Finally, I do not care
Finally, this election has done what no previous election has been able to accomplish in my lifetime:
Convince me that it really doesn't matter.
When the level of discussion is this infantile, self-righteous, and petty, why would anyone think that it matters which one of these fools has power?
I think we're capable of being grown-ups. I just think we refuse because it doesn't serve our egos as well. Though, ironically, it would serve our genuine self-interest better. We just constantly get self-interest and selfishness confused.
Because we're children. All of us.
And when your political process is one long playing out of The Lord of the Flies, for fear of something more honest, who really cares who wins the crown.
Not me. Not at this point.
6 comments:
I'll tell you why I would think that it matters which one of these fools has power.
In Barack Obama, we would get a European socialist for a President. Make no mistake, all the problems we have now will become much worse. What freedom we have now stands a much better chance of being infringed upon under Barack Obama than under John McCain.
In John McCain, we get an individual who genuinely cares about our nation. Not all of his stances are right, but most are. Do you think Barack Obama shares your views?
To give up on this election because the candidate doesn't share all the same views as you have or because the level of discussion amongst the candidates is infantile and petty among other things is itself infantile and petty behavior on your part.
It begs the question, do you really care about America? Don't you really know what kind of candidates we have or are you allowing yourself to be blinded by this determination to have all or nothing in this presidential election? Oh wait, I forgot, you don't care. It really doesn't matter.
Morgan,
You know why it's really a fuckin' flip of the coin who becomes President and what consequences we deal with as a function of that fact, at this point?
Because both of these candidates operate at about a level not nearly capable enough to be making the most important policy decisions this country faces.
Barack Obama has all kinds of disadvantages as a candidate. He would take us a step toward socialized medicine, which would be reversed within, say, the next 50 years, easily. More importantly, he would be more vulnerable to pressures on the left to pull out of Iraq not when Iraqis are in a better position to handle the security situation, there, but on an artifial timetable made by anti-war folks more concerned with getting troops home than getting the job done well. His economic policies, generally, both domestically and internationally, are attrocious and a serious step back from the free trade commitments that make America and the world stronger, economically and otherwise. His efforts to prove how ruthless he can be mean another four years of cynical politics, with a marginally better faith effort to transcend partisan mindlessness but with a disingenous edge to it, which is its own new kind of problem. That is one of the bigger disadvantages of his campaign. His claim to post-partisan and more honest politics is seriously compromised by a ruthless and partisan edge, both of which undermine the much more important meta-issue of this campaign: the need for reasoned, substantive, open-minded, open-hearted, engaged debate and discussion to guide policy-making. McCain and Obama offer better than rest of the ugly and stupid lot we had running in both primaries. But neither of them really believe in such post-partisanship nearly honestly enough.
And the longer we have such self-righteous bullshit, the less honest, reasoned, substative, and thoughtful our politics and policy-making is.
All disadvantages.
But McCain brings serious disadvantages for freedom and democracy, as well.
He, as well as so many arrogant conservatives, these days, clearly does not believe in democratic self-determination for any country that disagrees with the U.S. or gets in the way of U.S. self-centered strategic planning. Instead of letting Iranians resolve the most important issues around Ahmadinejad and his access to nuclear weapons, he and most hubristic conservatives in America have decided that America will determine Iran's defense policy. And we will do so while never taking responsibility for how much we strengthen the hand of that meglomaniac, domestically, for doing so. It's the not taking responsibility for failed policy more than the failed policy itself which concerns me, Morgan. And McCain is like every other politician, it seems: he can always criticize someone else's mistake but never be responsible for his own. Which, when you are playing with such a policy with such dangerous consequences, is like a child playing with fire.
McCain is better on free trade commitments to the economy and around health care, and even on that gas tax holiday, but he'll pander on that issue, as well, when it serves his purposes. He respects the freedom of politicians and journalists to speak freely, but of the freedom of those with money to fund such speech freely. He respects the freedom of his heterosexual friends, but not homosexuals in America looking to marry.
