Thursday, November 08, 2012

The Good, The Bad, The Ugly, And The Incomprehensible


This is highly flammable. Don't read without your special asbestos-lined goggles.

If I don't talk about the elections, I will blow a gasket. Feel free to go somewhere else if you don't want to be part of the harangue. I won't be offended.

I expect nobody to agree with every opinion I'll be vomiting onto the page here. That's fine. That's why we have elections in the first place, because everybody has their own opinions and not everyone else will agree with what you or I see as pure common sense. If you want to call me a flaming dickwad because of anything I say here, go for it. That's your right (at least if you're an American citizen, and let me be clear that I'm thankful I live in a country where I can spout off without fear of the government coming to kick down my door and arrest me for doing so. Your mileage may vary in other jurisdictions. In any case, I consider it your God-given right to call me a flaming dickwad at any time, and in any place, and I'll defend to the death your right to do so.)

And please, PLEASE, if I offend you in any way, don't let my personal idiocy affect your fondness for the THANKSGIVING COMES FIRST stuff. That's as non-political as it gets, and if I find I've screwed that up in any way, via this rant, I will probably hang myself. In Massachusetts, that's still one of the best options.

Massachusetts

Ballot choice Votes Pct.
Assisted suicide
Would allow a doctor to prescribe medication, at a terminally ill patient's request, to end that patient's life. More infomation.
Winner No
1,488,561 51%
Yes
1,430,543 49%
So, folks who consider life completely hideous, due to their viciously painful illnesses, will still have to resort to the usual self-concocted and haphazardly successful illegal solutions. I was torn about this one prior to voting, but the more I think about it now, the more I wonder just what in hell gives anyone the right to deny death to a person? I would NEVER choose to kill myself (at least, on purpose) because my religion frowns on that sort of thing, but if somebody spends their days wracked with pain and their most fervent wish is to be done with it, who am I to be judge and jury? What in Christ's holy name are the people who voted "no" on this thinking? That they're somehow doing someone a favor by keeping them alive to suffer some more? Yeah, maybe you want more time with a loved one. I can understand that desire. But, really, think about it. You're selfishly denying them release because of your needs, not theirs.

Ah, hell. I'm glad I don't have to face that sort of decision from either side of the equation. But, if I knew someone whom I loved dearly was constantly in pain, and I knew that they wanted to be relieved of that pain, and no medication or medical option was available for easing the pain, and that person asked me to kill him or her, I'd kill that person without a second thought and gladly let God decide if I was evil to have done so.

(I'm just getting warmed up, believe me.)

THE GOOD

Medical Marijuana was legalized in Massachusetts. Now the people who have been denied an easy way towards death will at least be able to alleviate a tiny bit more of their pain while they wait to die.




That anyone with even a modicum of compassion would not be in favor of this stuns me. Some ill-informed individuals have it in their heads that this will lead to their children becoming addicts. No, it will not. Marijuana is completely non-addictive in any physical sense. Yes, it can be as psychologically addictive as anything else - so are food, sex, tiddly-winks and blogging - but marijuana is utterly benign in a sense that alcohol, heroin, cocaine, and many other drugs are not. Comparing grass to, say, alcohol, is akin to comparing skiing to falling off of a mountain. They may look the same at certain times, but one is much more dangerous than the other.

In Colorado, marijuana was made legal, period. The same thing happened in Washington state. I applaud the folks in those two places. Unlike some of the folks in the other 48 states, they apparently don't have their heads implanted in their rectums.

(Now it remains to be seen whether these states will buckle to the inevitable pressure that will be applied by the feds to over-regulate, over-tax, or otherwise destroy these gains. In my current frame of mind, I hold little hope that the laws will be enacted unscathed.)

In other good news, Maine approved same-sex marriage.

