Candidates Continue to Clash as Crunch-Time Comes
The 18 month slog that is the United States Presidential race is about to see ballots off to a premature start, as voters in key states are being encouraged to vote early. Up to 70% of the electorate could potentially vote in advance as Election Day becomes Election Month. Use of election translation services are rocketing as preparations get rapidly under-way.
As the election campaigns continue on all sides, there has been a continuing emergence of truth twisting, seemingly on all sides. Admittedly, sometimes these deviations from the facts do appear to have happened completely by accident – a lack of fact checking or common sense perhaps – however the potential to mislead and deviously influence voters is practically omnipresent.
If it’s not republican Senate candidate, Todd Akin, suggesting that his opponent isn’t ladylike enough or declaring that rape victims bodies have natural mechanisms to prevent pregnancy, then it’s Texan Governor, Rick Perry, ‘educating’ children of the apparently questionable concept that is evolution – “It’s a theory that’s out there, it’s got some gaps in it”. That’s not to say that foolishness is a character flaw that only republicans possess. President Obama quite publicly offered his condolences after he believed a tornado in Kansas had destroyed an entire town and killed 10,000 people; the aforementioned natural disaster actually took the lives of 12. Uninformed and insensitive yes, but nowhere near the same league as Rick Santorum’s speech on the dangers of contraception, a presentation in which he relied on the expert advice of a collection of celibate men…
While errors of this kind are mostly down to a lack of forethought, naivety and just plain idiocy, there are also evidently some more sinister digressions from the truth occurring. Paul Ryan’s address to the RNC a few weeks ago was praised obediently by the republican supporters in attendance; however commentators easily managed to pick out at least seven points from his speech which were possibly not even remotely true. The lead anchor of CNN, Wolf Blitzer, stated the he marked ‘seven or eight points’ that the fact checkers would surely be able to dispute. But as his co-anchor, Erin Burnett, explained (and whole heartedly believed), his speech motivated people and it was well received, so never mind the issues with the facts…
The general consensus of the presidential race so far, as is usual of such an epic occurrences in US politics, that it has been a circus. With the evident lack of commitment to the truth and to the well being of the American people it’s no surprise that the electorate are losing faith. As depressing as it all may be in the grand scheme of things, at least we can trust that if we keep our eyes on Mitt Romney for long enough then he’ll eventually say something completely ridiculous to cheer us all up.
“I’m not familiar precisely with what I said, but I’ll stand by what I said, whatever it was.” —Mitt Romney (May 17, 2012)
Your comments are all so true. It is a sad state of affairs when the candidates on each side will say anything to get elected. I am not happy with either candidate I have to choose from, and just hope whoever is elected will do what is best for our great Country.
So, who will you vote for?
Nobody says that you HAVE to choose, do they~?
Face it: your vote makes/will make/can make absolutely no difference to the outcomes—but all of the votes taken en masse give credibility to a disastrously flawed system.
You do not have to participate, you know.
I love the quote at the end, sums up your point perfectly… No clue what the issue is, yet they still back it up with full confidence!
Ahha
logical, hey?
Nicely said. I suppose the circus will never end as long as we let politics divide us, instead of demanding a balanced approach focused on the greater good by voting out anyone who focuses on money and power. At present, we’d have to vote out almost everyone (though I do think Obama is one of the more balanced presidents we’ve had). I enjoy your blog.
I don’t live in America but I share your belief of Obama being the most balanced presidents. It really will be an epic shame for the company if they let Romney in!
Thanks for checking out the blog, I hope you continue to enjoy it!
Obama is a politician with an agenda—he’ll do and say anything to retain his job; after his next term is assured and unchallengeable he’ll carry on doing whatever he wants, regardless. regardless of the minions.
If this is ‘balance’ then he’s as balanced as any other; no more and no less.
*sigh* Thanks for reminding us. Ever notice how afraid politicians are to change their minds unless they can find a way to say they changed their minds while also saying they aren’t changing their minds?
I wish I could vote for an actual human rather than politicians who often appear to be partially robotic. Like bionic men except they get weird rhetoric upgrades (downgrades?) instead of intelligence, strength or speed.
Maybe one day we will be able to vote for people we can actually relate to and understand, definitely is a shame that so many politicians are so similar.
Whenever George Dubs Bush spoke on TV I could almost see the invisible man standing behind, working him like a ventriloquist’s dummy. The illusion was (and the allusion is) perfect.
The protracted campaign cycle is exhausting…for the voters – never mind the candidates. Once more the vote comes down to who will do least harm instead of who will do most good. In our household, as disappointed as we are with Mr. Obama’s job performance, we are still hopeful that in a second term he will have the audacity to come through as the intelligent, thoughtful, caring human being we think he is instead of the fawning, conciliating wimp we’ve perceived him to be. Not on the table: voting for Romney, not voting at all!
I would definitely cast my vote for Obama if I was in the country. I think he’s come in to office at a very difficult time after the mess that his predecessor made, given the chance of a second term I would love to believe that he is going to get things moving.
I think you’re very right in saying that voting comes down to electing the one who does the least harm instead of the most good. Absolutely tragic.
As a non-American the issue is still not merely academic for me. Whichever idiot you get in power affects the rest of us; where the USA is concerned nobody can sit on the fence.
But you’ve bought into their con, haven’t you? Far better if you’d finished with “Not voting for either, not voting for any, not voting at all”.
Try an analogy:
You are very very ill and you have three doctors. The first prescribes a hefty dose of strychnine, the second likewise but of arsenic and the third tells you (with a huge heart-warming smile) that only his cupful of cyanide will cure you.
Answer me honestly, please: given that you so desperately feel the need to vote—which will you choose?
And yes. It really is that simple.
LOVE this post! It is a succinct description of the mess that is American politics. I fear for my country’s future.
I ended up not voting, but typically I go libertarian, so it would not have mattered anyways. Like the one person wrote below, I saw it as who is going to do the least harm, not the most good. Looking to change myself first before depending on the government to legislate forced change onto those who disagree with my viewpoints.
The only quote from your post that I did not see as being out there or misleading is the one about evolution having gaps. The scientific community is in a political battle of its own over the end all be all of evolution because scientist are finally getting the courage to identify and ask some questions that are showing the flaws of evolutionary theory.
Keith, a.k.a. Daddy Moose
Having in recent decades learning to (a) think, and (b) objectively, for myself I was surprised when I did a quiz once to discover that I am the archetypal Libertarian. I was shocked.
Because I regard all political parties as blights on progress, and all politicians as murderous thugs. (All, I said.)
So: why not let them start all the wars they want, just so long as only they get to fight in them? Why not let them borrow all the money they want from the more frugal/sensible … so long as only they have to pay it back, and from entirely their own resources?
Even better: how about if they are held criminally responsible for anything that happens to the ship while they are at the helm?
You didn’t vote. Excellent start.
Evolutionary theory? It’s just a theory … disprove it if you can, offer a viable alternative if you can; I like an open mind.
‘Democracy’ … quite simply, isn’t.
Defined as “Government of the people, by the people, for the people” in reality it is Government of the people, by the party, for the party.
The whole system is an elaborate facade and We, the Unthinking (anywhere in the world) have bought it. Lock, stock, and barrel.
Any involvement with system—other than ignoring it completely (or even better, outright revolution)—is to perpetuate a monstrosity. Politicians are parasites and that is the beginning and end of it.
Any takers?