Tag Archive for 'Republican'

Don’t shoot me

Published
by
Cody
on February 2, 2008
in Personal and Political
. 0 Comments

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!

Sphere: Related Content

No politics, please

Published
by
Cody
on January 21, 2008
in Personal and Rant
. 9 Comments

I’ve decided that I’m not going to pay any more attention to the presidential race until September. Maybe October, if I’m still feeling jaded. I simply don’t care about the candidates right now. It’s still way too early for me to do anything about it. Sure, I suppose I could vote in Washington State’s primary and caucus, but I refuse to vote when third parties aren’t acknowledged. Washington forces you to pick a party to vote for in the primary and caucus. You can’t vote for the other party once you’ve chosen one and there’s no mention at all of parties other than the Democrats and Republicans. I suppose this is the concession made for not having any party registration…

So, I will deal with the flood of political news in the media, but aside from that, you’ll see no posts related to the primaries and I won’t look further into the issues. Once the parties choose their nominations and things really start to matter, I’ll come out of my hole. Until then, I’m ignoring politics like I ignore that Britney girl. And hygiene.

Instead, I’ll renew my interest in football just in time for the Super Bowl. A warning: I’m rooting for the Patriots. Let the hate mail commence!

Sphere: Related Content

Status quo

Published
by
Cody
on November 19, 2007
in Political and Rant
. 0 Comments

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.

Sphere: Related Content

The (9/11) truth is out there

Published
by
Cody
on November 8, 2007
in Rant
. 1 Comment

Generalizations really tick me off. The subject in question here is the 9/11 Truth movement. Dead horse, I know, but I happen to like beating things. Anyways, I was browsing around some sites recently and began to notice a trend. Among sites that discussed 9/11, the ones that supported the idea that it was an inside job and/or that the government perpetrated the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon were heavily liberal (of the far left flavor). Sites that debunk such conspiracy theories or simply make fun of them tend to be heavily conservative (moderate to far right). I can kind of understand the split here, but after reading through the comments on certain sites, I really wish this wasn’t how it was split up.

I am a libertarian at heart, but I tend to lean more liberal than anything. I also believe that 9/11 was an act of terrorism caused by the hijacking of airplanes by fundamentalist Muslims. The government wasn’t involved in any way and failed to act properly due to shoddy intelligence and confusion surrounding the events. In other words, I’m no 9/11 truther.

This puts me in a rather awkward position. Because I’m fairly liberal, conservatives tend to assume that I’m off my rocker and think that little green aliens told George Bush to fly remote control airplanes into American buildings. And because I don’t believe in the conspiracy theories, liberals tend to assume I’m a neo-conservative government crony and/or brainwashed. Both are clearly wrong and are a direct result of the oversimplifying of the situation here.

9/11 truthers are composed of people from all over the political spectrum. Some, like Alex Jones, are conservatives. Others, like the 35% of Democrats who think Bush knew about the attacks beforehand, are more moderate or liberal. I wish people would realize this, especially on the conservative side of things. Perry Logan (no relation) is a lot more liberal than I am, but he also debunks the claims of 9/11 truthers. Even so, he’s still attacked by more conservative blogs (especially DUmmie FUnnies) for being a liberal, which means he must be a truther. Exhibiting other traits often connected with truthers (such as being against the conflict in Iraq) also garners a person a reputation as a weed-smoking hippie truther.

Blogs like Screw Loose Change seem to be a little smarter when it comes to realizing that not all liberals are moonbats (my research indicates that word is only used by conservative blogs with nothing important to say), but that’s not saying much for the commenters, who still seem to be of the type to criticize anyone with a slightly liberal slant. Honestly, people. It’s all well and good to have an opinion, but attacking anyone who varies from that opinion in the least is bad form and makes you look like a jackass. I’m talking to both sides here. Truthers need to stop thinking I’ve been brainwashed or that I’m too ignorant to see their truth, and debunkers need to stop assuming I’m a truther because I’ve always thought the invasion of Iraq was a bad idea. False correlations are the sign of someone with a big mouth and a little brain.

And please, if you’re a truther, stop getting all surprised when you tell me to make my own conclusions and don’t agree with your version of events. Expecting me to believe everything you say makes as much sense as believing everything the government says, wouldn’t you agree?

Sphere: Related Content

When Republicans sounded like Democrats

Published
by
Cody
on September 16, 2007
in Asides
. 0 Comments

Oh the irony. Back during the Clinton administration, Republicans were saying the same things Democrats are saying now. Click the link to see some verbatim quotes.

Sphere: Related Content

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States