I'm not in favor of same-sex marriage in general. But the reason I'm not has nothing to do with homophobia. I'm just against the government being involved in marriage, period, and I care not a tinker's damn whether it involves gay people, straight people, multiple aliens from Neptune, or fucking zebras. There should be no tax breaks for being married, nor should there be any penalties for not being married, and marriage should be a commitment entered into by two (or more) people at their own whim, in whatever way they desire, officiated upon by the cleric or non-cleric of their choice, and should in no way, shape, or form be subject to the changing morals and mores of some state or federal legislative body. My marriage happened before God, in a church, and the piece of paper the state issued concerning it has no more value to me than soiled toilet tissue. And if anybody else, of whatever sex or sexual persuasion, deems equal standing to a ceremony they were involved in, I truly don't give a damn one way or the other. If there is ownership of property involved, or children, or anything else that may involve legal matters later, draw up a contract. But leave the fucking government out of your bedroom and mine, thanks.

Having said that, so long as the state has deemed itself a worthy partner in people's private lives, then I don't see any reason for them to deny that partnership to anyone. I personally know of a couple of guys in Maine who I couldn't be happier for. They've been together longer than any legally married couple I know. So, more power to you, guys. And if you decide to make it legal under this new law, I'd be delighted to be in the wedding party in some way.

One other thing occurred on Tuesday about which I am unwilling to kill myself. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party candidate for President, set a record for national vote total. He garnered 1,140,000 some-odd votes as of this writing. One of them was mine and I'm damn proud of it. That total will inch up as all precincts report. Of course, he still finished a distant and under-reported third to Obama and Romney, but I'm willing to take my jollies where I can get them at this point in my life.

THE BAD

Barack Obama was re-elected.

I don't think he's the devil incarnate, nor do I think he's an illegal alien, a terrorist, or any other ridiculous piece of flummery dreamed up by looney tunes like Donald Trump. His record on the economic front, however, is pitiful. The bailout was, and will probably remain, the worst piece of government domestic action in this century. It's absolutely amazing to me that a man with his record on the deficit and unemployment could be re-elected. If his name was Carter, he wouldn't have been. I could go on, but I won't. He's the one for the next four years and I hope (I pray) that we will not sink into a morass from which we are unable to extricate ourselves. I'd hate to wake up in 2016 to find that my ass is owned by a bank in Beijing.

(Romney was no bargain, either. He was, in my mind, the slightly lesser of two shitty evils. As I say, I voted for Gary Johnson. Didn't matter in Massachusetts, so I kept my flawless record of voting for non-winners in presidential elections intact. I would have loved to have seen how the campaign might have played out had Ron Paul secured the nomination, but I expect the outcome would have been the same. It would have been a lot more fun, though.)

Elizabeth Warren is the new senator from Massachusetts.



That so many people in this state had the wool pulled over their eyes by the miserably divisive campaign she ran... well, I suppose it should surprise me, but it doesn't. She painted Scott Brown as a misogynist (he isn't) and ran commercials that appealed wholly and unapologetically to the females in the voting ranks. The tagline, "She cares about US", came on the heels of an ad featuring only women speaking, outlining some questionable claims concerning Brown's voting record on women's issues. Had any male done similar, making an appeal to one gender - his own, that is - he would have been (rightly) skewered and barbecued. That she was victorious with such a slimy tactic makes me ashamed to be human.

(Am I in favor of what are termed these days as "reproductive rights"? Yes, mostly. Do I think the government should ever pay for birth control, abortion, or any other contraceptive measures, whether pre or post coitus? No, with the possible exception for a victim of rape. That some people have it in their heads that birth control of any sort should be handed out for free by government fiat, and that any politician who opposes that concept is anti-woman, amazes me no end. No, you are not entitled to dick, with or without pills, spermicide, sheathing, or anything else. And the same applies to Viagra, condoms, and any other male sexual option you want to bring up, just in case you were thinking of dragging that body into the argument.)

(And, as with Romney, Brown was no superb choice, either. He blew this election, via questionable tactics, just as readily as Warren won it. Making a major portion of his advertising play upon the claims Warren had made concerning her Native American heritage was a stupid, stupid, stupid mistake. She was already as hurt as she could have been by that gaffe. Brown jumping on it for further dead equine beating turned a lot of people, including me, right off. I still voted for him, since Warren makes my skin crawl, but I'm sure he lost many others. Anyway, if you took him to about 44 or 45 of the other states, gave people his voting record and didn't tell them he was a republican, they'd guess he was a moderate democrat. That he couldn't get elected in this lunatic asylum of a state I reside in says a lot more about The Peoples Republic Of Massachusetts than it does about him.)

