Archive for the 'Political' Category

Page 2 of 4

False dichotomy

There is a lot I don’t like about the world: slow walkers, erratic drivers, people who chew with their mouths open, txt-speak, and kittens. Okay, I don’t hate kittens. Kittens with spikes all over them (war kittens!), maybe, but not regular kittens.

Anyways, there’s one thing I hate above all else: the idea that there are only two kinds of people in politics. Everyone encounters it. You’re either a Democrat or a Republican. You’re a conservative or a liberal. You’re a crazy, left-wing, terrorist-loving moonbat or a war-mongering, right-wing, bible-thumping wingnut. You’re either with us or against us.

This is bunk and everyone knows it. The world isn’t black and white, people. There’s a hell of a lot of gray in there.

Continue reading ‘False dichotomy’

Don’t shoot me

Well, I did it. I voted in Washington’s primary. Actually, the primary isn’t until February 19, but using the miracle of absentee voting, I already filled out my ballot. All that’s left is to mail it and ignore the results. Okay, I won’t ignore them. I’ve decided I can’t completely avoid politics, though I still think it’s a waste of time. We should switch over to a parliamentary, proportional representation system and make things more efficient. And fair.

I suppose the burning question is who did I vote for. It may surprise some of you, but I actually voted for John McCain. This is all about the nomination, after all. On the Democrat side, it’s going to be either Obama or Clinton, and I don’t particularly care for either of them. On the Republican side, however, it’s still pretty wide open. I’m thinking it’ll be either Romney or McCain winning the nomination, as Huckabee is falling far behind and Ron Paul is…well, the very definition of “fringe candidate”. So, since I had to choose a party (either Democrat or Republican), I decided to throw my vote behind McCain, since I’d much rather have him as a nominee than Mitt Romney.

Luckily, though I had to basically become a temporary member of the Republican Party for the nomination process, I’m free to vote for whoever I like come November. Washington State doesn’t have party registration, which is nice. The drawback is that we have to pick a single party for the primary and caucus and stick with it. I don’t know if other states do it differently, but I know it’s a rather unpopular policy here. Heck, I might have the whole deal wrong. I honestly don’t know how things work. I just followed the instructions on my ballot.

So, who will I vote for in the election? I don’t know. It all depends on who the nominees are. I highly doubt I’ll vote Democrat, though, unless Mitt Romney gains the Republican nomination. Otherwise, I’ll probably vote for a third party. Or write myself in. I’m kidding about that last part. I don’t want to be president. That is, not until I’ve completed my plans for world domination!

What the hell, NBC?

The Nevada Supreme Court sided with NBC in their decision to retract an invitation to Dennis Kucinich to the Democratic debate tonight. NBC had originally invited Kucinich, but then changed their criteria to only allow candidates who’d placed first, second, or third in the primaries. Kucinich sued and got a district judge to file an injunction against NBC. NBC complained to the state supreme court and it was decided that NBC didn’t need to include him–one hour before the debate was scheduled to start.

This is hardly surprising, actually. As unfortunate as it is, it’s typical of the mainstream media. Excluding and poking fun at the so-called “long shots” is what the media does best. NBC News correspondent Kevin Corke put it best: “We were expecting to have the three major candidates. Why? Well quite frankly, because those are the probable candidates. That pool is the most viable pool. And truthfully, most people want to hear what Hillary Clinton and John Edwards and Barack Obama have to say. After all, those are probably the three they’re going to be picking from.”

Most of what he says is true. Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are the frontrunners, and they’re the most likely to be nominated by the Democratic Party. However, the people of America still have a say. I, for instance, don’t want to hear Clinton and Obama bickering over race and gender and Edwards whining that he’s not getting enough attention. I want to hear from the candidates that I identify with. That means Kucinich and Mike Gravel. I don’t care if they’re long shots for the nomination. I happen to want to hear what they have to say.

It’s ironic that NBC invoked their First Amendment rights in keeping Kucinich out of the debates. What about Kucinich’s First Amendment rights? Doesn’t he have the right to appear in a debate he was originally invited to? Heck, don’t viewers have the right to hear from all the possible candidates? This situation actually reminds me of the midterm elections in 2006. During the race for senator in Washington State, the Libertarian candidate, Bruce Guthrie, actually made it into the debate between the Republican and Democrat candidates. He had to struggle like Kucinich and other long-shot presidential candidates, but it was worth it just to get recognition, even if he didn’t get that many votes (hey, 1.4% is a decent amount for a third party candidate).

