It was probably because of the elections yesterday that made everybody want to talk politics. I've found that this is always a recipe for disaster, especially if you're at a party or at the office. The debate might start off nice but usually boils down to political party bashing. You know, good ol' fashioned American Mud Slinging. If you find yourself in the minority for that particular conversation, God help you. You better run for shelter because its gonna get messy.
At the naive age of 18, along with my draft card, I was given the choice between a tree-hugging, dope-smoking communist party or a gun-slinging, coorslight-chugging redneck party. (I bet you already know which aligns with which.) What I didn't realize, however, was that when I finally chose a party, I no longer would be judged by my own decisions and opinions as an individual, but I would be judged and criticized for the entire history of other's mistakes. Eagle no longer exists, thank you for shopping with us, please proceed to the nearest generalization. (I've found that name calling and generalizations are usually a lot easier than actually trying to find middle ground to stand on. And hell, who can resist a good zinger.) Here in lies the problem....the two party system.
Now backed into a corner just trying to save face, I find myself sometimes even defending my party on an issue that I don't even agree with. Why is it so hard to concede and say "Yes my political party is not perfect." The debate has transcended to a place as touchy to talk about as religion and race. So what to do? Declare independent and give up your right to the primaries. Nay. I say get rid of the entire party system. Create an election where you can only judge people on their personal beliefs and actions, not on their political parties. Everyone is an individual and should be judged in that way.
So when you go to vote look a little deeper than party lines, some people might surprise you. And if you don't, I'm not too worried, in reality your vote only counts as .0000008%.
3 comments:
Commie bastard.
I think things would be very different if Bush had just won the first time around, I know I could understand after the Clinton scandals that you'd want someone very different after that. It fired up a certain part of the republican party. The second term was different, its not like they didnt know who they were voting for. With a 20 percent approval rating I would assume some of those people would like there vote back. And that is a sad fact to all the democrats who desperately wanted Bush not to get another 4 years. This had all lead to a very divided country.
I agree. What about a one time only 6 year term for president.
No re-election to distract the preident from his duties - especially when there's a war.
Post a Comment