Monday, October 18, 2004

Election Ranting 

OK, consider yourselves warned, I am in a bad mood. I tried to wait to blog, to outlast it, but I can't. I shouldn't be in a bad mood, I'm all caught up on email and housework and tons of other stuff I neglected when my old job took all my time and happiness. I was in a great mood last night, but not now.

It's time to dust off my soapbox and megaphone. I've got some shouting to do:

For the first time today, I didn't feel engaged and/or amused by the 2004 Presidential Election. I was (and am) pissed off. I have reached my limit of stupidity, arrogance, bullheadedness, et cetera. Where to begin?.....

First, I am pissed off about this: The UK Guardian newspaper is enlisting readers to write letters to voters in Clark County, Ohio, which is considered a swing county in one of the Big Three swing states (Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida). Stupid, imbecilic, retarded, and beyond arrogant. Not to mention a great recruiting tool for the Bush Campaign (the Guardian being decidedly left and pro-Kerry). Yes, I guess people are stupid enough to think some anti-Bush tirade from a foreigner will impress the good people of Clark County. Karl Rove is laughing his ass off.

Second, Florida started voting today, and problems showed up faster than a Category Five hurricane.

State Rep. Shelley Vana was not so happy. She said the paper absentee ballot she was given at a Palm Beach County site was missing one of its two pages, including the proposed amendments to the state constitution. She said election workers were indifferent when she pointed out the oversight.

"There was absolutely no concern on the part of the folks at the Supervisor of Elections Office that this page was missing. This is not a good start. If there are incomplete ballots out there, I can't imagine I would be the only one getting it," she said.

Oh joy. It was so much fun the last time things went screwy in Florida. This is not a good sign. Ohio seems to lean slightly to Bush, Pennsylvania slightly to Kerry, so that means Florida is a good bet to decide the whole thing again. Wake me when it's over.

Finally, I think the thing that irks me the most is the scorn being heaped on both Bush and Kerry supporters. Allow me to take a crack at the scenarios that would unfold, depending on the winner:

A vote for Bush: "How DARE you!" (this from the rest of the world, and many on the left). "How could you vote to re-elect that bloodthirsty warmonger oil baron! The entire world will join forces to oppose the evil US Imperialism. We must join together now to stop the evil American people from further oppressing the hapless world."

The US is left alone as a pariah state to fend against the emboldened terrorists, and it is a much less safer place.

A vote for Kerry: "You terrorist sympathizer!" (from many on the right). "A vote for Kerry means you must be un-American! Anyone who disagrees with the Commander in Chief should have their citizenship stripped. It's obvious you side with the plot to dissolve US sovereignty, make the UN a World Government, and intstitute the worship of Satan. Terrorists who would otherwise be too afraid to attack will unleash themselves upon us, Kerry will stand there and applaud."

The USA is reduced to a cowering shell of itself against the emboldened terrorists, and it is a much safer place.

It was easier last time around. I was unhappy with Al Gore because...well, he was Al Gore. I was unhappy with Bush because I didn't like the way he battled with John McCain, and I wish he carried himself with more humility. I ignored the vast majority of the campaign. Didn't watch the conventions or the debates. I voted for Nader, and was glad I did when all was said and done.

This time around is different. Yes, Nader is running again, but his 2004 campaign seems to be all about his ego, and trying in vain to stay in the public spotlight. Voting for him isn't an option for me this time around. Bush is out too, I just can't put aside the policy differences I have with him, and excess swagger he carries. If only I could vote for the Bush who led us through 9/11 and Afghanistan, oh well. That leaves Kerry or Someone Else.

I'm leaning toward Someone Else. All Kerry had to do to win me was say that the war in did Iraq serve some good, and he could do a better job fighting it. He might have said that, as one of his 8 or 9 positions on the issue.

I read somewhere that a Tony Blair-style Democrat would be mopping the floor with Bush, and I have to agree. I need a leader who gets the mortal threat the US is under. He also must understand that the evidence and planning needed to take the US to a pre-emptive war should be as convincing as a DA's when prosecuting a murder trial.

I know I will still be entertained and engrossed by it all, but now a large part of me just wants the election to be done with. All the campaigning, counts, lawsuits, protests, cries of anger at home and abroad. Whoever gets sworn in this January has a lot to deal with. Let's get on with it.

At least the election will always be funny on JibJab.

Yes, it would be nice if we had a leader who realizes where the mortal threats (yes, there are multiple) to our country come from (no, not Iraq). However, it's not gonna happen, since politics means ignoring the good of the people for the good of one's wallet and status. That goes for all politicians, btw.

Post a Comment