So, it's been a few days since the GOP's Pledge To America (c, R, and TM, patents pending) has been released. I wasn't going to comment on it then, and I'm not going to comment on it now. Why? During the Clinton Years, I remember the Contract With America, which struck me as fascist and stupid (hey, look who's acting like he might run for Prez! Newt Gingrich! Damn, I miss kicking him around. The cover of Spy magazine that goofed on him and Janet Jackson just about made me shit myself). Not helping was that so many of the politicians who espoused the responsibility and ethics of the Contract violated them constantly, either in their private lives or the bills they voted for. I'd sooner trust Lindsay Lohan to be a security guard at Pabst than trust a party looking for an opportunity for political dominance to represent my best interests.
What's interesting is, in the days since, there's been nary a ripple about it. Some commentators read it and commented on it (I haven't read it, I simply don't want to. AND I READ SOFTWARE LICENSES, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!). But the general public has reacted with a shrug, and there's barely a mention of it anymore. This flag to rally under has almost no one.
The dichotomy of the two party system is that, if you don't like one party, you must automatically support the other. That's how it's worked for most of history. And now, people that don't like the D's are suddenly unwilling to trust the R's like they have in the past. I don't like Pink Floyd, but one of the lyrics Roger Waters wrote that sticks in my head is, "You have to be trusted by the people that you lie to, so that, when they turn their backs on you, you'll get the chance to put the knife in." I think this illustrates the flaw in the R's plan.
This entry has no point. None. Zip. Zero. Iie. Nada. This is just me sorting through a bunch of thoughts bouncing around my head and trying to make some sense of them.
It seems that Christine O'Donnell is in the news again for an old TV appearance. It's kind of the same thing they did with Sarah Palin in the early days of her campaign. Nothing unusual here, these kinds of things happen all the time now, thanks to nothing being completely gone on the Internet. Here's the part that has my brain running. See, a lot of this is about, "Hey, Tea Partiers! You wanted a candidate who wasn't a Washington insider! And look who you got!" We all make political choices that we regret (if I had known then what I know now, I never would have voted for Bo Grits or the Populists back in 1988). But people don't seem to be regretting this.
I suppose it could be argued that the Washington connected politicians don't have these foot-in-mouth moments. But is it because they do not believe that stuff, or are they just better at hiding it? In which case, people are still voting for idiots, they just don't know it. Lots of politicians have stances that seem downright insane, but because of how Congress is structured, it isn't easy for them to inflict their stupidity on the world.
The disappointing thing is not that outsiders, the people who actually want to change things, say such stupid things. I'm seeing a breakdown in the voting populous. There used to be a time when politicians tried to cover up or deny their shortcomings. The last one who handled this deftly was Ronald Reagan. Bush Sr. tried, but was nowhere near his league (I remember after a debate with Geraldine Ferraro, Bush said he "kicked a little ass out there." I saw that debate, and that is definitely not how I remember it). But when Clinton became President, suddenly, people were making excuses for his egregious behavior. Bill Maher advanced understanding, as he was the leader of the free world and all. Maybe voters saw the President as a reflection of their values, the rock and roll boomer generation living a vicarious fantasy. Or maybe, after all the stories of the backroom deals and the Tai Collinses and the pork barrel projects, people simply gave up. They treated it as a joke. Why not? Taking it seriously got them nowhere under the previous presidencies, so who gives a shit?
I'm just wondering 1) the O'Donnell's of the world are more common and we're only now seeing that, 2) if what separates the pros from the wannabe's is keeping their WTF thoughts to themselves, and 3) if the public is more likely to support your right to be a kook if you basically turn yourself into a reality TV show, one that runs on C-SPAN instead of E.
Like I said, no point, just pondering.
President, Illinois chapter
Society Of People Attempting To Think Clearly And Probably Failing