them for themselves. It almost makes me think Joe isn't that bad of a guy, and honestly he probably isn't. Still, the only time I want to hear the phrase, "I'm Joe the Plumber," from now on is in the sequel to Who's Nailin' Paylin: Still Nailin' Paylin.
(And don't act like this hasn't crossed Larry Flynt's mind at least once already.)
Now, thanks to John McCain and his incessant need for repetition, he's been elevated to mock superstar status. And by that, I mean he's been mocked by a good many people at this point. Not only is he not officially a plumber, he doesn't make anywhere near the 250K a year he'd need to in order to be affected by an increase in tax rates. And that's just the start of why Good Ol'Joe isn't quite what he made himself out to be.
And if it just ended there, I'd probably be fine. But no, we've got to be beaten over the head with Joe the Plumber. He's the unofficial "Tippecanoe" of the McCain campaign, and it's gotten ridiculous.
I'm forced to be subjected with commercials showing, ahem... "average Joes" (I can't get out of this death spiral) proudly proclaiming, "I'm Joe the Plumber." And while it could be a catchy phrase, it only serves to remind me how stupid a premise the story of the original Joe the Plumber is. You might as well just say something more relevant, like, "I can't do simple mathematics..." or, "I lack listening comprehension."
And Joe himself isn't helping things, either. He almost seemed like he was just going to bow out gracefully until he noted that he wouldn't mind running for political office. And while there's nothing inherently wrong with running for office ("he said with a straight face"), it's a little telling of how this Joe Six-Pack (you know he ties a few on) doesn't know when discretion is the better part of valor.
But I do have one positive thing to say about Joe. He has been consistent in one thing that he's said since the very beginning. The facts are out there, and people should get out there and find them for themselves. It almost makes me think Joe isn't that bad of a guy, and honestly he probably isn't. Still, the only time I want to hear the phrase, "I'm Joe the Plumber," from now on is in the sequel to Who's Nailin' Paylin: Still Nailin' Paylin.
(And don't act like this hasn't crossed Larry Flynt's mind at least once already.)
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
After Review, The Flag Has Been Picked Up..
So according to this report, thousands of voters that were flagged and wouldbe denied the opportunity to vote will get to now. This is good news, regardless of who you planned to vote for.
It's kind of sad that this kind of flagging and disqualification has been taking place across the country. My favorite part is how many of the officials overseeing the process want to claim they have the right to do so now, particularly so close to the election.
It's funny (and by funny I mean sad) that said officials try to act like their being robbed of some right to purge voter logs. Anything but that. The simple truth is that it's too late to do any bookkeeping. See, the laws in place in most states (including this one) prevent any kind of purging or removing of people from the logs within 90 days of an election. This is not only so that there is no attempted deception with regards to any possible suppression, but also so that there can't even be the illusion of any sort of foul play. Not to mention that challenging registrations at this point gives a person little to no time to attempt to correct the mistake before the election. Fortunately, early voting in many places has helped expose many potential hangups that might not have been found until election day.
In short, any officials that wanted to fuss over any fakers in the rosters have had the better part of 2-3 years (3-4 years if you only count presidential elections) to sift them out. So if you happen to know anyone that may have been told that they couldn't vote or that their registration was being challenged, please tell them that they most likely can and they should recheck things or just go and attempt to vote anyway. Because even though they're supposed to be notified that they can vote, I don't have much faith in the system to come through like it should.
It's kind of sad that this kind of flagging and disqualification has been taking place across the country. My favorite part is how many of the officials overseeing the process want to claim they have the right to do so now, particularly so close to the election.
It's funny (and by funny I mean sad) that said officials try to act like their being robbed of some right to purge voter logs. Anything but that. The simple truth is that it's too late to do any bookkeeping. See, the laws in place in most states (including this one) prevent any kind of purging or removing of people from the logs within 90 days of an election. This is not only so that there is no attempted deception with regards to any possible suppression, but also so that there can't even be the illusion of any sort of foul play. Not to mention that challenging registrations at this point gives a person little to no time to attempt to correct the mistake before the election. Fortunately, early voting in many places has helped expose many potential hangups that might not have been found until election day.
In short, any officials that wanted to fuss over any fakers in the rosters have had the better part of 2-3 years (3-4 years if you only count presidential elections) to sift them out. So if you happen to know anyone that may have been told that they couldn't vote or that their registration was being challenged, please tell them that they most likely can and they should recheck things or just go and attempt to vote anyway. Because even though they're supposed to be notified that they can vote, I don't have much faith in the system to come through like it should.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)