Fear and Loathing in the White House: Election Eve thoughts from an independent
My first ever election was the 1992 Presidential Election. Bush vs. Clinton. Two men that make you want to vote for Ross Perot, which is exactly what I did. That started me on an interesting road of political middle of the road-ness over the next 12 years.
When I registered to vote on the day I turned 18, Sept 27, 1992, I registered Republican. My first political memory was during the 1980 Presidential Election. I was in Kindergarten. Reagan had said something very funny to a 6 y.o. Looking back, I suppose that's not entirely surprising. Anyway, he had made me laugh and, in spite of the fact that my parents were ardent Dems, I "voted" for Reagan in my Kindergarten class. Carter won by some obscene vote of 15-3. Whatever. It was a Catholic school in a Union strong hold, but from taht day forward, until the day I walked into the booth in 1992, I chose to back the party of my Grandfather, a successful businessman. The kind of man that would have voted for Goldwater without batting an eye. And he was also my hero.
But then I had to choose between a weasle (Bush, Sr.) and a guy who, in every single interview, I KNEW was lying. Just saying exactly what needed to be said to make people like him. So I voted for Perot. And I'd have done the same given another chance. In addition to not trusting him, after having seen him as President for 8 years, I don't care all that much for his policies either.
In 1996, I couldn't vote for Perot again. But I wasn't voting for Clinton. And Dole, nah. So I wrote in The Brain with Pinky as his running mate.
4 years later, I didn't get to vote (long story involving where I thought I was registered and where i actually WAS registered). But had I the chance, I would have certainly voted for Nader.
I'm a political indipendent. I'm Socially Liberal and Fiscally Conservative. I cringe at the thought that on occation, I actually agree with Gov. Aaahnald. I'm a middle of the road weenie who's used to not liking 50% of what the President d'jour stands for. In Clinton's case, that would be about 60%. In Bush Jr.'s case, that would be about 99%. You see, Bush Jr is SO socially Conservative, we're on the percipice of a theocracy. And he's such a free spender and has ballooned the size and reach of the government to catasrophic proportions. He ain't the man.
If Kerry should win, and I sure as shit hope he does, I'm sure I'll only agree with at most 50% of his policies. I'm know that I would rather have someone like Howard Dead or McCain (before Bush had hin brainwashed) in the White House. I like Edwards, though, and I think he'd be a nice President in 8 years. Point is, if you disagree with a guy 99%, even 50% looks good. So good in fact, that you're willing to agrue until you're blue int eh face with people backing Bush. Keep in mind that if I only disagreed with a guy on about 5% of the issues, I'd be screaming just as loudly AGAINST Kerry this year.
But that guy doesn't exist. I'm used to the guy I vote for not having a chance in hell of winning. I was hoping Dean would be the difference this year, but it turns ou people don't think Passion and Politics should mix. Unless, of course, that Passion is for the Lord.
So I find my self having strategic conversations with life long Dems about how "our man" can beat the Village Idiot. But he's not really "my man." Just a better man. Not the worse of 2 evils this time. Not quite good vs. evil. More gray vs. black. Luke in the beginning of Jedi vs. Palpatine. It's far more important that the bad guy lose this time around.
And in another 4 years, maybe I can hope against hope that "My Man" makes a run and I can actually argue FOR someone.
I'm not going to close with the standard Reason Not to Vote for W. My good friend Chris yesterday upset me a bit. He said that he doesn't think Bush is as dumb and he seems. I grew up in the Gifted program. An intellectual snob through and through. The one thing you learn in that program is that it's very easy to spot the difference between the following groups of characters:
1) The real smart people - those that just have it
2) The bright people that have to work a little harder - you respect that
3) The bright people who chose not to work a little harder - their priorities are in another area
4) The not so bright people that genuinely try hard
5) The not so bright people that chose not to try
6) The genuinely not bright people
The thing about people in group 6 is, one of 2 things is said aobut them: "they're dumb as rocks" or "they're not as dumb as you think." The truth usually falls closer to the prior. Bush falls in group 6. The man's a moron.