I already mentioned the assisted suicide thing. What else sucks?

The general tenor of some of the campaigns, but I'll get to that in the next section.

THE UGLY




Need I say anything? Anything at all? Yeah, I guess I have to, so I'll make it nice and obscene.

Good Lord Almighty. I think the guy is a bad president, but can the racists please stay in the closet and not try to help? Thank you.

Will we ever get past the way we divide people up by skin color, religion, race, gender, wealth, or anything else, in this country? When the FUCK will the people who keep trying to make it "us" versus "them" (both the folks who hate other folks and the misguided do-gooders that think keeping these divisions is somehow helping things) just DIE the FUCK off and leave us with what little sanity that may still remain? How about we try just looking at each other as human beings for a while and see how it works? We can always go back to being assholes if it doesn't make things better.

THE INCOMPREHENSIBLE

That billions of dollars (that's "billion", with a "B") were spent on advertising for the presidential campaigns, with additional hundreds of millions spent on senatorial, congressional, and other races. I've complained a lot, but do I have any solutions I'd like to offer? Yes. If I could enact one law to make this whole thing more bearable, I'd make it illegal to spend more on advertising than the salary for the job you're seeking.

(Term limits? No. Term limits get rid of the good along with the bad. It's like bombing a country because the king or emperor or dictator-for-life says something or does something with which you don't agree. Fine, it's probably an effective way to kill him - if you drop enough bombs - but there are good, decent, kind people, with families and children, struggling to get by just like you and me, who are also being blown to smithereens, crippled, maimed, and otherwise getting what they don't deserve. There are more cost-effective solutions. We killed Sadaam without him being hit by a bomb. We can get rid of the lousy officeholders without resorting to the equivalent, too. It's called "voting". That it wasn't as effective as I might have liked, this time around, does not rule out its efficacy in future.)

The single most incomprehensible thing is that you stuck with me to the end of this. You truly are special. I am now decompressed and the usual benign fluff will resume next week and continue for the next four years. Thank you.

Soon, with more better stuff.

38 comments:

Ami said...

I can't comment on your local races, but we had marijuana on Oregon's ballot, too. Passed in the city, voted down in the country. Country won. And people will continue to smoke small amounts in their homes and no one will have a clue. And no, I don't smoke, but I know a ton of people who do.

I feel the same way as you about Obama. I can't believe the horrendous shit that's happened to the economy under his "Leadership".

I believe he's responsible for some crazy and questionable stuff, I hate THAT... and I think to say the least that it's in very poor taste for his wife to spend and spend and spend our money for lavish vacations all over the known universe. She's got her own money. And if she can't afford the goddamn vacation on her own, she should stay the fuck home like the rest of us do. I see it as a gigantic flipoff to the rest of us.

I don't care what color Obama is or what color you are or what color my neighbor is, so the racist stuff just pisses me off along with everything else. The color of his skin seems to give some people the imagined right to dislike him or hate him, but those are the people who are pretty goddamn sick.

I believe in hating people 'cause they EARN it. ;) (I really don't hate anyone... even the worker's comp assholes who tried to screw me and LOST.)

Tabor said...

I read this thinking I was surely going to disagree with everything you said, but knowing that I must take my medicine by listening to the 'other opinion.' Well, surprise, I agree with about 80% in varying degrees. Gives me hope that we can find compromise on many issues in this nation. I do think both candidates are beholden to the machine...and we as citizens have to watch those gears turn and find some way to dismantle them. Term limits of some nature would give us politicians that spend more time working and less time campaigning and raising money.

Daryl said...

okay .. while i am and likely will always be a female/jewish/liberal/new yorker i might have voted for Romney if he'd picked a position and stuck to it AND offered more than empty campaign promises .. all i got from him was that he'd undo Obamacare ... after that he said he'd tell us after he was elected what he planned to do ...

and to comment leaver Ami .. what "...lavish vacations all over the known universe." did Mrs Obama take?

messymimi said...

Thank you. You and i agree more than we disagree.

