Regardless of your political moniker you probably find the phrases; conservative, liberal, democrat, republican, neo-con, socialist too broad. These finite boxes others try to place us in feel too confining and entirely incomplete. Akin to the 12 zodiac signs, The name "Scorpio" falls woefully short as an adequate description even if you toss in a Leo as your ascending sign.
These limiting labels are by nature a disservice to any useful political dialog. The purpose seems to be to tie you into all the things a certain box entails. Struggle as you might to get an occasional..."but I don't..." in edgewise, your tagged with labels that seemingly discount your yet to be shared opinion. Like a polar bear struggling to get out of an poorly tailored suit, attempting to disassociate yourself from your duly assigned box is a difficult enterprise. If your like me even the parts of your assigned box that appeal to you come with incomplete descriptions articulated by woefully inadequate representatives. It feels like your drunk uncle standing to make the family thanksgiving pre-dinner prayer...he means well but slurs the message.
So, the first assignment to you as a new member of this newly formed group comes as a friendly request from your "oh so humble" administrator.
In this age of cloning, take a moment to describe yourself in poetically waxing terms, animal personification or any combination there of. Feel free to discard the limits of the approximate 48,000 phyla of the animal realm. Toss in colors, imaginative parts of seemingly unrelated mammals even go mythological if need be.
In short, describe to the group your political species in terms a bit broader (and hopefully more humorously) than the moronic and confining bifurcation of Donkey or Elephant.
Here's an example;
A Republican by birth (meaning my mother and father were Democrats), I broke away from the crowd in a very tangible sense. In 1960 during the Kennedy/Nixon campaign, then NY Governor Nelson Rockefeller came to my little old home town of Dover, Delaware. There amongst the throng of supporters were my mother and father (wearing Kennedy buttons) and me their 3 year old child. I got away from my mother just long enough to toddled up the steps of the dias where "Rocky" was all too eager to pick up a suspender clad tot for the proverbial "baby kiss". Unfortunately for my parents the next day their child appeared with Rocky on the front page of the Delaware State News. I'm sure it was a tough thing to explain in the "Kennedy for President" campaign office and Colt Lanes bowling alley bar on that faithful day.
In 1976 I was finally old enough to vote. Ronald Reagan was running against Gerald Ford for the GOP nomination (ironically Rocky was the unelected VP). My first vote?...a write-in vote for Ronald Reagan. Nelson Rockefllers kiss was a bit too blue blood and wet for my taste. In the GOP primary Reagan had been barely defeated by Ford who was then trounced by Jimmy Carter.
That said, I am one part GOP, with a Teddy Roosevelt slant, hence a bit more than miffed with the current White House resident. One part Southern Democrat (after all Delaware lies on the Mason-Dixon line). In fact the books I've read show the line coming to Delaware and stopping. There were gray states and blue states but in my history book in Dover Middle School Delaware was shaded light purple. That probably is the reason I am a long suffering lifelong Minnesota Viking fan :(
You see Delaware never left the union but were not exactly antislavery (lots of agricultural interest in Southern Delaware),
Then add one part New England "don't tread on me". The end result is a sort of Libertarianism tempered by a pragmatic 21st century view. My tequilla/gin/vodka/single-malt Bourbon enhanced brain has been formed by 32 years of experience in this fluid and ever changing dog-eat-dog business world.
So, I'm a red, white and blue Elephant wearing P-and-L rhinestone laden ballet shoes...always trying to gracefully carry my enormous girth. This "ELE-RINA" remembers a time when conservative meant lesser government, a fair but laisse-faire business landscape and staying out of others peoples personal business.
How about you?
