|
 |
The Last Word for June 25, 2000
|
 |
 |
Indecision 2000
|
 |
THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED DO NOT REFLECT RPGAMER.COM, THEY SIMPLY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF ONE HUMBLE EMPLOYEE USING THE MEANS AT HIS DISPOSAL TO ADDRESS AN AUDIENCE
With the summer's national conventions coming (and I'm not talking about DragonCon and Anime Expo), I feel the need to address some issues weighing heavily on my conscience. Here I have a method of speaking to thousands of people, and yet give biased views on just about everything. Therefore I am going to try to provide a totally non-partisan diatribe on the current election.
People tend to vote on party lines. That is just the way it works. People also tend to vote the way their parents did. That is also just the way it works. There is comfort in consistency, and if after thought you decide that is the way to go, by all means do.
But think about it first. There are two different facets of the election that you have to think about: the presidential election, and the congressional elections. I don't mean think about these elections on the basis of policy, or the basis of party, or the basis of who gives a better speech. I mean think about the positions these people will hold, and what is most important for that position.
The president does not have any say in what the law is. He has the ability to say what the law isn't through veto power. He has the ability to suggest policy issues for Congress to discuss, but no direct legislative power. That means that the world will not fall apart if you vote for someone who does not fully agree with you on all the issues. But if policy is not the best thing to go on, what should you look at?
Well, policy is very important. It would not be intelligent to vote for a socialist if you are a big supporter of capitalism and democracy. What is most important is character. Not who gives the best speech, not who looks the most presidential, but who you think is the most intelligent. The presidency is not about long-term policy goals. It is not about what he plans to do. Spur of the moment thinking is required.
The United States government was not designed to change overnight. Nor was it designed to change radically over a few years. Checks and balances, as well as separation of powers were designed to make the government slow to change, so that the passions of the day would not rule. Therefore more than a fraction of those long-term policy goals probably won't get enacted during the term. In a crisis situation, would you rather have someone talking about tax cuts and social security, or someone who can come up with an intelligent decision?
I know I said I wasn't going to be partisan, but I am going to explain my own views in order to illustrate what I am saying. It is up to you to decide if you think it is partisan or not. I am a liberal of sorts. However, I supported McCain, a republican, during the primaries. To me, he demonstrated intelligence that crossed over party lines to show that he was simply an outstanding candidate.
|
When asked about why he allowed his daughter to have an abortion when he claimed to be pro-life, he responded that it was not his position to interfere with decisions in his daughter's (who is an adult) life. When questions were raised about his sanity from being a prisoner of war, he released his medical records including a full psychological file. In two times of crisis, he gave the right answer. Not the expected answer, but the truthful, honest, correct answer (to me).
Of course, McCain got eliminated early, and most people did not agree that he was right for the job, or people simply did not think about it. The field has narrowed to two viable candidates, and instead of making a checklist comparing their stances on abortion, capital punishment, social security, etc. to yours, just think about who they are. Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, intelligence comes first. There are many stupid liberals and conservatives in the world. Just because they fit the same bill policy-wise does not mean that they are intelligent.
Congress however is a whole other can of beans. They are the exact opposite. You want someone who will represent your interests in Congress. An idiot who will vote the way you want him/her to every time is not really a problem. Seniority in all honesty matters more than intelligence (in this humble writer's opinion). The best candidate agrees with you on the issues, and is a gifted speaker with seniority. There is nothing wrong with someone who will be persuasive for your cause.
I would apologize to those living in other countries and are reading this, but chances are that their voter turnout is much higher. You see, their systems are not based on control through non-participation. People do not vote here because they feel it will not make a difference, and that the parties are no different. All of those are true. The system is almost too effective though. Voter turnout is dropping through the floor. This is just a desperate attempt to try to level off the decline in votes.
Naturally, many of you are going to decide not to vote. I just ask you to think about it first. Overconfidence is the cause of many mistakes in the political world. "No one would dare oppose the United States." Maybe no one sane. In Japan the bubble-economy of the 80's created immense apparent growth, and the government didn't try to pop the bubble, only to fall out of power for the first time in 38 years. Yes, the parties are the same. Yes, your one vote will not make a difference. But the candidates are not the same, and your one vote with the millions thinking like you, will make a difference. Just think about it.
|
 |
RSS feed
iTunes