The one where everybody lies

I was talking last night to a good friend who lives in Virginia, when she brought up the election. I know that she’s usually pretty indifferent to politics and her husband are generally skews right, so I wouldn’t have introduced the subject at all. But once she asked me who I was voting for (Obama) and whether I vote in every election or just presidential (all of them, baby), I felt comfortable asking her the same. She said that she was as yet undecided, which was kind of monumental for her. Usually she just votes for whoever her husband supports, so the fact that she has not definitively decided to do so made me realize that she was actually kind of invested in this election. So I told her the specific reasons for my choice, and phrased it in such as way as to say why I was not voting for John McCain, rather than why I was voting for Obama. I think that enough people can enumerate all the rah rah explanations for their choice of Obama, and I didn’t want to appear too partisan. So I stuck with the policies of McCain that I don’t like, such as his support for continuing Guantanamo Bay, his tax plan, his reversal of his initial stance against torture, his health care plan (this is a big one, as she is in the health care field), and his pick of a running mate.

Surprisingly, my friend wasn’t too big on Palin, either. I somehow thought she might be into her, but thankfully this isn’t the case. I said that Palin seemed to be unable to separate her personal religious beliefs from other peoples’ rights, and that I did not want my life to be governed according to Palin’s understanding of Christianity. My friend, whose husband is religious but is herself actually atheist/agnostic, seemed to understand where I was coming from with this one, and furthermore brought up Troopergate. I don’t think that Palin did herself any favors with that one. We agreed that Palin does not seem to have the kind of temperament that one would want in a (vice)president, and that John McCain, with his frequent expressions of intense anger doesn’t either.

Then we finally got to the part of our conversation that, to me, illustrates why we are such good friends: we are in complete agreement that politicians are pretty much lacking in something (integrity, decency, honesty, some essential human thing), and that there’s probably something wrong with you if you want to be one. Probably. I do know a couple of people who have expressed an interest in entering local politics, but I’d be lying if I didn’t say it gave me pause and made me reevaluate my opinions of them. You pretty much have to sell your soul to participate in American politics.

The thing that we all have to remember is that politicians will say anything. It’s better now that we have youtube and cell phone cameras and whatnot, because they can’t just go around saying whatever they want without fear of being held accountable, but still… As a politician, you learn that not only will you compromise, but you will do so in key situations and at some point go back on your word. You are a professional liar, hand-shaker, and meeting-attender. Why would anybody sign up for this? Because there’s something fundamentally wrong with them, that’s why. I know that we need politicians and, anyway, politics are a great way to funnel all the self-promoters into a job that 1) gives them the recognition they crave and 2) allow us to identify them on sight and avoid them, 3) sometimes results in good things happening for the rest of us.

I’m really into politics because I care what happens in this world, and I want to feel like I have a say in the direction of my life, but I know that this is a flawed, flawed system. Maybe I should run for office and fix it.

Kidding.

Time Capsule

This is what Richard Pryor thought a press conference with the first black US president would be like:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_cdbByTeNE]

Like rats fleeing a sinking ship

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/the-top-ten-rea.html

Minnesota Politics again

Who’d have thought that I’d talk about Minnesota politics even once on this blog, much less twice? This time, though, my primary focus is Michele Bachmann, a member of the House of Representatives and a total idiot. Representative Bachmann went on Hardball and said that Senator Obama and his wife, Michelle Obama, held anti-American views and that they could not be trusted in the Oval Office. Representative Bachmann then went on to say that the media (now she trusts the media??) should thoroughly investigate other members of Congress to determine whether they held anti-American or pro-American attitudes.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_pN2IPAw6E]

Just to give you some context, here are other videos of Representative Bachmann:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wX1UnAtynU]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdbCbbEr64]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJdRHE3ppj4]

I’m pretty sure that Michele Bachmann didn’t get the memo; you’re supposed to imply that the Obamas, Democrats, and liberals are somehow less patriotic than the McCains, Republicans, and conservatives, but you’re not supposed to come right out and say it. Tsk, tsk, Representative Bachmann.

