Better late than never...

This post has been delayed, but better late than never.

Well, when I asked the Nick Lampson campaign about why there weren't any of their signs along two of the major roads in my area, but a whole lot of Ted Poe signs, I got this response:

"I understand your concern about signs. The Poe campaign has hire henchmen to pull up our signs wherever they see them. So, I'm certain this is what has happened in your area. We have even opened a North Harris County Field Office on 1960 two months ago (102 FM 1960 West)."

There were a couple of other paragraphs, but it was all boiler plate, and not directly related to my inquiry. It all seems kind of strange, and I'm not sure what to believe, but during this election there is nothing I wouldn't put pass anyone.

In fact, since I'm in Texas, and obviously not a Republican, I was thinking about voting for a third party. Right now, they have vote pairing sites, just like in the 2000 election. And while there is some controversy behind them, I think they are a good idea. In 2000, people in swing states would agree with a person in a "safe" state, like Texas, to exchange candidates. For instance, a person in Florida would agree with someone from Texas to vote for Al Gore instead of Nader, and in exchange, that person from Texas would vote for Nader. The idea is, at present, 3rd parties don't have enough power to get elected. However, if they can get 5% of the vote, they qualify for federal funding, which in turn helps them be more competitive in future elections. For more information, see this article: http://slate.msn.com/id/2108641/

I believe we need more choices in this country to make it a properly working democracy. Unfortunately, I think Nader is a total tool. Not because of the 2000 election, but because of his general attitude and approach to politics. I could probably go into more detail about him in a future post, but right now, it's just another tangent. Maybe I'm being too hard on the guy when I call him a tool, but I really don't see him as much of a third choice.

I was actually thinking about voting for the Libertarian candidate. Yes, you read right. I'm not a party hack of any kind, and I still believe most of the Libertarians I've read or met are Ayn Rand "fuck the poor" types, but at least we wouldn't have the following from them:

1) Pseudo-morality debates that pander to the fringe, and distract away from real issues
2) An ill-conceived "war on drugs"
3) Warmongering
4) Corporate Welfare
5) Laws that robe us of our natural/god-given liberties
6) Racist immigration policies
7) Did I mention the drugs?

I don't totally trust them as far as the environment and education is concerned, but when it comes right down to it, I like an inefficient goverment. I'm not an anarchist, but I do believe one thing: individuals don't suck, but when they get into large groups, their stupidity gets the best of them. That's the reason why we have branches of government, why we have checks and balances. Too much power, especially when it is the highly "efficient" variety, is dangerous.

After 9-11, I saw things get a little too "efficient". People were scared, and were not thinking straight. They wanted something done now, and damn the consequences! People were afraid to question leadership and the direction of this country in general. They were willing to give too much power over to someone else, to make all their problems go away.

Of course, things never work out well when this happens. People sought leadership, and got exploitation. Where once we were united in tragedy, we were divided by fear mongering. I see the past four years, and I am not happy. I see what is on the horizon, and it looks like more of the same. I DON'T want to see "four more years" of the same.

Perhaps that is not the best expression of my feelings, of my anger and frustration, but it will have to do for now. This post took long enough to write.

I was also going to write about the Jon Stewart incident of Crossfire. I meant to write about it as one of my first blog posts. But the more I wrote, the more threads it pulled at. That whatever I wrote, it wouldn't do the subject justice.

But there is one thing I will say, some of the responses to the incident has pissed me off a bit. There are a lot people picking away at the guy, and ignoring the message. And even what they are picking at is stupid:

1) That "He's a hypocrite"

Give me a fucking break, it's a comedy show. Now while maybe not "Crank Yankers", and more political satire, it is not CNN. They rip BAD into a lot of politicians and media whores. They don't regurgitate the talking points, and offer real perspective in their satire. But during the interviews, if they treated their guests the same way, it wouldn't be funny. And that is their main goal, HUMOR. Now, if Jon finds a moment where he can be aggressive with his guest AND be funny, he usually does.

Not a perfect situation, but even as a "political satire", they are closer than the mainstream media to the ideal. THEY EVEN GOT A FUCKING PEABODY AWARD FOR CHRIST SAKE! This only shows how fucked up things have gotten, NOT how legitimate they are!

2) The "Clown nose off, clown nose on" Syndrome

Some people think that the above attitude is cowardly. That he criticizes the media, and then hides behind his clown nose. But again, even if you want to say that he is more than just a comedian, or that he can't have it both ways, you do have to agree that the responsibility of a "political satirist" is different than a journalist. That his show is not a debate show, but satire. That when people come on, he just keeps it funny. The real meat of the show has always been the satire, and not the interview.

3) That he's a partisan

Pot, meet kettle. Pot, kettle, meet a distraction. He doesn't hide his views, that's what makes it political satire, a point of view. But he's not a partisan, it's not constricted by talking points, but the anger against absurdity. You can say he is "left-leaning", but when John McCain comes on, they get along great. Not only is he funny, but he's a reasonable person. And John McCain is not the only person on "the right" that gets treated this way. Anyone like that gets responded to well. Yet, anyone who is a short-sighted, two-dimensional hack, will be torn apart both outside and during an interview.

4) The "Rudeness" Factor

Fuck you!

5) "What does he know?"

He's only a comedian, right? The guy is an educated man, first of all. Second, a good comedian takes a lot of intelligence and creativity. Especially, political satire. Especially, for a program that won a fucking Peabody Award! (I still think this is absurd!) So, see #4.


I know I haven't cover the whole thing very well, but it's my stab at it. Maybe someone can pick everything I said apart, and I can refine my rant. Or maybe I'll just ignore you. I don't know, I just think we need to stop the bullshit. Stop attacking the person, and listening to the messgae. Start being reasonable, and open our eyes to the truth. To look with our OWN eyes. To think for ourselves, and question authority. To not accept how the world is framed for us, but help refine things together.

Or, we can just keep this silly drama up, talk about the same bullshit at the watercooler tomorrow, and be lost in our own little delusions. Fuck it, let's go watch CNN or Fox News until we get retarded! Then when we do something stupid, (which we always do), we can blame it on someone else and still claim our self-righteousness.

Ahhh, I think it's about time to pop some popcorn, watch some blood, explosions, and/or sex scandels on CNN, and jerk off to Paula Zahn!

(I'd do this with Fox News, but I hate those assholes, and they don't got a nice piece of ass like Paula Zahn! I'm sorry, but Anne Coultier looks like a retarded horse in a blonde wig. I seriously don't understand why people think she is attractive. I really think she looks like a German lesbian tennis player. That, and she's a facist, seriously.)

A horse is a horse, of course of course