Posted: Aug 5, 07 6:21pm
I doubt I can wax as poetic as wcb, our fearless leader, so I'll try for accurate. Raised by Irish Catholic union-supporters (I was a teenager before I learned that crossing a picket line was not a cardinal sin) we had signed photos of JFK around the house, my parents were suburban PTA civil rights activists, and we kids were all raised on social justice and doing the right thing. I lobbied for McGovern, marched on Washington, and helped arrange the local participation for the first earth day, all before getting out of high school. But I was late-born for the hippie thing, and have a strong practical side. So, as I got old enough to understand business and financial realities (as in figuring out how to pay for college), I became one of those fiscally conservative, socially conscious types....which means neither dems nor republicans really resonated with me. I want less government, but I want that government to take care of those less fortunate. I want personal rights, but I want business to be able to succeed and thrive as well. I'm a capitalist who still tries to believe that capitalism can be honorable. I want protection of the earth to be part of the financial equation we deal with when assessing costs (for business or individuals) but I fully admit I don't know how to make that happen. I hate the erosion of civil liberties, but were I in charge I can't say where I'd draw the line between individual rights and protecting the whole. I hate the war in the middle east, but feel that we as a country are responsible now that we started it, and also hate the idea of leaving now that we've gone in and wreaked havoc. I want out of there, and to bring our soldiers home, but I don't want more innocent lives lost by an abrupt and ill planned withdrawal.
I hate that the money invested there has cost us social services at home, but I truly don't know how to value one group of people in need over another.
Think globally and act locally resonated the first time I heard it...I want to take care of those at home not instead of those abroad, but in addition to. I want a government that will do all possible to avoid war, not just because war is wrong, but because we know from experience that it doesnt work. I know if we could learn to practice peace in our communities, we'd do better at it in the world. But I also know thats not easy, and there is no clear path one can express in a sound bite, so its not really a factor in our political process.
So, if I have to be categorized, I thnk I'd be called either a starry eyed idealist or a tree-hugging liberal, depending on who is doing the labeling. I think politics brings out the worst in people, and the need to compromise to get ahead means that no one high enough up the food chain to be president can actually have any real character left. So in that regard I'm either a wizened old cynic or an astute realist, depending again on who you talk to. I always vote, without ever (since my childhood McGovern fixation) really believing in a candidate, it's always been a lesser of evils thing. I can't get excited about any of the candidates, but I get rabid on the issues: free trade, civil rights in all its forms (that ALL men and women are created equal), support for education and anything that helps children, fair pay and access to jobs, green living and preserving the planet, health care as a right for everyone, and a responsibility of a well to do populace, that we each need to leave the earth a little better than we found it. Ok, even I think I sound starry eyed and flaky, but I wrap all of this in my goal of sound fiscal practices and the knowledge that we have to prioritize what we value so we invest our money and talents in what matters most.
So, wcb, do I belong in this group? Having written this (thanks for suggesting it) I now know why I've shied away from political forums; I don't fit in any group, my views cross party lines, and I like exploring ideas, not platforms. Anyone else want to weigh in?
Posted: Aug 6, 07 11:10am
you nailed it. The whole idea is to show how foolish these labels are. Of course it was also an open book test, no way to get anything but an A, but your submission is A+.
Let's see how many more brave, independent "box-phobic" tee bee dee'ers we get.
Nicely Done, Enjoyable
Posted: Jan 7, 08 10:08pm
You run for president, I'll be your VP! =D
That is just the kind of common sense I keep hoping to hear from our candidates, and never do.
Posted: Aug 6, 07 4:30pm
Like many people, I've jumped back and forth across the political jumprope. I've voted for Ronald Regan, I've worked on campaigns for John Anderson and Dennis Kucinich.
I prefer to vote for the person whom I think will do the best job, be it President, Senator or Mayor or even School Board.
Dividing us, keeping us apart, encouraging us to label each other, ourselves and our 'enemies', keeps us distracted from the majority of issues and things going on behind that curtain.
We've been scared of and fearing the Great And Powerful Oz for so long, we've forgotten that it's just a little dude back there.
One that works for US.
It's time we took that power back.
The 2006 midterms were a good start.
Posted: Sep 1, 07 4:07pm
Oh boy. Stop me when I reach 30 pages... No, let's see if I can be succinct. I hate the parties - I hate the war rhetoric they use against each other, and the fact that inciting fear and hatred ("Have you heard what those scurrilous [Republicans/Democrats] are doing NOW?!") seems to be the way to squeeze money out of people, and squeezing money out of people seems to be the way to win elections.
