Earlier I received a comment from someone that doesn't seem to remember me. I respect him as a person, but his comment caught my eye and I have to speak on it.
Hey there, glad to meet another, oil drinking, minority oppressing, big business supporting, voter disenfranchising, war-mongering blogger.There are just several things right and wrong with this statement. It's right to believe that all of these are misconceptions for people. He is right in presenting these statements as incorrect, yet common, stereotypes, if it is meant to be so. You see, I am truly all and none of these things.
I am not an oil drinker. I understand we have problems with renewable resources and need to take efficient steps to push research and production for new fuels as well as alternative energy sources, including nuclear. I also understand the current need to open up our own capabilities in Alaska and elsewhere.
I am not minority oppressing. I have been oppressed by minorities for a good portion of my life. I've lived in areas that are predominantly Hispanic and black and been the "cracker" or "gringo" whose ass they intend to kick. When you start looking at college for your future you have to do better than blacks or Hispanics to be equal, just to compensate for affirmative action. (Yes, I know there is no more AA. When I was looking for college there was none.) I am not to say that all blacks and Hispanics are racists. It simply appears that there are more of them in those communities than there are in white communities. They get away with their racism too. Could you imagine the mayor of New York saying that New York will be a vanilla city at the end of the day? I bet it would cause an uproar for Arnold Schwarzenegger to declare an area "Hymietown". Yes, I'm the one who's been oppressed by minorities.
I do not support big business. The only thing that comes to mind when I hear about big business is monopoly. For some reason I keep reviewing the Sherman Anti-trust Act in my mind and carrying it over into present day America. I frequently look at the company I work for today and wish there was a way to negotiate with this machine. There is an inherent danger when you create a big business. They change from doing the ethical thing to doing the legal thing. The better your lawyers the more legal things become. I do not support big business as a whole. I support companies, no matter what size, that provide a valuable service at a reasonable price and do the ethical thing, no matter what size they are.
I am not voter disenfranchising. I would like to think that I am the disenfranchised voter. I have not voted since the presidential elections. The politics of things are so ridiculous and the fighting so stupid that everyone involved has lost my vote. I no longer vote republican or democrat. I'll only vote if I can find a worthy candidate. You will not get my vote by proving the other guy is worse than you are. You have to earn my vote.
Last but not least.
I am not a warmongerer. In an ideal world there would be no need for war. Everybody could negotiate a compromise to every problem, even religous problems. This is, however, not a perfect world. We live in a world where an entire religious group believes that all other religions are a scourge upon the earth and need to be "wiped off the map". We are in a war not of our own making. We are in a war of religious freedom where Islamism is threatening the rest of the religions throughout the world. I do not wish anybody kill anybody else. I still think there are political maneuvers we can do to make this problem ineffective. Things like forcing an oil embargo on Iran and Saudi Arabia. (No, I never said they were easy maneuvers.) If terrorists have no money then they can't support their cause. It's similar to the way we shut Soviet Russia down. However, I understand there is no way in the free world we could get China, Russia and several other countries to abide by this. Hence, our need to have rough men who stand ready. There is no other path we can take. If there was a viable alternative I would not advocate war upon anybody. Unfortunately, we can't force free or communist nations to their international civic duty when the League or United Nations is the recognized world legislative body.
No, I am none of the things I have been called, but I have been accused of each and every one of them several times over.
Posted by aakaakaak at September 5, 2006 02:37 AM | TrackBack
http://www.lonympics.co.uk/politics.htm Arnold has the same values as satan
Posted by: Down with satanism at September 5, 2006 12:02 PMWow, how prolific of a statement. You should go into politics with the intelligence that exudes from such a statement. You'll fit right in with the rest of the short bus politicians we have in office.
Posted by: Jeremy H. Bol at September 5, 2006 05:55 PMJeremy, I think many of us are starting to lose the political affiliations of old because of the sub-standard performance of all politicans. We see practical solutions and reasonable compromise regardless of party as our own salvation. I agree with you on almost every point. The republicans lost me with their immigration stance. I have no party.......we are alone.
Posted by: Billy Budd at September 5, 2006 06:58 PMI learned many years ago that no matter who we vote for, things pretty much stay the same. Except when they get worse.
I think parties should be limited to Birthdays and New years Eve!
Posted by: Patty-Jo at September 6, 2006 12:46 AMI gotta say I'm more or less with Patty-Jo on this.
We don't so much have to ban all political parties, which I have advocated in the past. Just take the teeth out of political parties (and political actions committees, etc.) by outlawing financial contributions to political parties (and political action committees, etc.). Outlaw financial contributions by political parties, lobby organizations, businesses, etc., to candidates for political office. The only financial support that should be allowed to take place (and matter) during a campaign is from the registered voter to the declared candidate.
Parties can still be the focal point of ideology and canvassing of candidates, but they become far more volunteer oriented (much like the original concept for an elected official in the U.S.). Candidates only gain financial support for their expensive campaigns (since parties will no longer be able to contribute to them) when they garner the trust of registered voters and have committed to running for an office.
The second step is to enact (and enforce) real term limits on elected officials. We already have the President covered, but for Congress the rule could be very simple: no elected Representative or Senator may run for immediate re-election. This does not mean they can't run more than once or serve more than one term, all it means is if Senator Snuffy is in office right now, he/she/it can't run for re-election to the next term. He/She/It could run for the term after that though. Now Congressional officers no longer have to worry about their upcoming re-election while in office.
Posted by: Brodie at September 7, 2006 04:58 AMhello people http://abga.info
Posted by: fgjhg at June 30, 2007 01:00 PM