Write your Congressmen

Thursday, August 30, 2007

John Edwards and SUVs: Do the Math

John Edwards and SUVs: Do the Math:

"The Detroit Free Press (and just about every other media outlet on planet Earth) reports that U.S. presidential hopeful John Edwards wants you to surrender your SUV. Speaking at a forum sponsored by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Mr. Edwards said if he was (emperor) president he would (order) ask Americans to (turn in) give up their gas-guzzling SUVs and 'drive more fuel-efficient vehicles.' Of course, the millionaire friend of the working class didn't address the exodus' impact on the United Auto Workers, or how he might dispose of all these abandoned vehicles.

On a related topic, Edwards defended his $6m energy-sucking 28,000-square-foot mansion by saying he's worked hard all his life and has always supported workers– especially those who built, clean and maintain his energy-sucking 28,000-square-foot mansion. (OK, I added that last part.) And all those people who worked hard to buy a gas-sucking SUV? Apparently, that's different."

Monday, August 20, 2007

Appropriate Endorsements

CNN.com - CNN Political Ticker:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) — White House hopeful Hillary Clinton has raked in several high profile endorsements as she campaigns for president, but the latest may not be greeted with open arms.

Heidi Lynne Fleiss, the former 'Hollywood Madam' who was convicted on charges connected to her prostitution ring, is a big supporter of the New York Democrat's White House bid, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports."

President Ronald Reagan once said something relevant about this topic:

"Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first."

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

How the Republicans let us down

I don't think either party is worth a damn, actually. They're both interested in power and position, and nothing more. Statesmanship is dead. However, the current miserable state of affairs is what we have, so we must live with it.

With that said, here in the US we have a two-party system which out of necessity must be oppositional. I'm not sure why people in the 18-35 year-old category get riled about this, especially those with edumacation. Opposition and contrast is the core of deconstruction, itself the core of postmodernism which they hold so dear. But young, so-called politically aware people complain mightily about gridlock in Congress. Maybe that's the way it's supposed to be, the only way that good ideas worthy of legislation should ever get out of that mess. In my view, the problems come when the two parties work together; then we don't stand a chance.

The Democrats are what they are, and will always be: the party of Wealth Redistribution. They claim to be for the common man, but no one ever seems dismayed by the hypocrisy that nearly every one of them in Congress is a career politician, has almost never held a real job, and yet they're mostly all millionaires. Last I checked, jobs in public service don't pay that well.

So the Democrats are as they have been since Moses. But the Republicans... Yes, they're millionaires all right, but they're the party of Wealth Reclamation; we expect them to be so. On the surface, this seems to be a clear contrast, but not so. I mean, what happens when a bunch of millionaires (on both sides of the aisle) get together? They talk about how they can make more millions. And so we have our political system.

The Repubs are different in so far as really coming from wealth, and unlike the Democrats make no bones about the silver spoons which fed every orifice. So, they're not as hypocritical as the Dems, and even try to find ways to make and keep more money. If others in the lower classes come along for the ride, that's fine by them.

The Dems, on the other hand, want the lower classes to remain so, because that's their power base. And when people start getting into upper tax brackets, their interests suddenly shift to - you guessed it - Wealth Reclamation.

So this good for Republicans, right? Wrong. They still fail us. Why? Because they play into the Dems game of trying to make a "pleasant" or "nice" candidate loved by all. In doing so, they fail to offer a viable oppositional candidate. They mean to, but the Repubs end up doing the same song and dance as the Democrats, shift their positions to suit the largest poll, verge on lying and sometimes flat out fib. All of which makes them look all the more disingenuous - like the Democrats. This rightfully confuses the masses, who themselves are, I'm sad to say, not politically astute.

People want, need and will vote for someone in whom they can have faith, whose performance gives us pride in our nation, and, simply, is honest; someone who will make hard choices but choices that are for the good of the US and its citizens. But every time, we get the same thing: a promise to break from the past, a promise of more and better things to come for everyone, things which are just not possible. These things are plastic-spoon-fed to us. And like suckers, we lap it up, or at least accept it, every time.

Either party could succeed handily, and maintain that success, all they have to do is stop playing games and treat The People like adults. We can handle it.

But that's how dumb they are. And we are.

More on this later... I need a clove cigarette...