I'd like to think of myself as independent, but issue-by-issue I come down on the progressive-liberal side 95% of the time, and always have. I DO find the Democrats at their most annoying when they are doing the populist pandering thing, like demonizing oil company profits when people start whining about gas prices.
The issues closest to my heart now are concerns about how politics is done in this country - the money, the rancor, and the divisiveness. So, though I disagree with him on 90% of the issues, my current hero is the Governator.
Posted: Jan 5, 08 6:15pm
I'm recycling this due to all the new members that have joined our band since it's posting.
HEY NEWBIES,...are you a Heffalump or Woozle?
Posted: Jan 5, 08 7:54pm
Have voted across the board/ballot all my adult life. Have NEVER (sorry did not mean to shout) voted a straight ticket and have never (that's better) held a civlized conversation with anyone who has. He who votes a straight ticket has invalidated his vote. The purpose of Democracy--Republic means to have and exercise a free choice and when you vote for "Party" you vote for them(italics mine)---not you!
Am not even an Independent anymore because I've heard that someone/somewhere has got a copyright on that word and is forming--has formed-- a political party using the one word that we "independent" thinkers could identify with. We are talking big time Oxymoron here. Woe is me and woe is us. Don't tell me that Pogo was right. "I have seen the enemy and he is us." Okay, maybe he was right. In that case, I'm gonna become one of THEM!
The Heffalumps Emerging Majority
Posted: Jan 5, 08 11:53pm
It will be hard to write something original and not go picking and choosing off the other poster's plates... but we really all seem to be the same party. Pretty much.
My great-uncle probably had the most influence on my early political leanings as I spent most of my childhood with him and his wife. A staunch unionist, he worked for the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad in Maintenance of the Way all his life, just like my grandpa, their middle brother, their dad, and a nephew.
He saw daylight savings time as a bid for more after-work tennis and compulsory public education as a way to keep the kids busy while mom & dad worked as well as a way to keep those kids dumb enough that all they could do when they grew up was work for the company.
Personally, I'm a bit more mellow than that. I'm for government social responsibility, especially toward our past and returning service(wo)men and their families. I think it is the greatest slap in our collective face when our government doesn't follow through on promises to these heroes.
I think health care should be provided like other emergency services (fire/police), but I would also imagine a thriving second tier of specialty practices for nonessential & volunteer procedures. I find most 'solutions' don't work because they aren't written with win-win in mind. We have to think about more than our own pet side of an issue.
As I said, for the most part I'm in agreement/alignment with what Janet, Will, Brian, and wmans have said. I can even agree wholeheartedly with your Teddy Roosevelt slant, WC.
Where I think I derail from the rest of you is my tempering of free trade with heavy penalties for corporates operating on our soil in any capacity that are raping either the planet or the populace... anywhere. Put the fines toward our non-banking debt. I know there are good companies out there. I'd like to help them get ahead and help new ones get started.
Overall I generally distrust anyone who actually wants a public office. I haven't trusted a president since Carter & I really wish Bobby had lived (or maybe just think I do.) I'm not thrilled with any of the republican candidates. As for the dems, if I thought he'd stand a chance, I'd have voted for DK a couple of times now. I didn't like Kerry and still distrust Edwards. I'll defend Al to the death (against worthy Fromz, most likely), but I don't want him serving more than a cabinet position for now. No more Bush/No more Clinton.
Obama is the best thing I've seen in ages.
Guess I'm a starry-eyed tree-hugger cleverly, but not contentedly, disguised as a democrat. This year anyway.
Posted: Jan 6, 08 6:50am
I am surprised/pleased not to see anyone who is a diehard Dem/Rep. I agree with wmans that voting a straight ticket shows a complete lack of thought on the voters part. If this small group is so diverse, imagine the political diversity of a state or a country. So why do the major candidates still regurgitate the same party line over and over? We might as well have a computer run for office.
As for my leanings now:
When I was new to the south, I was shocked on primary day, when voting as a republican I was the only one in that line! The years here have softened me and seeing many poor and discouraged people I understand why they believe only the democrats can help them. But here is the problem, deeply in the bible belt, the same people will preach against gay marriage and evolution then vote for the candidate that supports those things as long as they also support government handouts.
