Tag Archives: stupidity

Tangled Web

This election’s shaping up to be another humdinger.

THE HOARY QUESTION OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

In the middle of a contentious election, in the fourth year of an administration that didn’t win the popular vote, in an era of ennui, this is the probably the worst possible time to ask one of the hardest questions of our political life. But that is also why this question cannot be avoided:

Should the Electoral College survive in its current form, or at all?

Florida 2000: The Sequel

Newspapers and magazines have been full of stories raising the disturbing possibility that the 2004 presidential election could once again end up in the courts: Will we wake up on Nov. 3 not knowing whether George W. Bush or John Kerry will be president for the next four years? Will the Supreme Court intervene again? How did things end up this way? Didn’t the country learn anything from the Florida debacle of 2000?

God Save Us From Liturgists

Take a wild guess how much I appreciated what this guy had to say about the liturgy.

Polarisation and liturgy

…My second suggestion would be to strengthen the force of the abrogations of Paul VI, and make the old rite available only to elderly priests who celebrate it in private…

Boring

America was served twice-reheated leftovers tonight. What’s worse, is that the meal
wasn’t filling or satisfying in the first place. It looked good, but it tasted like
cardboard.

Tonight’s debate was more of the same style over substance we say in the previous
two debates. The answers were all over-rehearsed and lacked any real depth or sincerity.
Like in the first debate, Kerry came off looking and sounding better. Bush didn’t
fall on his face like he did in the first debate, but he didn’t come out swinging
like he did in the second debate, either.

Continue reading

Cheap Imitations

For the last hour or so, I’ve been watching the second of two debates between Vice
President Bush and Governor Dukakis on CSPAN. I was in sixth grade at the time of
original broadcast. I idolized the character of Alex P. Keaton in “Family Ties”
and parroted his conservative statements and supported the candidates he liked,
much to the chagrin of my liberal Democrat parents. In my social studies class,
I debated, as if I were Bush, against a classmate playing Dukakis. I don’t recall
the substance of the debate, but I know that, in the eyes of my classmates, I cremated
“Dukakis”.

A lot has happened since them. I’ve grown up and changed. I eventually shed my conservative
skin and accepted what my parents said as political gospel. I was a bleeding heart
liberal through most of college. I gradually learned that idealism and naivete
are a bad combination. I slowly drifted toward the middle, where I am today. I’m
still and idealist, but some of my ideals have changed. My political acumen is still
dwarfed by my knack for science, but I believe I have lost much of my former naivete,
and I think I see things more clearly than I used to and many of my peers currently
do.

I watched that Bush-Dukakis with great interest. I was surprised to note the similarity
of the questions asked. I was further surprised by how similar the answers were
to those heard from Kerry and Bush. There was a very distinct difference, however.
Both candidates were more thoughtful, intelligent, and responded to more questions
without evasion, than today’s candidates. Bush, Jr. and Kerry rarely strayed from
their campaign slogans and ready-made rebuttals. Neither has debated with either
the prowess or the substance of Bush, Sr or Dukakis.

When I stepped away from the TV to write this entry, I had one very clear idea in
my head. Both of the candidates in 1988 were head and shoulders above the candidates
of 2004.
2004’s candidates are cheap imitations of 1988’s. Given the chance,
I would vote for either Bush, Sr. or Dukakis before wasting my vote on either of
the vapid, inept, self-serving, self-aggrandizing, grandstanding egomaniacs running
today.

Shut Out

Libertarian candidate Michael Bedanrik and Green candidate David Cobb were arrested
at the site of the second debate
. They were attempting to serve papers to the
Commission on Presidential Debates. The story makes for an interesting read. (Thanks,
Slashdot)

Supporters of the two-party system have argued that minor candidates shouldn’t be
allowed to participate in debates. The problem with that reasoning is that’s it’s
circular. As long as third party candidates get shut out of mainstream events, they
will remain minor. If people get a chance to see them in action, they might actually
change some people’s mind. *Gasp* The horror!