It is only McCain's commitment to stay in Iraq and his relatively freer trade/free market commitments which gives him a marginal edge in my mind. And that edge withers as Obama commits to stay in Iraq, as McCain emphasizes his insecurity about diplomacy, as McCain compromises free trade commitments, as Obama sounds off on protectionists themes left during a general election (which are not his honest commitments, I don't think), as Obama commits himself more openly to gay marriage rights and right to serve in the military service openly.
McCain maintains a very, very, very slight edge in my mind based on his clearer commitment to stay in Iraq until Iraqis responsible for security, there, are ready for us to leave and with his freer trade and free market commitments.
But it's really so slight, and Obama's superior intelligence, including and especially his recognition of the limits of force as a tool or as a threat in foreign policy matters, constantly weigh on my mind, in this election. McCain has some marginally better policy commitments almost completely by accident, because his thinking cap sure isn't doing the work for him. And the fact that Obama's thinking cap operates more effectively, generally, and that Obama is younger and less burdened with the foolish prejudices of older folks, makes McCain a less appealing candidate.
And now throw in his decision to launch a negative blitz and forgo a substantive policy debate/discussion, and you have a recipe for him earning a loss in this election, not just the less popular position he holds in real numbers, now.
John McCain better get on his thinking cap, quick, Morgan. Because this election is not going to be decided by the cynical politics of yesterday. The Wall Street Journal was the first source I read, after I posted this, which echoed this sentiment. John McCain is not going to win this election by going negative. He's going to win or lose it by making stronger arguments for better policies.
And as long as neither him nor Barack Obama are making such arguments and generated such policy ideas, Morgan, it really doesn't matter who wins this election.
Who gives a shit if Dumbass R beats Dumbass D if they both have dumbass policies and thinking behind those policies?
I don't.
So if you want your candidate to win, Morgan, I suggest you start encouraging him to put on his thinking cap and debate and discuss this election and the policies in question honestly.
Or tell him to get ready to lose yet another election.
Because it doesn't matter to me that it hurts John McCain's brain to think up better policy and the arguments to support that policy. You aren't up for that job, I say, go take another one.
This job is for grown-ups who have smart policies and policy-making skills.
And if these gentlemen aren't up to it, who gives a shit who becomes President, Morgan?
Not me. Not as long as men one of whom I would call President gives enough of a shit themselves.
If you give a shit, Morgan, I suggest you start talking up with your friends and candidates that you want smarter policies, not ones that pander to your or my prejudices or ideological piety.
Because if all your man does, Morgan, is play to the piety of his own people, why in the world should the rest of us care if he gets elected or not?
John McCain's got work to do. As does Barack Obama.
And let the best man, for real and not in our self-righteous partisan fantasies, win.
I didn't even get into the long-term consequence of strikes on Iran's nuclear capabilies, either, Morgan, which are a whole other problem he faces.
Politicians and citizens, Morgan, can generally only see about a 2 steps in front of them. And it is the tripping up after those 2 steps that concerns me.
And if these two assholes are only going to bother themselves with the next 2 steps because it makes their brains tired to think beyond this election, then who gives a shit which one of them is elected?
If all each of these "leaders" is only going to pander to the base impulses of their various flocks, instead of leading, which means challenging those you lead to think bigger than their immediate circumstances, who cares who have the office when neither candidate is really prepared to lead?
Despite the failure of both candidates to have well-thought out policies as you have said, it doesn't change the fact that if Barack Obama ends up elected President, we will get a socialist for a President and America will be put one step closer to becoming a socialist nation. And there is no way you can say McCain is a socialist. Hopefully, you will not vote for a socialist come November.
Not quite a socialist, Morgan. Though he definitely leans more in that direction that I think is good for the country or for liberal democracy.
The truth is that both of these candidates are far afield from the more thoughtful policy thought that I think the country needs.
But a general commitment to freedom and a respect for the self-governance - the two fundamental principles associated with the terms liberal democracy - would be a good start. Both of these candidates are liberal democratically challenged.
And the biggest problem has nothing to do with economics, at all, actually, Morgan, I don't think. It's that they are not genuinely engaged in a substantive policy debate and discussion where they could learn more about the challenges they are facing where they could learn something rather than pretend they or anyone has more answers than they do.
We all suffer for the lack of that kind of debate and discussion, Morgan, not just Mr. Obama, unfortunately.
Post a Comment