So what have I learned? To look for the candidate that has the best chance to make the country stable and prosperous even if I disagree with them sometimes.
That might make me a heffawoozalump but it's not as ugly as it sounds.
Posted: Jan 27, 08 10:08am
Since I don't vote in the States I didn't answer this before now.
In Canada I have not always kept with one party. I too vote for the person I feel will be best for the job. I have voted for these 3 parties in the past, the NDP, the Liberals, and the Green Party. I don't expect anyone to know about Canadian politics. Just wanted to let you know since I am a fairly vocal newbie.
Posted: Jan 6, 08 12:22am
Not that I enjoy sounding like a total idiot, the first thought that came to mind when I read "heffalump and woozle" was Dr. Seuss!
So much for my political intelligence! And with that, I'll stop before I expose myself any farther!
Posted: Jan 6, 08 8:35am
You didnt miss some profound new story. H and W was a term I decided to use to mock the attempt of political pundits to categorize us in to such finite boxes. There is no Political IQ/experience required to chime in here. In fact, the fresher the face/idea the better IMHO
However, to be perfectly accurate H and W are characters for Winnie the Pooh!
Posted: Jan 6, 08 7:44am
I consider myself neither, tend to vote for the person rather than the party. My voting record since 18 has been Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Dole, Bush II, and again Bush II (regrettably).
I am from a deeply conservative state (Alabama), funny because used to be almost 100% Democrat, but now very much a Republican state. So much so that the Democratic candidate never campaigns here, waste of time and money. Republican candidate rarely does, because assumes already has locked up.
Some would consider me a liberal: pro abortion, yes that's right, pro "abortion", not pro "choice". I hate that term, this country was founded on the freedom to choose. Anti war, pro universal healthcare, pro education, whatever the cost.
On the other hand I could be considered conservative: pro capital punishment, anti welfare (there needs to be limits), small government, states rights, strong military (why I voted for W).
I cannot get excited about any candidate from either party. I refuse to vote for Clinton just because she's a woman, and I refuse to vote for Obama just because he's black. I feel some minor excitement for Ron Paul but he has no chance of winning. Too scary for the status quo. Rudy maybe?? Nah, too much personal baggage. McCain?? His time has passed. Thompson?? How boring can one man be.
Romney? Can he get past his Mormonism?
Edwards?? He's so fake, he looks like a freakin' mannequin.
I'm actually considering not voting at all, which will be the first time ever since turning 18. This has those around me dismayed and upset since I am the most vocal and active politically in my circle.
I need to be excited, like when I first voted. Or when I first heard the man from Hope.
Posted: Jan 6, 08 5:12pm
mel; don't look over your shoulder because YOU are the one all the candidates get watery-mouthed over--because the vast majority of people in this country no longer vote. If they/he/she can get you out in November '08 they can walk the rest of the way. Please don't let the "Voters" make Your choice for you--you make it. Thanx.
Posted: Jan 6, 08 8:24am
This came from Weird State Laws Forum on a newsletter I subscribe to... thought you'd like to know that we pay people to think up and pass these laws, proving once again, Will Roger's truism, that Legislatures/Congress is oft-times a joke...
Question 1: In which state is it illegal to fall asleep with your shoes on? North Dakota
Question 2: In New York, the penalty for jumping off a building is: Death
Question 3: In Kansas, you cannot shoot a rabbit from: A motorboat
Question 4: In what state is sunshine guaranteed to the masses? California
Question 5: Which food cannot be served in Wisconsin state prisons? Butter substitutes
Question 6: What states can you not cross between while wearing a chicken on your head? Minnesota and Wisconsin
Question 7: Which animal are you not allowed to have in the back seat of your car in Massachusetts? A gorilla
Question 8: Before committing a crime in Texas, criminals must: Warn the victim 24 hours in advance
Question 9: In which state is it illegal to sleep on top of a refrigerator outdoors? Pennsylvania
Question 10: In which state is it illegal to go trick-or-treating on Halloween? Virginia
It'd be great in 2008 if Group Member WhiteManitou were elected President with wbciv49 Veep... I'd be happy to campaign for y'all...