Craig said...

Well, my friend, you are nothing if not provocative. . .

Without provoking another shouting match, can I say that I honestly think I oppose assisted suicide because of the good of the would-be deceased? And because what starts as optional will sooner or later become compulsory. If doctors are allowed to prescribe drugs to end a person's life, it will be a matter of time before somebody decides that they can't refuse such a request, their own conscience be damned. Just like medical schools are already refusing admission to people who want nothing to do with abortions.

We did the medical marijuana thing here in Michigan a couple years ago. Frankly, I'm not all exercised about marijuana, and might even prefer full legalization. But the 'medical' part was pretense, pure and simple; and the execution left something to be desired. We had a 'clinic' up the street from our house, and it didn't take long before every stoner in town had found a doctor to write him a scrip. Small crowds of stoners are not a happy convergence with family neighborhoods. They eventually got the enforcement issues sorted out, but it was quite the free-for-all for the first year. . .

My thoughts on 'gay marriage' are complicated, and would probably take more space than I ought to take. For here and now, I'll just mention the Law of Unintended Consepquences, and leave it at that. . .

I am no fan of Mr. Obama's, and his re-election provokes a measure of anxiety. But I'm with you - I wish the race-baiters would just shut the hell up and go away. My distaste for the preseident has nothing to do with his race, and I resent that some wack-jobs give my neighbors an excuse to think that it does. . .

And again, that whole 'contraception' thing. See my comments above about options and compulsion. I might think, for various reasons, that contraception is not a good thing, and those who use it are, on some level, harming themselves. But they have that right, and God bless 'em. But please - don't tell me that it's my duty to buy it for them. . .

I try really hard not to get into drawn-out political arguments, I really do. In large part, because I think many (most?) of my fellow-citizens vastly overrate its actual importance for the conduct of our daily lives. But hey. . . you asked. . .

Uncle Skip, said...

It appears the new catchphrase, now that the election is over, is Mandate for Compromise.
Dammit! We didn't need an election to figure that out.
Until the local voters realize it is the person they keep reelecting who's the problem, there won't be a resolution to the issues in Washington.

I don't even wanna think about what's gonna happen here (in California). The majority party now has a two-thirds majority in both the senate and assembly.

Re: that marijuana thing. Medical marijuana's been legal here for quite awhile. But local communities are outlawing smoking in more and more places. Some have outlawed in entirely in public places. Interesting conundrum.

From the expression on Warren's face in that photo, I'd say she needs an enema.

Uncle Skip, said...

Ignore everything I just posted... I've decided Craig has the right idea.

Kerry said...

What Tabor said.
Also:
I live in one of the 3 states (OR, Wash and Mont) that have assisted suicide laws. The fear that Craig expresses in his comment have not materialized here.

Oregon's Death With Dignity Act requires that "patients of sound mind may request a prescription for a lethal dose of medication. Two doctors must confirm a diagnosis of terminal illness with no more than six months to live. Two witnesses, one non-doctor unrelated to the patient, must confirm the patient's request, and the patient must make a second request after 15 days." So it's really not super-easy to obtain a physician-assisted suicide (PAS); you must be really committed to the idea.

In 1998, the first year of the law's enactment, only 23 people received PAS prescriptions; of those, only 15 decided to actually take the lethal dose.

I completely support this law.

IT (aka Ivan Toblog) said...

What's the point of making laws about things which should be entirely about individual choice?

There's entirely too much meddling in others lives

I know there are better qualified people out there who can do a better job than any of the current office holders
They're all just too smart to get into the shit fight we call political campaigns

Michelle H. said...

I'm not one to mince words about politics, so I'll keep my opinions to myself. You already know my viewpoints on the one bumper sticker photo, so I've got nothing to add there except dumb people doing dumb stuff. Sort of like these people at the link who pissed off veterans.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/mcdonalds-upside-down-american-flag_n_2088972.html

Jenn Flynn-Shon said...

I firmly believe that the money spent to advertise could have brought down the national deficit to zero. Oh and I also think that in the future the elections should be held via Facebook. Like a candidate today? Click here! Not so sure about that tomorrow? Simply unlike. Get your Likes in by midnight on the election day. Most likes wins. The end.

