A brilliant plan
It is no secret that I think there is virtually no difference between the Republican party's presidential candidate and the Democratic party's candidate. This past week's Democratic National Convention further affirmed just how hard the Democrats are trying to sound like the Republicans. I would be willing to wager that George W. Bush could easily read John Kerry's acceptance speech at the Republican's shindig, and no one would know the difference.
Yet, I encounter many, many people who would define themselves as "progressives" or "liberals" -- people that would have voted for Nader or some other third-party candidate in previous elections -- that insist it is important to put aside ideology in this election and vote for John Kerry. The thinking here being that George W. Bush must not be re-elected.
At first this strikes me as extremely sad. It seems to me it signals the death of the idealist. I even read an online comment yesterday where someone said they had no problem voting for a warmongering murderer and liar like John Kerry instead of the warmongering murderer and liar George W. Bush, because it was the pragmatic thing to do. After all, this person reasoned, one of the two was bound to be elected. This individual wanted to make sure it wasn't George W. Bush.
Greg Palast, while acknowledging the similarities in Bush and Kerry, uses the analogy, "Asking if Kerry is as bad as Bush is like asking if a slap in the face is as painful as a brick to the skull."1 It's the same "lesser of two evils" argument that pervades almost every election in this country these days.
At 5:30 a.m. this morning as I was picking up little turds Zoë Poodle deposited in the floor2, it finally dawned on me that Kerry's plan is brilliant. He already knows that many of the anti-war, progressive, liberal voters want Dubya out of the White House so badly they would be willing to do most anything that doesn't require them to expend any more effort than driving to a voting booth and standing in line for a few minutes. Most of them will vote for him regardless of anything he says or does. Kerry already has the Michael Moore crowd solidly on his side, no matter how much it defies logic. After all, John Kerry may sound just like Dubya (well, except for the accent), but he isn't Dubya, and that's the most important thing.
It's the more conservative folks -- people like the so-called Reagan Democrats, many southern Democrats, and, most importantly, corporations -- that Kerry is trying to convince to vote for and/or support him. Therefore Kerry doesn't just support the war in Iraq, he wants to expand it. He announced that the Democratic party has "one simple purpose: to make America stronger at home and respected in the world."
And get this: those idiots at MoveOn.org have even sent a letter to their members telling them when Kerry is elected, "we'll wake up that morning able to dream big dreams for a country and a world that are once again headed in the right direction." I don't know whether to laugh or cry over such unadulterated bullshit!
So, this November a large number of people (but nothing close to a majority of the population) will march like so many mindless, pre-programmed "Stepford Wives" robots down to their designated voting places. These people -- especially those under, say, 40 years old -- will step into the voting booth and cast a vote for their own slavery. Because anyone that votes for either John Kerry or George W. Bush is voting in favor of military conscription, plain and simple.
Maybe this will not be such a bad thing. When you get that letter telling you to report for your enslavement, maybe then you will have the backbone to do something right for a change. God knows we need something to shake us out of this mindless lethargy.
And if that wasn't enough venom for a Saturday morning, read this. (Make sure to check out the embedded links.)
1I think Palast is being too kind to Kerry when he compares Kerry's "slap in the face" to Bush's "brick in the skull." It should be more like a baseball bat to the head versus a crowbar to the head. The difference is not that great. But that's beside the point.
2It is raining outside, and Zoë Poodle apparently doesn't like to defecate in the rain.
Yet, I encounter many, many people who would define themselves as "progressives" or "liberals" -- people that would have voted for Nader or some other third-party candidate in previous elections -- that insist it is important to put aside ideology in this election and vote for John Kerry. The thinking here being that George W. Bush must not be re-elected.
At first this strikes me as extremely sad. It seems to me it signals the death of the idealist. I even read an online comment yesterday where someone said they had no problem voting for a warmongering murderer and liar like John Kerry instead of the warmongering murderer and liar George W. Bush, because it was the pragmatic thing to do. After all, this person reasoned, one of the two was bound to be elected. This individual wanted to make sure it wasn't George W. Bush.
Greg Palast, while acknowledging the similarities in Bush and Kerry, uses the analogy, "Asking if Kerry is as bad as Bush is like asking if a slap in the face is as painful as a brick to the skull."1 It's the same "lesser of two evils" argument that pervades almost every election in this country these days.
At 5:30 a.m. this morning as I was picking up little turds Zoë Poodle deposited in the floor2, it finally dawned on me that Kerry's plan is brilliant. He already knows that many of the anti-war, progressive, liberal voters want Dubya out of the White House so badly they would be willing to do most anything that doesn't require them to expend any more effort than driving to a voting booth and standing in line for a few minutes. Most of them will vote for him regardless of anything he says or does. Kerry already has the Michael Moore crowd solidly on his side, no matter how much it defies logic. After all, John Kerry may sound just like Dubya (well, except for the accent), but he isn't Dubya, and that's the most important thing.
It's the more conservative folks -- people like the so-called Reagan Democrats, many southern Democrats, and, most importantly, corporations -- that Kerry is trying to convince to vote for and/or support him. Therefore Kerry doesn't just support the war in Iraq, he wants to expand it. He announced that the Democratic party has "one simple purpose: to make America stronger at home and respected in the world."
And get this: those idiots at MoveOn.org have even sent a letter to their members telling them when Kerry is elected, "we'll wake up that morning able to dream big dreams for a country and a world that are once again headed in the right direction." I don't know whether to laugh or cry over such unadulterated bullshit!
So, this November a large number of people (but nothing close to a majority of the population) will march like so many mindless, pre-programmed "Stepford Wives" robots down to their designated voting places. These people -- especially those under, say, 40 years old -- will step into the voting booth and cast a vote for their own slavery. Because anyone that votes for either John Kerry or George W. Bush is voting in favor of military conscription, plain and simple.
Maybe this will not be such a bad thing. When you get that letter telling you to report for your enslavement, maybe then you will have the backbone to do something right for a change. God knows we need something to shake us out of this mindless lethargy.
And if that wasn't enough venom for a Saturday morning, read this. (Make sure to check out the embedded links.)
1I think Palast is being too kind to Kerry when he compares Kerry's "slap in the face" to Bush's "brick in the skull." It should be more like a baseball bat to the head versus a crowbar to the head. The difference is not that great. But that's beside the point.
2It is raining outside, and Zoë Poodle apparently doesn't like to defecate in the rain.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home