The world outside my bubble

This presidential election is so dramatic and action-filled that I really haven’t been paying much attention to other races across the country. I mean, it seems like Lautenberg kind of has the Senate race sewn up in New Jersey, so I was content not to know what else was going on around the country. BUT then I woke up and started to be myself again, and decided to familiarize myself with other races that are going on. Two races that caught my interest are taking place in Minnesota and North Carolina. Actor/writer/producer, Air America founder, and impassioned proponent of progressive politics, Al Franken, is running on the Democratic ticket in Minnesota against one-term Republican incumbent Norm Coleman. Right now, polls have Franken leading Colemen 43% to 37%, with Independent candidate Dean Barkley having as much as 19% of the vote. Last month, Coleman was ahead of Franken, so this reversal is interesting indeed. When I read this, I was a little surprised at Franken’s ability to gain traction in Minnesota, but then I remembered that this is the state that elected Jesse Ventura as governor (NTTAWWT). Franken and Coleman’s numbers are rather close, and when you throw in the presence of a third party candidate, this race is definitely one to watch. It’s also interesting to note that Barack Obama has opened up a modest lead over John McCain in Minnesota.

The race in North Carolina is also close; polls show that Republican incumbent Elizabeth Dole has 44% of the vote, while Democratic challenger Kay Hagan has 49%. A third party candidate, Libertarian Christopher Cole has support from about 2% of the electorate, but in such a close race, even that small percentage could help decide the outcome of the race. I am fascinated by this race because it is dominated by two accomplished women. I know nothing about Hagan that I did not learn in writing this post, but I have admired Elizabeth Dole for years. She’s a smart, well-educated, interesting woman who is easily the equal of her politically powerful husband. If any woman would do, and Sarah Palin’s collapse under scrutiny would seem to illustrate that this was the case, why couldn’t John McCain have picked someone like her? Or Maine Senator Olympia Snowe? Either one of these women would have helped make a compelling ticket with much more of a fighting chance.

Wait, really?

I haven’t spoken about the Biden – Palin debate that took place the other night, which is a rather glaring omission. This was likely the most-watched political event EVER, and it definitely bears some consideration. I will say this: it probably wasn’t the debate that most people were expecting to see. It wasn’t a train wreck. Sarah Palin’s performance was neither crash-and-burn bad, nor did it reach the levels expected by those who believed that she was lulling Biden into complacency and setting him up for a massive trouncing. This actually bears repeating: it wasn’t a train wreck, but there were signs of a less-than-stellar performance by Palin. She pretty much immediately pitted herself against Biden and moderator Gwen Ifill, so that if and when she did not fully answer their questions, it would appear to be intentional and not due to ignorance. She stuck like glue to her talking points, but did it in such an obvious way (repeating the same MAVERICK! phrases ELITE! a lot WASHINGTON INSIDER!) that she did not come across so much prepared to debate as she did rehearsed to perform.  Biden did a good job of answering the questions put to him without looking like a bully, which is impressive, since he came across that way a bit when he was responding to Obama during the Democratic candidate debate. On the whole, I doubt that either candidate influenced anybody who wasn’t already inclined to be on his or her side. A transcript of the debate can be found here.

Today, I ran across this funny chart a couple of times, and thought I’d share it:

If you’d like to read more from the man who created this flow chart, click here.

What ever happened to kindness?

I am not the world’s most enthusiastic Obama supporter, but enough of my positions are close to his that I feel comfortable voting for him. I don’t feel like the Republican party addresses my concerns, but I’v never actively hated them, or regarded them with the ridicule that I see in a lot of my Democrat peers. I understand that 2008 is an election year, and people will do what they feel necessary to try to get elected. STILL I was disgusted by both Rudy Guiliani and Sarah Palin’s speeches. Guiliani has no hope of getting elected to a higher office than the one he’s already held, so it didn’t hurt him to give a nasty, unsubtle, totally negative speech about the Democratic candidates. He has nothing to lose and it bought him a little goodwill from people who six months ago wouldn’t have spit on him if he was on fire.

But I was totally unprepared for how nasty Palin’s speech was. She’s been raked over the coals by a lot of people in the last week, but the Democratic ticket did not participate in the very public rehashing of all of her family’s business. They didn’t condemn either her or her daughter, and didn’t question Palin’s decision to stay in the presidential race. So why would Palin give such a dirty speech, and take cheap shot after cheap shot at Obama? The qualifications and half-truths were bad enough, but outright lies about death taxes and clean coal really make me wonder why the Republican powers that be would think it necessary to craft and deliver this speech. It definitely played to the rabid base in the convention hall, but I can’t imagine it going over well with moderates. And for somebody who considers herself a strong and committed Christian, I really wonder how such a dirty attack could be considered in any way Christ-like. In terms of delivery, she totally nailed her speech. In terms of content, Ms. Palin did little to solidify her own party’s positions on issues and gave the kind of light-on-actual-information speech that Republicans often accuse Obama of giving.