Because isn't that what its all about anyway? I mean for god sake they were running twitter feeds during the debates. As if what someone named @slimy_politico_h8tr said mattered for a second.

I know we don't agree on all the issues, and I'm gone from Massachusetts now and we have our own Flake to deal with (yes, his real name) but it seems our overall sentiment of stupid political bad-mouthing tactics diminishing the very fiber of the process, are on par with each other. Not a surprise there!

Suldog said...

Good People - For the most part, I had my say and now I'll shut up and let you have yours, without rebuttal. If it appears to me that something you say is asking for a rebuttal, that's the only time I'll jump in again.

Craig said: "If doctors are allowed to prescribe drugs to end a person's life, it will be a matter of time before somebody decides that they can't refuse such a request, their own conscience be damned."

I understand and appreciate that argument. I would say, however, that it does not immediately affect the current question, and if such a scenario develops in future, I would fully expect those physicians to stand by their consciences and make non-violent protest their rule. If that means they have to give up their profession, that would suck, but sometimes we do things for principle that are not in our own best interests, and my opposing something now because of a possible scenario later would go against MY principles.

Lowandslow said...

I, too, agree with much that you say. In many ways I'm a Libertarian also. On many social issues it simply isn't any of the government's business.

S

Some Blogging Guy said...

I don't agree with some of what you said but that's pretty normal. I do agree with the concept that the government has to mind it's own business!

Very entertaining post too!

SBG

Jackie said...

Nobody but NOBODY better call your writing, "decompressed and the usual benign fluff"...not even the great Sully.
Good stuff...always!
Hugs,
J.

Stephen Hayes said...

I read to the bitter end and I hope you now feel better. I agree with about half of your comments, but the one thing I agree with most is getting all of this unaccounted for money out of the political process. Allowing one individual to contribute 50 million to a campaign is outrageous. The Supreme Court made the worst decision possible allowing corporations and foreign entities to flood money into our political process, and while I'm not generally in favor of altering our Constitution I'd make an exception to limit campaign spending.

Tim King said...

Jim, I wrestled with the same issue on Question 2 (though with a slightly different take). I think it's absolutely stupid to kill yourself for any reason. (Of course, I might feel differently if I were suffering from a painful terminal disease.) But at the end of the day, it wasn't about "making suicide an option." (And I hate the word "suicide." Killing yourself is always an option, no matter what the law says.) The question was whether the police power was going to be used to attempt to reduce a free people's right to control their own bodies and their own lives, together with the nasty side-effects of prohibition. People make choices. Sometimes they make mistakes. Sometimes stupid mistakes. Unfortunately, I think most people on both sides of the issue voted the way they did, not because they believe in a human's right to control his own body, and not because they believe that protecting that right is the valid role of government, but because they hate "suicide" or because they approve of "death with dignity." Sigh.

I'm not sure I'm totally unhappy with Obama's reelection, compared to the alternative. That is, if Mitt Romney were president, with a Republican House, I fear we could expect federal spending and federal intrusiveness to grow out of control and without debate. It's slightly comforting to have the two political opponents on competing sides, with the "spend less" rhetoric (if not action) in the House, whence budgetary measures originate.

Gotta go. Nice reading your rant. :)

-TimK

lime said...

my friend, i love that you can express your views so strongly and accept and welcome that others may have strongly differing ones as long as it's not the hideous racist crap expressed by that bumper sticker. that is just....wow....i have no words. that someone would actually put that on their car for all the world to see is just incomprehensible to me.

i can't comment on your local race because i had no real reason to follow it. the assisted suicide i have very conflicted feelings about. do i want people who have no medical recourse to have some dignity? yes. i just want to make damn sure whatever laws are written to allow for it are VERY carefully crafted so as to prevent abuses of said law.

pot? yeah legalize it. i was actually surprised to hear mr. lime say he was glad washington and colorado voted the way they did with regard to that.

the money spent on the campaigns is fucking obscene. now we see the vast swaths of devastation in the wake of sandy and compare the dollar value of damage for that. think how much recovery could have been done with all the shitty attack ads and pandering and blatant misrepresentation of the opposition. it disgusts me. and no one will ever convince me that a corporation is due the same free speech rights an individual is and that pouring shitloads of money into a campaign is how they should exercise that right.

