Posts Tagged ‘politics’

What Happened to the Girl?

Tuesday, July 29th, 2008

I was sitting at my favorite discount pharmacy waiting for the folks behind the glass to dispense my prescription. A couple of young guys were ahead of me. The TV in the waiting area was tuned to a news channel, and Republican presidential candidate John McCain was on the screen talking about something or other.

Young Guy #1: Is that one of the president guys?
Young Guy #2: Yeah.

YG1: What’s his name?
YG2: That’s McCain.

YG1: How many are left?
YG2: Just two: Obama and McCain.

YG1: [sly grin] Wasn’t there a girl? Which one is the girl?
YG2: That was Hillary. She’s out of it now.

YG1: Yeah, I thought so, ’cause nobody would vote for a girl. That was pretty funny. So, who’s left?
YG2: Obama and McCain.

YG1: Yeah, ’cause who’d vote for a girl!

Well, feminists, have at it! I think we can safely conclude that Young Guy #1 is clearly a moron; however, he did have a point that I believe is valid. Back before it was all decided, I was cheering for Hillary to win the nomination because I doubted that she was electable for the very reason that our presumptively public school educated moron proposed.

Some of you will say that I’m being unfairly harsh toward Young Guy #1. After all, knowledge about and involvement in politics is optional and not for everybody. Thinking that makes you a moron, too! These abstract figures you can take or leave pretty much decide our individual and national destiny. So, yeah, just view elections as vanity contests at best or too much trouble to bother with at worst and see where that leads us.

*     *     *     *     *

Anyhow, back to the point. Is voting for a promise of “change” for change’s sake any less moronic than saying “nobody would vote for a girl?” Perhaps the young moron even had more brain cells working than those purportedly well educated voters who are now being led down a primrose path strewn with petals of perfidiously proffered passage. Some of them didn’t even need to hear the “change” mantra, for they were already hard-wired by fellow Kool Aid drinking, tinfoil hat wearing drones into an unthinking position of voting only for Democrats without even weighing the merits of the available candidates. The same is true for hard-core Republicans who only know how to pull the big lever that says “Republican” and for whom campaign events are opportunities to spend time reinforcing their prejudices with other, like minded monomaniacs. This polarization has to end. We really look stupid.

OK, so the country is going through a period of malaise. The economy is suffering a cyclic downturn; oil prices are high due to Chinese consumption and other factors; we have yet another unpopular war; and, with a less than charismatic leader in George W. Bush, it is easy to blame everything on him and his party, just as we did with Gerry Ford in the aftermath of Watergate, Vietnam, and a severe recession in the 1970s.

Jimmy Carter was the bright, shining, youthful figure who vowed that if he were elected it wouldn’t be business as usual in Washington. He was right. It was worse. Our short-term, feel-good mentality and his naivete cost us a fortune. If he wasn’t the worst president of the 20th Century, he was second only to Warren G. Harding. He gave away one of the most important strategic assets of the western hemisphere, the Panama Canal. He insisted that Soviet contractors build the new embassy in Moscow, because it would save money. That embassy was never used for its intended purpose, because during its construction the KGB planted more bugs than you’d find in the entire Okefenokee Swamp in Jimmy’s home state. Jimmy trusted Communists and felt little need for spies. Accordingly, he dismantled the CIA, cutting loose a large number of career covert agents. He allowed the embassy to be placed under siege in Tehran. During his administration, we verged on runaway inflation, with the prime interest rate topping 21% while the economy stagnated. The Dow-Jones average, which had managed to climb to 1000 in January 1977 from its 1973 depths, started sinking once again. Many proclaimed the stock market dead. But Jimmy sure looked more glamorous and promising than Gerry Ford to those who voted for him—and that included some very intelligent people. Hell, Gerry pardoned Richard Nixon, which was unforgivable. So voting for Gerry must have been like voting for Nixon all over again. They were wrong. They were bamboozled by a promise of a new order in Washington, something that they had to know in their hearts was impossible.

Germany turned to Adolf Hitler in 1933 for similar, albeit more dire reasons. The national malaise resulting from the excesses of the Weimar republic, the apportioning of the fatherland by the Treaties of Versailles, and the extreme currency deflation laid the groundwork for the Beer Hall Putsch and Hitler’s mercurial rise to power.