If I were Dennis Kucinich, I’d strongly consider running as an independent. I know a lot of people who would vote for him. He’s the one candidate I like.

News, news, and less news

Good news is hard to come by these days. Flipping through the channels today, I came across a preview for “Britney in Crisis”…on CNN Headline News. Um, isn’t that something that belongs on E!, or maybe even Bravo? MSNBC was busy focusing on how Hilary Clinton put on a fake and calculated show of emotion (regular CNN was doing the same, minus the fake), and Fox News was doing their usual job of being bad at everything. Generally, I can count on Fox to at least being showing important things (as opposed to washed up celebrities), but Bill O’Reilly and this video kind of ruined that. A lot. Besides, I prefer pundits of the Colbert school of thought.

I eventually gave up on watching any news that wasn’t related to New Hampshire, so I settled on the Daily Show, which at least told me what I wanted to hear. It was also a good chance to see how Jon Stewart was getting along without any writers. Fortunately for him, the primaries and the accompanying news show clips provided enough laughs that he didn’t need to do much else. The strange metaphors everyone was using for the Clinton campaign were awesome (seriously, “a soufflé doesn’t rise twice”?) and his guest, John Zogby of Zogby International, was one of the better ones. And I learned what was going on in the world! Who knew a Comedy Central show without screenwriters could teach me current events? At least I didn’t have to hear about “Britney in Crisis”. Perhaps I should send an open letter to Britney et al: “Dear useless celebrities, please stop doing crazy things in public so I don’t have to deal with seeing you anymore. Sincerely, someone who never liked you.” Then another to CNN asking where they lost their credibility.

I also saw a trailer for the new Rambo. It made me wonder how bad it must sting for the bad guys to get whipped by a 60-something movie star. Also, Will Smith is a scientologist. I picked that up on the Colbert Report. Hurray for satirical news shows!

Status quo

There are more than two political parties in the United States. You’d be surprised at how many people don’t realize this. I frequently am. Indeed, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are the biggest two political parties so they’re bound to get the most attention, but the general ideas is that they get the attention because there aren’t any other parties to speak of. This kind of thinking is absurd. Not only does it limit democracy, it also suppresses the so-called “third parties”, such as the Libertarian Party or the Green Party. Parties like that shouldn’t be a footnote in elections. Unfortunately, the people of America have turned the term “third party” into a joke, or even an invective.

“So do you think a third party will win this year?”
“What, do you mean like Ralph Nader, that damn vote-stealer?”

Regardless of Nader’s position as thief of votes (I’m looking straight at the 2000 election here), people should realize that their votes are not just limited to “Democrat” or “Republican”. Too often third parties are seen as annoyances, detracting from the “true” parties. This is because the United States has been limited to a two-party system for years. The last time a third party candidate came even close to winning a presidential election was in 1912, where Theodore Roosevelt, as candidate for the Progressive Party, carried 6 states and won a bigger share of the popular vote than the Republican candidate, William Howard Taft. He lost to Woodrow Wilson, but his second place finish has never been duplicated by a third party. Even Ross Perot only got as much as 8% of the popular vote in 1996.

A common argument I’ve heard against third parties is that a vote for a third party candidate is wasted because they’ll lose anyways. Can anyone else see the flaw in this? It’s a circular line of reasoning. A third party candidate will lose because no one votes for them. No one votes for them because they think they’ll lose. It’s self-fulfilling. I really think that if everyone voted for the party they liked most (instead of the party they thought would be most likely to win), the Libertarian Party would get a lot of votes. Most people don’t even know what a libertarian is, though I bet most of them would identify as one (who doesn’t like a small government?). I blame that on the media for inundating us with the whole “liberal vs. conservative” idea. Note to the American people: the political spectrum stopped being a line a long, long time ago. There isn’t just “left” and “right”.

Anyways, I’m just saying this because I’m a libertarian (ideologically, as denoted by the small “l”). I’m not registered with the party (denoted by the big “L”), but I may register before this next election. It doesn’t seem that the Democrats or the Republicans are going to be putting out candidates I like, so I’ll probably vote Libertarian. Wasted vote? Perhaps, but at least I’m voting for someone I like. That’s a little more important than going along with the status quo.

 

May 2012
S M T W T F S
« Apr    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
Support Wikipedia