Ami said...

And for Daryl: A partial list of the vacations that WE paid for.


-- President’s Day 2012, Michelle and the first daughters in Aspen, Colorado to ski.
-- Christmas 2011, the first family in Hawaii for an extended vacation.
-- Summer 2011, in Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., for the annual beach break.
-- June 2011, the first lady, her mother and daughters traveled to South Africa and Botswana.
-- President’s Day 2011, the first lady and first daughters travel to Vail to ski.
-- Christmas 2010, in Hawaii.
-- August 2010, the first family traveled to Panama City Beach, Fla., for some sun and fun at the beach.
-- August 2010, Obama spent the weekend alone in Chicago for his 49th birthday bash.
-- August 2010, the first lady and daughter Sasha traveled to Spain for a mother-daughter vacation.
-- August 2010, summer vacation again at Martha’s Vineyard.
-- July 2010, the first family went to Mount Desert Island, Maine.
-- May 2010, the first family had a four-day trip to Chicago.
-- March 2010, first lady and daughter spend Spring Break in New York City.


I have no objection to vacations, I object to paying for them. Everything they did, bought and ate was paid for by US during one of the worse depressions in US History. It's a flagrant gesture and I do NOT like it or the people who have perpetuated it upon us.

Jenny Woolf said...

One way or another, most of the US elections passed me by this time. Usually I'm much more interested and involved. I heard on the radio that the Chinese leadership welcomes Obama because they think he'll always back down when pushed hard enough. On the other hand they think Mitt was stupider than Obama and he sure was no good at dealing with foreign nations. Stupid or weak? Hm.....

On the plus side I feel a little encouraged because the extreme right wing crazies who have seemed really set on dragging the US down to a second class power, don't seem to be as popular as they were. Maybe it's dawned on them that a country which doesn't have an effective tax system and strong central government finds it hard to buy defence or stop its citizens from dying of cholera, etc etc.

As for assisted suicide, I think the issue for me is how you stop people murdering their relatives for their money. Imagine that mean sick old dad is the only barrier to inheriting 5 million dollars. Afraid I know a couple of people who could rationalise their way to pulling the plug on him, entirely from the goodness of their hearts and for his own benefit of course. (shudder). But like you, I think it is unimaginably cruel for the poor people who are trapped in impossible lives. This is a question with no good answer. A thought provoking post.

barbicakes said...

Forgive me, but I skimmed over your rant, like a speed reading class that whats his name invented.
I got the gist of it, you like, you don't like, you "F" this and you kick butt that.
If medical marijuana was deemed legal everywhere not only could it help many people but it could help curb the ever growing $$ problem here, but this idiot president would probably outsource it to India or China. I don't like him at all either no how no way....and I don't care if he's red yellow green or black. He's like Houdini he has a spell over this nation and I don't get it.

Ahhh that was nice.... I'll not do it again, one time was enough...thanks..it's very freeing like taking your panty hose off at the end of a very big meal. :)
Have a nice day.

Bruce Coltin said...

I pretty much agree with you on all counts, except that I like Obama because of his likableness. And, for the same reason, I also like Scott Brown, who somehow ran the dumbest campaign imaginable. He beat himself with bad strategy. Does anyone still value endorsements by Ray Flynn and Bill Weld? As for the real heart of your post, let's make a pact to keep the pills for each other. When, it's time, I will gladly crush one and mix it in to your beer. You do the same for me.

Suldog said...

Bruce - Deal :-)

Juli said...

Okay... I'm gonna weigh in on Q2. I voted Yes, simply because I have a friend who has been told to go live his life while he can, and there is nothing more the doctors can do for him. (He's currently living out his bucket list.) I could not justify denying him this option if he wanted it. However, the majority of people I talked to who were voting no was because of the Wording of the new law. More specifically that the prescription could be filled and used at any time and any where. Meaning that someone else (a teenager or a family member in grief) could get a hold of excess pills or the full prescription, AND that it was completely unsupervised. So if a person didn't want to burden their family, they could go for a walk in a forest and essentially OD right there for a random hiker to find on a trail.

