Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Make the Commercials Stop!!!

This time of year is tough to watch TV. I like to have it on while I work. The political commercials are hard to take. Let me get this straight. If you are a Republican you want to see dirty water, breathe dirty air, want to see pedophilia Congressmen run amuck in Congress, and give all the countries money to oil companies.

If you are a Democrat it is no better. If you are a Democrat you want all servicemen to die, all income to go to the government and all businesses disbanded.

Every year the parties do this with their extreme adds. Not only exaggerations, but outright lies.

Is it any wonder so few people vote? A large portion of the country does not follow politics on a regular basis. When they do pay attention, they get these adds. To them, there is no difference in the parties. They don't see a difference. This is a pity. I do believe the average person should pay more attention on a day to day basis, but I also believe the two major parties need to better explain what they stand for. They don't for one reason. Negative adds work. We say we don't want them, but they do seem to work. They are also helpful to a point. A candidate like a company using a marketing campaign wants you to see their best side. Negative adds can show you a different side.

We need to see what the person believes. That doesn't mean apple pie and motherhood. We need to demand to know what they believe in their gut! Conservatives need to enunciate why they are conservatives. Liberals need to stop hiding why they are liberals. Be proud of what you believe and tell us why you believe it. When you go negative as they all must do, be truthful!!! Is there any wonder the citizens have such a negative opinion of politicians?

Thursday, October 19, 2006

The day after

Most pundits are forecasting at least one chamber of the congress changing hands. So what happens the next day after they take office? Make no mistake I think that would be a horrible thing for the country, I think Republicans still have time to turn it around, they can do it by talking about the real record. If they will talk about the effects of the Bush tax cuts, and the wonderful economy we are enjoying and talk about security, there is no reason for them to lose. They are not doing this of course, and it looks like they may go down as a party.

All that being said, what happens the day after? My guess is the sun will come up. My guess is there will be lawsuits from both parties, which will be a shame and probably a freak show. On the whole I think rank and file Republicans will demand changes from the leadership, and probably won't get them. The mainstream media will basically say that the electorate came to its senses.

Contrast this to what happens when Democrats lose. People are still talking about Florida 2000, even though that 'conservative' (a little sarcasm there) paper the New York Times found that Bush would have won under any legal scenario. John Kerry still talks about the 'theft' in Ohio. Even if there were wholesale corruption as they charge, 65,000 people would have had to change their votes. On the whole the modern liberal can not face reality. I purposely say liberal because I do not believe these tactics and beliefs represent the Democratic party faithful, only the rabid moonbat wing of the party.

Speaking of reality, Speaker Pelosi (my stomach just turned a little) has to somehow find a way to jump start the economy. That will be easy, since all they have to do is start trumpeting the numbers that already exist. They have to find a way to come across with everything they have promised to fix. In short the world will turn into utopia on January 3. We all know that can't happen with either party. Of course what will happen in the real world, they will rediscover that without sixty votes you still can't invoke cloture in the Senate. The filibuster will suddenly become a horrible procedure again. Funny how that idea keeps changing parties. One good thing that might happen is President Bush might finally find that elusive veto pen. Somehow they will have to find a way to stop companies from offshoring, and moving off shore themselves. Since this is a product of a competitive economy and not some grand conspiracy they won't find a way. I seriously doubt it will be a big story anymore though, until '08 when it will be the fault of whoever gets the nod for the Republicans.

Yes you have sensed a note of suspicion for the mainstream media. I do not believe in conspiracies, I just think they all think the same. They don't conspire, they are just elitists.

A change would be interesting historically, but with memories of Congress abandoning our ally in South Viet Nam, do we need any further motivation to keep Ms. Pelosi out of the Speaker chair? What a disaster it would be if they did the same thing to Iraq. To make matters worse, a San Francisco liberal would be third in line of succession with a Vice President with a history of heart trouble.

Yes the current Republicans sicken me, but do we really want Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid? On the bright side Senator Reid could teach us how to wipe out the deficit with land speculation.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Taking back the language

I am generally against starting any sentence with "Taking back our ...". This is different. When political demagogues use those words they are railing against something that was never taken away, ex. Take back the country, take back our party. Our language is being hijacked by real people and I believe for their own selfish reasons.

Advocates that will not describe their views in plain language worry me. That doesn't mean they are nefarious, but it does make me look closer at their claims.

Both left and right use these tactics and it is scary. Pro choice advocates now use the term "Women's Healthcare". Whether you believe in a right to choose or not, calling it Health Care is changing the subject at best. People who support the Iraq war are called "Pro War". No one outside the mentally deranged is pro war.

Affirmative Action is an old term that has lost its meaning. When JFK coined it I believe he meant it to be just that. Trying to find and promote and hire previously under-represented minorities. Today Affirmative Action as implemented by the government and Supreme Court is pure and simple quotas. That being said we use the same term.

You may say, what is wrong with a little creative marketing. While it is true that every group from businesses to advocacy groups are going to put the best face on their views, we are moving toward camouflage. Political parties this time of year stoop to outright lies to paint their own candidate as the savior of the world, or their opponent as Hitler and Goebbels rolled up into one.
We have a problem of disinterested voters. Too many people do not get involved with the political process. This is one of the reasons. I know that politics has always been dirty, and a little less than honest, but the desire to hide true intentions I don't believe has ever been as high as now. We cannot continue to allow these spokesmen to hide behind euphemisms. Tough issues are tough for a reason. We can disagree and in a legislative perspective one side will lose, but we must discuss them openly.

The debate of what to do with Social Security is crucial. In between twenty and forty years the system as we know it will bankrupt. Whether you believe that or not it must be discussed honestly. The side that disagrees can give alternatives projections, but why must the reform minded be painted as wanting to dismantle it, or turn it over to Wall Street robber barons. Likewise I disagree that people on the left who want us to pull out of Iraq, but I don't believe they hate America. I believe they are wrong. Nothing more nothing less. I believe Education is not going to be corrected by massive inputs of money into the same broken systems that exist today. That does not mean I am against children.

Have a debate, not a playground insult match.

Monday, October 09, 2006

Imagine No boogie men

Remember the song Imagine by John Lennon. He would have us imagine a world where there were no countries, religion etc, etc. Good song, bad message.

I want to take that idea in a new direction with all due respect to Mr. Lennon. I want to imagine a world where we can not blame anyone else for our problems. Can't blame your parents, can't blame Big Oil, can't blame the Religious Right, can't even blame Big Government. I know it is hard but you can't even blame George W Bush. In my hypothetical world, if someone does something illegal, you can bring them to justice, but you just can't dwell on it. You would have to take every bad thing that happens, and find a way to deal with it.

Of course I am laying out a world that sounds good, but is much harder to implement. I don't think we will truly ever see this world, but if we all try to come a little closer in our own lives, wouldn't the world be a little better?

I think it would. I don't pretend to live in this world myself, but I do strive each day to get a little closer. Some days I make some progress, and some days I don't, but the dream and the standard is there.