"The next time someone gives you that civic bullshit about voting, remember that Hitler was elected in a free democratic election."
-George Carlin
More people should have thought of that back in 2004.
Okay, so unless you're really stupid you've figured out that I'm going to get all political here. Now I'm not a super political guy, but I try to keep up with what's going on, and I try to form logical and educated opinions. Around election time this is especially true. So why am I having such a crisis right now?
As stated over to the right, I am a democrat and have been pretty much since day one. I think I've only veered away from the party twice. One was in the 2000 election when I voted for Ralph Nader. I wanted to send the Democrats a message about how their choice of nominee, Al Gore, who had no personality, a royal bitch of a wife (those little "Parental Advisory stickers on CDs?? All her.), grandiose delusions about his involvement with the Internet, and a positive but unrealistic view of the environment and what we should do about it. I mean, hey, I love this planet too, I just don't have a hard-on for it. We should all do a little more to help the earth, true, but as Carlin once observed, the planet is fine. It's survived the ice age and the dinosaur, it'll survive us too. In view of all this I threw my vote away and cast my ballot for Nader, again, to send the message. I knew Nader wasn't going to win, but I didn't think Bush had a chance in Hell of winning either, so I assumed this was a safe choice. Oops. Sorry America.
The only time I voted Republican was in a local election, and I don't even remember when it was or who was involved. All I remember is the Democratic candidate came door to door, and I didn't like him. Plus, the asshole woke me up.
Anyway, the point is I am a Democrat and I sincerely want to believe in Barack Obama and vote for him in November. However, as of right now I'm having trouble with that idea. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against Obama as a person, he's clearly an intelligent and pleasant man. I just don't buy his rhetoric. Any time a politician starts talking about how they're going to change things my bullshit detector starts going off. Where is the change coming from, what's it going to be, how will it happen?
Granted, having an African-American President would be a huge change in and of itself, and I support that. What else ya got? Sure, there's lots of talk about change, but I haven't heard much about policy. At least, nothing that differs much from standard liberal policy anyway. It seems as though the media go out of their way not to discuss it. Maybe I'm just watching the wrong shows and reading the wrong articles, but I haven't seen a thing.
Also, people seem to be under the delusion that his "lack of experience" is a good thing and a catalyst for change. Wrong! First of all, Obama is a senator. That's experience. Maybe not quite the same as other politicians have, but it's a start, and it's more than most of us have, so it's a non issue. Secondly, it's a nice romantic notion that an outsider can come in and fix a broken system, but more often than not they just wind up getting eaten up by the system, and becoming part of it. Sorry to burst your bubble kids, but that's how it works. Maybe Obama can prove me wrong. I hope he does.
The other thing that bothers me is he's already giving people fodder to call him a flip-flopper, an experienced politician move if there ever was one. Granted, the guy's got a right to change his mind, but still..., let's look at the big two instances. First, remember when Obama gave that speech about how he could no more turn his back on Rev. Jeremiah Wright than his own family? Well, we know how long that lasted. In fairness, he did the right thing here, but it doesn't look good when questioning his loyalties.
Another thing people tend to be all excited about is the fact that he's decided not to participate in the public financing process. Originally, he'd promised to do so if Sen. McCain did the same. So what does Obama do? He decides to pull out of that and make himself out to be a revolutionary thinker while making McCain look like an antiquated asshole. Dirty political pool, that's all it is folks. And by the way, does anyone else wonder what happens to the money he didn't take? Does John McCain get it? Does it go back into the fund? how about this idea: Obama takes the money and instead of using it for his campaign, he donates it to the Red Cross and the Salvation Army so it can be used to help the flood victims all across the Midwest get their lives back on track? That's probably impossible, but it would bring him my vote.
So that's where I sit right now. Clearly this is going to be an interesting campaign season. If any fellow Democrats out there can direct me to some good information about Obama's policies and what changes I'm supposed to expect (and a sense of connection to government doesn't count-that's bullshit speak too), feel free to leave me some links in the posts. Maybe I can get on board and I won't have to make the same mistake I did in 2000. Once again, sorry.
Happy 4th!
Dave
P.S. The above is not an endorsement for John McCain, nor is it intended as such. And don't leave me nasty comments questioning my patriotism-if I wasn't patriotic, I wouldn't care!
4 comments:
Just a couple of quick thoughts:
On the public money thing... First of all the "public money" they talk about is the $85 million he REJECTED, not the money that people are donating. The terminology is confusing, but just to be clear he is NOT accepting public money, he's acepting private donations--each of which is rigidly documented and monitored, making sure that no (outright) donations are given from special interest groups--y'know, like the PMRC.