Crazy. But that's the thought process. Most said that they would have voted yes if the law stated that a medical professional could issue the pills in a hospital or hospice (at home) setting where the person would not be alone. I really hope it makes the ballot again with better language.

On Q3... Hello? No brain-er. The tax revenue alone could solve our education funding shortcomings. That is of course, if the rest of the ass hats in public office could get their crap together long enough to do the right thing with it.

Okay.

That's all I have as I can feel my blood pressure going up...

Mariann Simms said...

I agree with everything you said - except about the woman I know nothing about. But, if I might add something that you and I may or may not agree on: Time constraints on campaigning. It seems as soon as one gets in office - six months later they are out campaigning for the rest of their term. That is NOT the way our tax dollars should be spent. They should be in their offices, going to meetings, showing up in their political capacity and sticking with it the whole damn time. No hand-shaking, baby-kissing, money raising, or anything else until, let's say, six months before their term ends. That's it. Six. No more than six. Also, there should be equal air time for all candidates...regardless of their party. Just because you have no money because your father didn't own 300 businesses...is no reason your voice shouldn't be heard (within reason). In that case, it probably would be difficult to weed out the people who just want to run because they get 15 minutes of air time. I guess there would have to be a legitimate system of checks and balances to see who is allowed to get the allotted air space. I'm sure if everyone ran a "fair" campaign, there'd be less of a monopoly based on wealth alone. Wealth might equal power...but it shouldn't count jack in a campaign. Past deeds should count...good decision-making, devotion to get the job done you promised, and serving the people (instead of having them serve you)...should be on everyone's "to-do" list...and they should get some of these things done...or we shouldn't re-elect their sorry asses.

Okay, I'm done now. :)

Suldog said...

Mariann - I agree. I've long been in favor of incumbents being limited in campaigning. That would tend to even off some of the advantage they bring to the table. They already have a record on which to base an opinion. Let that speak for them.

(Some tweaking needed, but that's the basic premise.)

Jimmy said...

Hey Jim, I agree Gary Johnson was a better choice than the only two candidates that were shoved down our throats, I lived in New Mexico while he was Governor and was pleased with him then.

Too bad the amount of money spent on these campaigns couldn't have been used to actually stimulate the economy, and why can't equal time be allowed for each candidate rather than only for those with the most funds.

Glad you got that off your chest, I agree with you on most everything you said.

silly rabbit said...

I actually had nothing at all to disagree with here. You said my mind very well. Thank you!

Al through the campaigning I kept waiting for Romney to point out that the Obamas are very, very wealthy too. Perhaps not as much, but way above the average person! Duh. I do not consider them to have a clue about the average man's financial plight any more than Romney. But he fell off his log on that one. In fact, he fell off his log a lot.

BTW... my contribution to Thanksgiving Comes First just hit the news stand, so to speak. =:]
And God Bless you for blasting WalMart!

silly rabbit said...

Yikes! Looking at my spelling makes me think that perhaps I should have waited to have that glass of egg nog. =:/

joeh said...

Damn, I feel better just reading this rant!

Absolut Ruiness said...

Even though i didn't follow the US presidential elections closely (for obvious reasons), your rant gave me a perspective on it. You don't know the way people reacted here in India at HIS re-election. As if he were a long lost son of the soil who will eventually mould all US policies for India's benefit. Some folks here smile so fondly when they speak his name as he were their own father! This is what irritates me about this election. The Indian media too went berserk. Anyways, I thoroughly enjoyed this venting out of your emotions and it wouldn't have been YOU for you to not to do so. "We can always go back to being assholes if it doesn't make things better." Always an option but we have to be otherwise first!

Lora said...

I agreed some, I disagreed some. But most of all I'm just glad this election is OVER and I still have about half the friends I had when it started ;)

Kathleen said...

Oh, Suldog, I do love you so. And I love how social media has a provided a means for conversation about politics.

I agree with much of what you've said.