When I registered to vote on the day I turned 18, Sept 27, 1992, I registered Republican. My first political memory was during the 1980 Presidential Election. I was in Kindergarten. Reagan had said something very funny to a 6 y.o. Looking back, I suppose that's not entirely surprising. Anyway, he had made me laugh and, in spite of the fact that my parents were ardent Dems, I "voted" for Reagan in my Kindergarten class. Carter won by some obscene vote of 15-3. Whatever. It was a Catholic school in a Union strong hold, but from taht day forward, until the day I walked into the booth in 1992, I chose to back the party of my Grandfather, a successful businessman. The kind of man that would have voted for Goldwater without batting an eye. And he was also my hero.
But then I had to choose between a weasle (Bush, Sr.) and a guy who, in every single interview, I KNEW was lying. Just saying exactly what needed to be said to make people like him. So I voted for Perot. And I'd have done the same given another chance. In addition to not trusting him, after having seen him as President for 8 years, I don't care all that much for his policies either.
In 1996, I couldn't vote for Perot again. But I wasn't voting for Clinton. And Dole, nah. So I wrote in The Brain with Pinky as his running mate.
4 years later, I didn't get to vote (long story involving where I thought I was registered and where i actually WAS registered). But had I the chance, I would have certainly voted for Nader.
I'm a political indipendent. I'm Socially Liberal and Fiscally Conservative. I cringe at the thought that on occation, I actually agree with Gov. Aaahnald. I'm a middle of the road weenie who's used to not liking 50% of what the President d'jour stands for. In Clinton's case, that would be about 60%. In Bush Jr.'s case, that would be about 99%. You see, Bush Jr is SO socially Conservative, we're on the percipice of a theocracy. And he's such a free spender and has ballooned the size and reach of the government to catasrophic proportions. He ain't the man.
If Kerry should win, and I sure as shit hope he does, I'm sure I'll only agree with at most 50% of his policies. I'm know that I would rather have someone like Howard Dead or McCain (before Bush had hin brainwashed) in the White House. I like Edwards, though, and I think he'd be a nice President in 8 years. Point is, if you disagree with a guy 99%, even 50% looks good. So good in fact, that you're willing to agrue until you're blue int eh face with people backing Bush. Keep in mind that if I only disagreed with a guy on about 5% of the issues, I'd be screaming just as loudly AGAINST Kerry this year.
But that guy doesn't exist. I'm used to the guy I vote for not having a chance in hell of winning. I was hoping Dean would be the difference this year, but it turns ou people don't think Passion and Politics should mix. Unless, of course, that Passion is for the Lord.
So I find my self having strategic conversations with life long Dems about how "our man" can beat the Village Idiot. But he's not really "my man." Just a better man. Not the worse of 2 evils this time. Not quite good vs. evil. More gray vs. black. Luke in the beginning of Jedi vs. Palpatine. It's far more important that the bad guy lose this time around.
And in another 4 years, maybe I can hope against hope that "My Man" makes a run and I can actually argue FOR someone.
I'm not going to close with the standard Reason Not to Vote for W. My good friend Chris yesterday upset me a bit. He said that he doesn't think Bush is as dumb and he seems. I grew up in the Gifted program. An intellectual snob through and through. The one thing you learn in that program is that it's very easy to spot the difference between the following groups of characters:
1) The real smart people - those that just have it
2) The bright people that have to work a little harder - you respect that
3) The bright people who chose not to work a little harder - their priorities are in another area
4) The not so bright people that genuinely try hard
5) The not so bright people that chose not to try
6) The genuinely not bright people
The thing about people in group 6 is, one of 2 things is said aobut them: "they're dumb as rocks" or "they're not as dumb as you think." The truth usually falls closer to the prior. Bush falls in group 6. The man's a moron.
posted by RauluaP at 1:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home