Now, don’t get all up in arms here. I’m not comparing Obama to Hitler, or even to Jimmy Carter, for that matter. I’m merely saying that the conditions are ripe for voters to grasp at straws in the hope that the rhetoric actually will represent reality, and that reality will be a panacea for all our ills. When the pain grows, people tend to think irrationally. Think again. Has this sort of thing ever worked in the past? Has anyone ever been able to change how things work in Washington? What will the long-term consequences be this time if you vote straight out of your ass?

For those of you who say that McCain is just an extension of George W. Bush, you’re swallowing a line, too. Before you blow wind in my direction that I’m just a filthy, dirty, neocon, creationist, homophobic, Bush-loving, blindly GOP-voting pig, let me say that I am not happy with either candidate. I firmly believe that senators for the most part make lousy presidents. With few exceptions, they are career politicians who have little, if any, executive experience. We’re not electing a king or an emperor; we’re electing a chief executive. He runs the executive branch of the government. Give me someone who has successfully run something—preferably a large corporation or a state. But I digress. McCain is McCain. Bush is Bush. McCain, if elected, will inherit two houses of congress with Democrat majorities. That and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan are Bush’s legacies to his successor. The economy is cyclical, perturbed by fiscal policy and monetary policy as well as international trade. The direct influence of the president on the economy is debatable, but it is certainly much less than what campaign speeches would have you believe. Oil prices—neither presidential candidate will be able to do much to change.  So, why do we listen to the same empty promises—from both parties’ candidates—every four years and believe this mendacious rhetoric? I sure as hell cannot base my vote on who makes the best empty promises. Can you?

What I want from a president is a strong national defense and a successful foreign policy. What I want from congress is to keep government the hell out of my life and my pockets. I am sad to say that neither presidential candidate offers the complete package to me, and congress is out of control. Thus, I cannot throw my hands up in the air and just vote for change for change’s sake.

On the contrary, I feel that gridlock is essential to keep this congress from going hog wild spending my money. That’s sad, too, but that’s what checks and balances are all about. It will please you to know that I felt the same way when there was a Republican majority in congress. George W. Bush rubber stamped every damn spending bill, not wielding the veto pen for six damn years. His ramrodded Medicare Part D legislation was a ridiculously extravagant expansion of the welfare state. This, from a Republican? With a Republican congress, no less? Is this the LBJ Administration Redux?

Hell, both major parties are in the business of buying votes with redistributed wealth. I object. That’s my money they’re using to buy votes, and your vote for “change” is a vote to open the spending floodgates for congress. I won’t stand for that.

Furthermore, I am not convinced that Mr. Obama would not weaken this country’s defenses, but that’s another post for another time. On the other side of the coin, I do not believe that Mr. McCain has a firm grasp on the economy, but what can a president really do about the business cycle? Not much.

Hey, do you notice how inconsequential former hot-button issues like abortion become when people are feeling the tightening in their purse strings? Goes to show you where the national mindset is. Yep, that’s right. Firmly lodged in the personal wallet. When times are good, we can get all bent out of shape about stuff like abortion, but when we’re feeling the pain, it’s me first! Nobody seems to care which candidate goes which way on abortion this time around, just as long as they’re promising a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage. The almighty issue of abortion is finally relegated to the back seat it deserves. Hallelujah!

Shifting gears, I’ll move to another thing that is getting on my nerves. Let’s just bail out all the mindless idiots who leveraged their credit cards to the hilt and then thought they could do the same with houses, shall we? Those poor, poor people. Duped by the greedy bankers. They didn’t know any better. Yeah, so that’s why they make good voters. Whoever can make them feel better, placate them—with MY money—will get their votes. You can bet that both sides of the aisle will be feeling very generous with MY money. What a convenient issue to pop up just prior to a national election! Bastards!

I did it right. I have no mortgage. I have no car loans or leases. I have no debts. Yet now I have to pay dearly because some assholes thought they could buy champagne on a beer budget? I have no sympathy for them. No, instead I want someone to save my damn wallet for sure! Instead of trying to shore up this house of cards, we should let it tumble and rebuild our credit system on a firmer foundation. However, congress is not about to take any such painful steps. They’ll just continue to spend my money to the tune of enthusiastic cheerleading by our sitting president and the two wannabes. Crap!