;-)
Posted: Jan 6, 08 1:21pm
LanSr, I've seen #1 enforced.
Falling asleep with your shoes on, according to one master's student, is tantamount to passing out.
Usually there is no trial. And the sentencing? Shaving cream if lenient, Sharpie artwork if the judge is a sadist.
Posted: Jan 6, 08 8:44am
with all of the media blasts and fingerpointing and with eleven months until the election I am becoming a
GRINCH!!!
Posted: Jan 27, 08 1:09pm
Does that mean I get coal for Christmas? DANG! Bite my tongue... gives off carbon dioxide when burned....
OK, I'll be the little doggie that doesn't wanna haul the gift sleigh...
work for you? Works for moi...
p.s. think you are downright...(won't go there)...
Posted: Jan 6, 08 9:24am
This is going to be a "long one".
The first I remember thinking about politics was as a child when Ike and Adlai were running. I kept trying to figure out why the "I Like Ike" worked so well and the "All the way with Adlai" was not going over as well. I figured Ike was the big General in WWll. People must like war hero's and dislike intellectuals. fast forward to Kennedy Nixon when I was in middle school and freshman HS. I didn't like Kennedy because I kept hearing about the Pope ruling the US. Later, my HS was the first to initiate the Kennedy "physical fitness" program and issue "colored gym trunks". in accordance with hard work and physical performance.I worked hard and made the Top color my junior year despite the fact that my sports skills sucked. Add to that Kennedy's calling Kruschev's hand. I cried "foul" when he was assassinated and never believed Johnson didn't "know" what really happened.Oh and BTW, I liked Goldwater because I felt he wouldn't "pussyfoot" around in Vietnam.
Next was Nixon and Humphrey. I knew Humphrey didn't stand a chance because he was an intellectual and was compared to " Humptey Dumpty". I watched Nixon get us into the black financially, open relations with China and thought "Not too shabby". Then Ford? Well, he was the nice "Father Figure". But his "whip inflation now" just didn't cut it for me. Along comes Carter. At first I thought "Billy Beer", Libya, trying to talk Chrisitanity to a Bhuddist
believing foreign leader? Huge inflation?
Iran Hostages?. But, I later changed to believe the guy was probably one of the few honest and sincere politicians in my life time. Along comes Reagan with his elitist crap and Nancy's redecorate, screw those with problems who don't plan.
Then, Reagan's "contrived"release of the Iranian hostages after his election, his "simplification" of the tax system in 1986,the behavior of his cabinet members and appointees and I began to understand the affect of "spin" and media on the masses. I won't even talk about the Mondale issue. What a dumb selection on the part of the Dumbacrats!
Bush/Dukakis? I knew Bush l would win for 2 reasons: He was taller and had more presence (WWll fighter pilot) than Dukakis. And, he was head of the CIA at one time.And, a third reason: he was a "team player" for the Repugnant Party.
Clinton: CHARISMA! I didn't like Dole when he ran. But, regretted my choice later when I found out he (Dole) had a real sense of humor and could admit his faults.GWB? I just hated him right off! Cocky little rich kid who I "knew" would get the presidency by "hook or by crook".
I want to see some responsiblity for taking care of the US first. Afghanistan: we pretty much had to make that move. Iraq was pure BS from the "get go". All I have to do is watch and see who is prospering and who is being downgraded. I see Obama as inexperienced but capable of inspiring NEW VISION in the US. Hillary has good points but she is just too "disliked" to win. Edwards: I agree with the mannequin analogy. Mitt (religious issues) and the same BS different face. Huckleberry (Ah yes the Cross) and some BS different face. Giuliani: still riding the wave of 9/11.Biden? There seems to be a lack of support for him.
I would like to see some real "vision" and positive direction for this country. Let's find a way to "defang" corporate fascism without destroying the benefit the corporations can provide us. Let's find a way to deal with the immigration problem without singling out one country (Mexico). Let's stop the churches from using state welfare systems to support their importation of LEGAL immigrants (immigration reform or enforcing existing laws and loopholes) Let's start trying to explore alternative energy sources that will break our dependence on oil and the greed that accompany self perpetuation of companys exploiting us for our dependence on them.
