The New York Times is endorsing Hillary Clinton and John McCain. So What? Big Fat Hairy Deal. What difference does it make? Why in the world should I care? Guess what, I don’t.
The real question is who am I going to endorse. And the answer is….
I haven’t found a favorite yet. In fact, I am really in hopes that another candidate or two will come forward. As it is I don’t care for any of the choices. Oh great, there’s that word again. Choice. It is our choice, my choice, but it feels like the only choices are bad for me. "Would you prefer a kick in the shin or a poke in the eye"? Neither thanks, please give me another option.
Why are we still locked into thinking a two party system is a good idea? There is a great Simpson’s episode from the Treehouse of Horrors that has the aliens coming down and taking over the bodies of Dole and Clinton during election season. One or the other wins the White House and then they enslave all of Springfield. The parallels to real life touch too close to home. Some wonderful lines sprinkled throughout the show should cause tears of laughter followed by tears of panic as they sink in. “It’s a two party system, what are you going to do about it?” or Homer’s “Don’t blame me I voted for…”.
We are stuck in the middle of a two party system, again. My problem is I can’t tell one from the other. The competing platforms are ‘tax and spend’ or ‘spend and tax’. The only difference is who they focus the pandering on. Either way I seem to be stuck paying the bill while all the time seeing less or less for my money.
Does this mean I’m jealous for not getting my fair share and would be happier if I were included in more of the government programs? NO WAY. I am one who would like to see less government and less of a bite on my livelihood. I was single for far too long and during that time I lost over half of my hard earned dollars to taxes and let me tell you that that is a tax that is grievous to be born. Now that I am married I get to suffer the marriage penalty (tax wise that is).
You may think that I must make a lot of money but it is not so. I had to scrimp and save to get even simple things like a Playstation 2. I ate a lot of Top Ramen noodles and $1 TV dinners and probably way too many 3 corn dogs for a $1 to do anybody any good. I did these things to be able to do other things like travel (cheaply) and enjoy other hobbies like movies, music, and photography. I watched over the air broadcast rather than pay for cable, and I watched it on my big (depending on how close you sat) 25 inch TV.
I have always tried to pay my own way and take care of my own needs so that I would not be a burden on others. If I couldn’t afford it I did without. And you know what, I did just fine. Maybe these are lessons passed down from my forefathers that instilled values in my growing years. Maybe it is a fear of not having a thing to my name. Maybe it is a natural desire to pass from childhood to adulthood. Either way, the search for independence and self reliance is very empowering.
So of the current field of players who can I support when all of them are promising more of the same only more so? Who of the bunch will help 'me' meet 'my' goals? Who of any of them will protect me from them? Until I find the one that actually has my best interest and that of the nation as a primary objective and not just an insincere empty promise to serve their own needs, I will keep looking, and wishing their was another choice.
This is the kind of election that reminds me again that there ought to be a button marked “None of the Above” as one of the choices. It works like this. If “None of the Above” wins, none of the candidates running may be included in the run off for that election and must sit out that election. A whole new group must be put forth and the elections run over for that particular office. This is the one chance for the voting public to say to both the political parties, “you gave us a poor selection so it is time for a do over”. If there is to be any chance of finding better candidates, this one is our best chance.
The last few elections, and by that I mean all the ones in my lifetime, seem to be more about voting against something rather than voting for something. With a nation as great as ours this should NEVER be the case. From the principles of Freedom and Liberty to Honesty and Integrity there is a myriad of values for which to stand. We should have candidates who can translate these values into action. There are still many individuals out there that live their lives by abiding by their principles and stand out as examples to us all by excelling in their fields of endeavor. I am sure that of all her citizens, America must have a willing few out there that can make the phrase ‘Public Servant’ meaningful again.
Clinton, McCain, Obama, Edwards, Thompson, (anyone who doesn’t make it at least to Super Tuesday wasn’t really running no matter who they were), Huckabee, Romney, Paul (who makes some valid points but like the rest offers no real solutions), Gulliani, and the rest (why didn’t they let Colbert run). Who in the bunch can you really vote for, and by the time November rolls around will it just be another vote against? Maybe we should vote for Pat Paulsen http://www.paulsen.com/, after all Tom Smothers says “When I look at the current selection of candidates, Pat Paulsen is the most qualified, regardless of his physical condition.” Right now I’d have to agree. By the way, Paulsen beat Kuchinich in the Michigan Democratic primary. If that isn’t a wake up call I don’t know what is. Perhaps Stephen Colbert should team up with Paulsen, after all Huckabee was just playing Colbert as a running mate looking for the Colbert bump.
Buckle up people, because this time, its going to be a very bumpy ride.
This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.
No comments:
Post a Comment