So, I’m still up in the air about just whom I’ll vote for in November. Libertarian candidate Bob Barr is tempting. Alas, our two-party system is too firmly entrenched to expect the Libertarians to make any significant gains. Furthermore, this short-sighted, feel-good, gimme gimme gimme generation of voters has been conditioned to expect that government will take care of them from cradle to grave, which is decidedly antithetical to Libertarian philosophy—and mine. Can somebody help me out of this morass by giving me some reason to vote for McCain, other than that he would provide a strong national defense, or giving me some reason to vote for Obama, other than that he is a change from that which cannot be changed? How about not telling me why I should not vote for somebody, for a change?

Oh, and how about exhibiting a sign of intelligence by injecting a little humor into your political diatribe? I’m growing weary of the darkly impassioned, ornery, humorless bleating of the goats on either side of the fence. It’s not a black and white world (or should I say red and blue), and you people are being downright nasty to each other. How about not taking yourselves so seriously, for a change? We’re all in this together. All the liberals and conservatives I know are nice people, yet many of them put the blinkers on when in the presence of those of the other persuasion. The world is composed of shades of gray, and all this red/blue polarity is really destructive. Let’s get back to give and take. Neither McCain nor Obama is all bad and neither is all good. It’s just easier to look at it that way, so we’re ceding this election to the whims of lazy minds. Let’s not.

This post has been brought to you by the Mouse Who Ate Xanax, who is solely responsible for its content.

Tim Russert dies of heart attack

Friday, June 13th, 2008

I was saddened to hear that Tim Russert of NBC News and long-time host of Meet the Press collapsed in his office today and died of a heart attack at age 58.

Those of us who consider ourselves journalists, as well as those of us like this Turkey who pretend to be journalists, can view the corpus of work assembled over Russert’s journalistic career as a model of integrity and substance, something to live up to. Russert never shied away from asking the tough question and never arrived at an interview without doing his research. He didn’t shoot from the hip; he took aim, took a breath, and squeezed off his shots, which seldom missed the mark.

Russert was serious when he needed to be, but he frequently mixed in a lighter side, which revealed his humanity. Family was everything to him, and always came first. He appeared to genuinely like the vast preponderance of his interviewees, who responded by returning the favor. He always appeared to be humble, never full of himself like many other journalists. He was always himself.

Although family and work came first, Tim Russert was a devout football fan. His beloved Buffalo Bills never won the Super Bowl for him, which he deserved at least once.  It is sad that he did not live to see that dream come true.

I watched Meet the Press every Sunday, and it was because of Tim Russert that I did. I feel as if I have lost a friend.

My heart goes out to the Russert Family and to all who knew him. Saddened though I am, I cannot presume to imagine the pain of their loss.

Nut Case Alert!

Monday, May 5th, 2008

PETA has spoken. In the wake of the tragic Kentucky Derby place finish of the ill-fated filly Eight Belles, they have written a nastygram to the person in charge: Senator Hillary Clinton. Furthermore, just to make sure Hillary gets the message, they’re writing another nastygram to daughter Chelsea. PETA knows how to play dirty, too, thank you very much.

If you don’t know by this time, Eight Belles broke both front ankles as she charged down the stretch in a game effort to catch Big Brown, the big colt that won the race. While Big Brown was enjoying his moment of glory in the winner’s circle, Eight Belles was being euthanized on the track where she had broken down. She paid $10.60 and $6.40, posthumously.

I do not dispute the notion that the Kentucky Horse Racing Association should investigate the circumstances surrounding the filly’s tragic injury. Without being prompted to do so, the KHRA did, in fact, initiate such an investigation, which is routine anytime an animal dies on the track.

However, our nutball friends at PETA are taking this opportunity to make their silly-ass noises to expand their notariety, not only writing to Hillary and Chelsea, but also calling for the dismissal and banning of the jockey, who was out there trying to do his job. Their position is that the life of the horse is far more important than a man’s ability to earn a living and feed his family. In the meanwhile, they exploit this tragic incident to further their own questionable agenda.

PETA has had horse racing (the sport of kings) in its cross-hairs for a long time, claiming that it constitutes cruelty to their precious animals, which people “bet on just like a poker hand.” They equate it to dog fighting. If these yo-yos had their way, you wouldn’t even be able to kick your neighbor’s dog’s ass for taking a crap on your lawn.