He had "promised" in February (when he'd not had the nomination anywhere near locked up) that he'd only take the $85 million if his opponent did too, then he decided not to once the decision was actually his to make--which, by the way, Hilary said she was going to do the same when it was being assumed she'd win.
The actual quote he used was, "If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.” He added that he would ONLY agree to such a deal if Mr. McCain agreed to curtail spending by the Republican Party and independent groups. Then a meeting between the lawyers happened and they pretty much said that there would be no future meetings because McCain's side refused to discuss it with Obama's side. So, Obama went with the plan that's in place.
To me, it wasn't so much of a flip-flop as it was, "Okay...if you don't want to talk about it, we don't have to...you take your money, and I'll raise my own." --and, actually, the Obama Campaign stands to make much MORE money than the McCain campaign as a result. Essentially, McCain's side outright refused to curtail the spending of the RNC and special interest groups...so Obama didn't take the public money--which means he actually KEPT his word, rather than going back on it. McCain's side refused to even MEET to discuss it... They pretty much gave him permission to reject public funding, via Obama's own words--which the media are not fully quoting, or you would have heard the "only if" part of his statement.
You're right that it would be impossible for him to give it away. It's kind of like if a company writes a grant for an organization. They want a DETAILED record of how it's used, and if it's used for anything other than the purpose for which it's donated, there's usually a lawsuit and often entire organizations are shut down due to legal fees alone. So no, you're right, he couldn't do that. It'd actually put him in prison.
I thought you were kidding a couple of weeks ago when you asked if McCain would get the money since Obama isn't taking it. Each side would be provided with $84.1 million from the US Treasury--and that is ALL the Treasury will give to either candidate's campaign, and ALL the campaign would be allowed to spend, via opting into the program. They can not and will not give the $84.1 million Obama rejected to McCain. It's not do-able. It stays in the treasury. Much like if you decide not to take out a college loan, I could not then go to a loan financeer and say, "My brother didn't take out a loan, so I want his money." It just stays in the bank. I really didn't realize you didn't know that when you said that to me weeks ago.
Obama made the smart decision, money wise. His campaign made something like $95 million in June--which is $10 million more than the public money would have been. The Democratic Party, as you know, has overall less money to work with than the Republican party (by the way, even though you're supposed to be "limited" to what the treasury gives you, every campaign essentially does what Obama's doing ON TOP of the public money and documents it much LESS rigidly than Obama's campaign is doing--essentially laundering it), so for him to reject the $85 million actually means he'll be able to raise MORE to try to win, and that he's going to have to be accountable for each red-cent, unlike the McCain Campaign (and, to be fair, the Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, etc, etc, Campaigns of the past) who only really has to be accountable for the $85 million they're getting and has assorted other millions coming in from private donors that they don't really have to be responsible for in any serious way.
Sorry that was so long...if it helps, I'm not reading it either. :) No offense intended by any of what I've said. Just trying to clear up a couple of the questions you threw out there. I've got more...but why? :)
Also, I'd recommend reading the following .pdf file. It's from Obama's website, so of course, it's slanted in his direction...but at least this is the line he's taking publically on the issues, and I think it notates a lot of the "changes" he wants to make pretty clearly.
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf
...huh...it cut off...
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf
In case that doesn't work, the rest of the address from the PREVIOUS post should be "hange.pdf" like "Blueprint for Change" .pdf.
Sorry for posting three times in one night. Just trying to be helpful.
Derek,
Of course no offense was taken, and none is intended in the following.
In response to your comments, I was aware of the details about what money Obama rejected and what he decided to use. I still think it was a calculated set up to make McCain look bad from minute one, and the exact quote you used only reinforced it to my eyes. We all make if/when/then statements, and usually we aren't expected to go through with them. In this case however, the statements were made in a public forum by someone seeking office. Obama said he'd take the money if McCain did too. McCain did, he didn't, end of story. I don't care what rationale and qualifications he used to cover his butt, that's how it is.
Also, I was kidding about McCain getting the money. I didn't know all the specifics, but I was pretty sure Obama's camp would have researched it all and wouldn't just hand McCain free money. The rest was all wishful thinking.
Thanks for the info on the .pdf file, it's helpful, but I'm trying to find some info that's more balanced if such a thing still exists. Usually USA Today does a nice job with candidate-to-candidate comparisons, but I haven't seen much yet, and everyone else just seems to be championing their guy.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback. I enjoyed writing this post. Hopefully anyone who reads it will be encouraged to think a little bit, which is always good no matter who's side you're on. Plus I got to quote George Carlin twice, and make a dick joke about Al Gore. And that, dear sir, is awesome.
Post a Comment