But I have way more faith in Obama to do the right thing about the economy and here's why:

My recollection was that he tried to put forth a balanced budget but was blocked by what seemed like incredibly juvenile behavior, eg, "No, I'm not gonna budge unless you do exactly what I want."

I also think he restored the country's reputation internationally, and, truly, I would have been so embarrassed to travel abroad when Bush was in power. World opinion of the US sank so low it was horrifying.

I also recollect he inherited a huge economic issue with Wall Street and a hole dug to China from the open-checkbook policy of pouring cash into what even I could see from the outset was a house-of-cards reason to go to war in Iraq.

I can't imagine what the world economy would have been like without the economic stimulus package-and I think it should have been bigger. I think it put a finger in the dike and kept things from getting far worse. I thought the man was doomed to fail when he entered office. I don't think a president has faced a worse "no-win" situation in history. But we are seeing a slow recovery and, to be sure in Minnesota, unemployment is looking better.

Obamacare? I am SO grateful for the provision that allows my kids to be on my coverage till age 26. That was HUGE for our family. I think healthcare is SO screwed up in this country, that only a single-payer system (as flawed as it is) will ever realign the patient-physician relationship and get the insurers out of the middle. That would go a LONG way toward reducing healthcare costs. So, in the meantime, I'm good with Obamacare.

As for entitlements, Medicare is a mess, and the only way out as far as I can tell is to pour way more support into hospice care and stop spending so freaking much on end-of-life heroics that only prolong misery.

So, Mr. Obama gets my support. And if the Republicans will knock off the spoiled brat have to have it my way or I'm picking up my toys and going home mentality, they I think you'll see some real progress on the economic front.

All that said, it really helps me to read "rants" from intelligent, informed people like you so I can understand the opposition to Obama. Having been a reporter in a county in Texas right next to Ron Paul's county at about the time he entered politics, I can tell you that I would NEVER support him as a candidate. Tom Delay (whom we called "Tommie") used to pass through the newsroom to drop off ads for exterminator business. I am completely floored that he rose to the position of power he did.

I cannot imagine what we'd be going through right now if we had to wait for a man with ZERO national or international governmental experience to set up a cabinet, actually figure out where he stood on issues and stick with that, and supposedly reach across the aisle.

Nope, as the former head of a $4 million portfolio of businesses in a nonprofit organization, I would be hard-pressed to hire someone with Mr. Romney's level of experience for such an important job when compared with someone who already had 4 years of experience and had toughed out one wicked hard term of office and actually learned what his limitations were so he could begin work with them. I'm afraid Mr Romney would have had a dangerously long learning curve in a critical time in our country's history.

So, I am optimistic that we'll keep moving forward. And I hope you'll still be my friend cuz I love you to pieces!

(Oh yeah, that felt SO good to rant! Thanks!)

Retiredandcrazy said...

I think I would agree with most of your rant, but I haven't got enough life left in me to think about it you crazy man.

SueAnn Lommler said...

That he was re=elected with his record...well surprised me totally!! I mean, seriously
Enjoyed this post
Hugs
SueAnn

Buck said...

I didn't get out into the Virtual World much yesterday and just now read yer screed. I agree with EVERYTHING... except the Gary Johnson piece. You're correct about the Big L's getting more and more votes, and that's a Good Thing. Perhaps there will come a time in what life I have remaining that I'll be able to vote for a Libertarian without feelin' like I'm just pissing in the wind. But that time WASN'T this past Tuesday, and I pulled the "R" lever (actually filled in the R-oval) yet again.

I've read all the comments here and I sincerely hope Obama's supporters are correct with their "he's not THAT bad" sorta comments. I disagree, of course... but the outcome remains to be seen. And in serious doubt, too.

Three Hundred Sixty Five said...

I'll have to go back and read the rest of your blog later....I just wanted to give you a cyber hug (**) for your G. Johnson vote. Truthfully, I wasn't sure how many knew of Gary, and I sort of figured most of his votes would come from my part of the country (I live in Albuquerque). Congratulations....you're a damn sight smarter than I thought.

Three Hundred Sixty Five said...

Oh, yeah, and I wish I lived in Colorado, but at least I can get there with a 4 hour drive......