Well, I don’t know about you, brother, but if I had had the choice, I sure as hell would have opted for a life consisting of two or three years of hard work followed by a career of chasing fillies and brood mares on some cushy stud farm. Just ask any stallion if he would have it any other way! If he could talk, he’d hoist his middle finger in PETA’s direction, and whinny out a great big belly laugh.

I know that only a small percentage of the overall racing population winds up enjoying those romantically bucolic rendezvoux, but what the hell. It would be worth the gamble. If I couldn’t compete I’d deserve to be horse meat on some foreigner’s plate or to spend my afterlife holding together the binding of a book.

Besides, now that the Swiss government has engaged a panel to report on man’s offenses against the dignity of plants and considers “beheading” wildflowers as cruelty to plants, one has to believe that the mere existence of horses constitutes cruelty to oats.

You can read the full text of the letter to Hillary in this Political Punch blog post from ABC News.

Does anyone out there—especially in the wonderful world of politics—have the balls to shut these wankers the hell up?

Voters of Pennsylvania, Hear Me Out

Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008

People of Pennsylvania, here are 10 reasons why voting for Senator Obama will be a mistake:

  1. “Change” is not a viable platform. Change to what?
  2. You’re kidding yourself if you think this junior senator can change the way Washington works. For him to suggest he can do so affirms either his cluelessness or his mendacity. (Probably, the latter.)
  3. You say you’re voting for him because he’ll end the war? More cluelessness on his part. There are no easy answers. Colin Powell recently stated that whoever inherits the war will be stuck with a slow withdrawal, as we can neither sustain the current troop levels there nor can we withdraw abruptly. Anyone who hands the enemy a schedule for our withdrawal is handing them the keys to Iraq and the ability to exert significant control over the Middle East and the world. Don’t let this sweet talker con you into believing that there’s an easy or quick way out of Iraq and Afghanistan. There isn’t. Yeah, it’s partially about oil. So what? You drive to work don’t you? So shut up already about protecting our oil interests. You can’t have it both ways!
  4. There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch. Expansive social programs cost money. That money eventually comes out of your pocket. Don’t be fooled into thinking that it will all come from “rich people.” It comes from taxpayers. We all pay taxes.
  5. Speaking of rich people, poor folks can not afford to run for President of the United States. Not many of us earn more than $4 million per year, as Obama does.
  6. However, he’ll make more money by playing populist games, like asking Congress to selectively increase capital gains taxes on “the wealthy”, which may or may not be defined by him as anyone making more than $200,000 per year. In other words, those members of society whose investments create jobs will be given a disincentive to invest. People will be punished for the industriousness that yielded the reward of a high income.
  7. Meanwhile, Obama doesn’t really relate to the masses. He says they “cling to” religion and guns and disdain people who aren’t like them. In other words, he knows what is best for them but they don’t.
  8. So, he would propose to confiscate wealth and redistribute it according to need established by “the government.” This didn’t work out very well for the Soviet Union, and it sure as hell won’t work here.
  9. This is a guy who whines about reporters and debate moderators asking him tough questions. Is that very Presidential? He who sits in the Oval Office will bear the brunt of the Fourth Estate—there are no exemptions. Obama won’t change Washington, and this is an endemic part of Washington.
  10. Obama will be a one-term president—not unlike Jimmy Carter, who also thought he could change things in Washington—which will guarantee Republican rule for at least the following twelve years, just like it did when Carter disgraced the Oval Office. If you long for good, solid Democrats—not these modern liberal, heads-up-the-ass weenies who sit in their lofty perches and tell us all what we should be doing—you’ll put the Clinton machine back in charge of things. It’s your only chance to take serious, long-term control of Washington. Mark my words: if Obama is elected, not only will he be a one-termer, but also the Democrats will lose both houses of congress due to popular dissatisfaction with his Communist approach to government.

Really, folks. You’re Pennsylvanians, not liberal New Yorkers and sure as hell not San Franciscans. Do you really want this crap? THINK about what I’ve written above and do your own research. If you find flaws in my logic, then fine. I’ll stand corrected. If you don’t and if you wind up electing Obama president just because you want “change,” don’t say I didn’t warn you!