No more wars unless we are attacked. It would be nice to be the "Savior of the World". But, can we really afford it? Show me a person who can provide the most of these benefits or comes closest and THAT is who I will believe in.
What does that make me? Probably none of the above. But, I DO believe we have the capacity to go beyond the media crap and the "image" BS. I believe we CAN find a good leader (albeit the lesser evil)
Posted: Jan 6, 08 5:38pm
white, re; No more wars unless we are attacked.
When the Clintons were in the WH, we were attacked no fewer than a half-dozen times--albeit overseas. And Clinton did doodley-shit. And, tho it was not HIS war-- he cut and run in Somalia when a dozen marines were killed rather than go after the freaking warlord who ordered the action. True, you will say, we did not belong there in the first place but we were, and when that draft-dodging c----s---ker pulled out, All of the terrorists (and that is really what they are--not Freedom Fighters) in that part of the world knew the US did not have the balls to stand and fight. If they are proven right in the forthcoming election and the Persian Gulf countries are left to fend for themselves----if we think we have an "immigration" problema now with Mexico---Holy Mackerel Sapphire,you ain't seen nuthin yet when the armed and well financed Islamicists start hitting our shores. Think I'm an alarmist? Read some of the posts of Osama. That guy is Hitler with a beard and a lot more followers. I know you are good with words white, but in this matter, don;t shoot the messenger--'cause that is all I am.
Posted: Jan 6, 08 5:52pm
wmans:
No apologys from me for Clinton.I guess the words I should have used would have been. NO BS reasons! We were tricked into agreeing with the Iraq thing. Maybe you believe in WMD. But, I believe it was BS to get us into something we did not belong in or that was premature. I agree about Osama. But, attacking a petty dictator while pursuing Osama was VERY poor strategy at the very best.
Posted: Jan 8, 08 4:57pm
A whole lotta big words! I'm scared.
Smile!
Punkin
Posted: Jan 8, 08 7:54pm
Dont be scared Piglet Punkin...engage!!!
Posted: Jan 8, 08 8:18pm
FWIW... I'm pissed off... Obama, Obama, when they should be saying Beautiful Candy, Candy... oh, but she's Aunt Jemima... the most beautiful black woman with a genius IQ, DANG, we can't have that if she's Republican, and oops. dang, she's for.... wbciv49, get this ... beyond Bad Wimmens thangs, ... peace?
PEACE? What color is that?
Isn't how amaZing that what's her name. Condoleeza Rice, ain't worthy of anyone?
Oh , yeah, she'e Aunt Jemima, don't Count, was an Aunt Jemima, din't ya know....
Posted: Jan 8, 08 8:52pm
WTF are you talking about LANSR? I was unaware she was running for anything except Bush's good graces. (DR RICE Phd).
Have you been hitting the tequilla? Please explain! Or are you just reacting to Hillary and Obama????? I am confused!
Posted: Jan 8, 08 8:56pm
No, he was amzing if I were cute, or worthy of a bootie kicking.... Hell of a way to determine men's testerone, but there we go (check!)....
BIG TIP!
Posted: Jan 8, 08 9:17pm
More confusion! What am I missing? Do I need tp take a brain pill? I am totally clueless!
Posted: Jan 27, 08 2:40pm
This comment is fucked up LanSr. Did you take your meds today sir?
;-) Or maybe a little too much tequila = maybe you ate that damn worm!!!
Posted: Jan 27, 08 5:50pm
No meds, other than life-sustaining. No booze.... no painkillers...
What the Hell was LanSr saying?
Haven't got a clue... musta made sense in a thwarted sense of reality at the time... (sowy all)...
For all's info - I pretty much am off painkillers - would rather keep a logical brain cell than a weird one... I don't hurt any less, but I think better.
I think....
Blessings all, and it's going to be great in 2008!
moi
Posted: Jan 9, 08 12:46pm
* includes photos
I hate to say this but there really is a woozle
Posted: Jan 9, 08 1:05pm
Being Libertarian, and from Texas, guess ahm a Woozalump... or somesuch... Flying Phoenix, good to see you on Board... White Manitou, as always thought-provoking, wbciv49 Veep meat, others... well you are y'all...
Posted: Jan 27, 08 2:49pm
* includes photos
Woozle: Check Wikipedia=
Character from Winnie the Pooh
for the history of these characters.
Stan Woozle reprimands his bumbling sidekick, Heff Heffalump.
Posted: Jan 20, 08 11:54am
What is interesting about all of the comments so far is that there doesn’t appear to be any “hard liners”. Everyone seems to be winding their way through the maze of politicians, picking and choosing the best they can.
I hate to be categorized, as I can’t fully support any one group. I guess that point has already been made. I tend the believe that even with someone with the highest integrity, the political climate is such that one is forced to compromise their values to a point where they are rarely what they were when they started. My father used to say that all politicians where crooks and if any of his children ever became politicians he would disown them.
I always vote, mainly for the sole reason so I have complaining rights. If you don’t vote you can’t complain. The down side of voting is that you implicitly agree to abide by the outcome. Otherwise don’t vote, revolt.
In my whimsical mind I would vote for Hilary Clinton, and only for the historical significance of it. When will we ever have the opportunity for a husband/wife president? After all we have had two father/son presidents (Adams and Bush) Grandfather/Grandson (Harrison) and a couple of cousins (Roosevelt’s, and Madison, Taylor). I realize that this is no basis for selecting our president but I am just cynical enough not to believe that any one will be that bad or that good.
I tend to think that, regardless if I agree with their politics or not, by the time a politician has made it to the presidency of the US they have demonstrated a remarkable amount of intelligence. I tend to ignore the political rhetoric and try to focus on who benefits from what actions. All the politicians say all the right warm-fuzzy stuff that stirs you emotions and patriotism, so much so that I have stopped listening; maybe a bad thing, maybe not.
I remembering watching the Watergate hearings, amused at the Ford administration. I have felt that Carter was a lot better than given credit for. I started voting during the Reagan era and although I didn’t like Reagan it seems that historically he has a hand in bring down the fall of communism. I didn’t trust Bush-1 although he did what he promised in Iraq. I liked Clinton and he did bomb Afghanistan (does any one remember?) I don’t like Bush-2, although I agree with invading Afghanistan but I wonder what are we doing in Iraq. I feel that the current administration has hijacked our democracy for their own ends.
As for voting for these guys I generally vote for third party candidates. I just have a hard time fully supporting any of the main two party candidates. My family tends to vote for the candidate that will say they will help us. Currently we have a tree farm in Oregon and with the current inheritance laws we will probably lose the farm to inheritance taxes. The Republicans at least give lip service to tax reforms.
I tend to favor keeping our resources in the hands of small business, I support small to medium size companies as long as they have a working partnership with the community in which they are. I look for win/win solutions rather than win/loss, although I wont disregard that at times there has to be a win/loss outcome to some conflicts.
I believe we should help people but not to the point where they become dependant on the help but to help them become independent.
I also believe in not rambling on for more than one page at a time.
Posted: Jan 20, 08 12:01pm
That was darn good rambling...I was hard pressed to find anything I didnt agree with. That means were either both kooks or there are alot more of us out there than the election results to date would indicate. Things that make you go HHHHMMM!
Posted: Jan 20, 08 2:21pm
yes, that was a good read. I do have one disagreement though. You said "if you don't vote you can't complain". Oh if that were only true! In America, the ones who don't or can't vote complain the loudest!
Posted: Jan 20, 08 3:29pm
Yes, there is little for me to disagree with either. Except on the topic of cynicism. "I am just cynical enough not to believe that any one will be that bad or that good." The last time I believed that too was in 2000, and the last 8 years for me have been a series of nasty shocks. (Well, about 3 years ago, I started to get used to it.) With every new encroachment on civil rights, I wondered, "Would Gore really have responded that way too?" Who knows?
BTW, the latest move to exempt more family farms from inheritance tax was done by a Democrat-controlled legislature. I guess sometimes even the politicians themselves won't stay in their neat little boxes!