How many faces did YOU recognize as the camera panned through the room? I'm just curious. How many of our elected officials and other governmental VIPs are recognizeable to the average American? How many are recognizeable to you? I read recently that Fox is going to put together a new show called "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" Great... yet another demonstration of how pitifully uninformed and unintelligent we are as a whole. News stories about the new game show quoted a Fox exec as saying, "While most game shows measure how smart you are, this is a show that will measure how dumb you are." Awesome.
And why does our government have to be so freakin' politicized? I hate our two-party system. HATE IT. It drives me insane to watch half of the chamber stand up and the other half stay seated in mute rebellion. It drives me insane that the speechwriters provoke this nonsense (and that the speechmakers actually deliver this blatantly politically charged rhetoric). I blame both parties equally, don't get me wrong. Both sides are ridiculously off-their-rockers. Why should I, a regular don't-really-know-that-much-about-it American join one side over the other? You're both FULL OF CRAP. I tried to elect you, even pay taxes so that you may earn a paycheck, to learn about and really debate the issues, surround yourselves with expertise so that you could be better informed than me, make policy decision according to what's best for ME. Yet, you spend all your time playing to "party leadership" (a.k.a., those who can fundraise like the dickens). While it's okay that you don't know me, it really bothers me that you don't care about me. All you seem to care about is winning and proving them wrong. I watched an episode of Sex and the City today that reminded me of what I'd LIKE the State of the Union to be... in it, Samantha is booked to speak at a cancer survivors' luncheon. Smith (her beau) tells her to just be herself and speak from her heart; she says she "knows PR" and she must deliver a polished (and rather run-of-the-mill) speech. The result... no one is inspired by her prepared speech, but her impromptu mini-break-down brings them all to their feet. Bottom line... I don't identify with (and am not moved by) the overly-polished, pompous rhetoric that hijacked my too-good-for-you HDTV tonight. I wish I knew what YOU REALLY THINK.
Finally, a quote from today's New York Times really got my blood boiling this morning. In a piece about the public financing of presidential campaigns and its approaching demise ("Death Knell May Be Near for Public Election Funds"), the Federal Elections Commission chairman said, "We are looking at a $100 million entry fee." Once you read the article, it makes me a little less angry (I'll explain in a sec), but upon first reading of that quote, I was pissed! What is this country coming to when the chairman of the Federal Elections Commission is actually quoted as saying there's a $100 million entry fee to get into the presidential election?! But, hopefully, he was being sarcastic. Hopefully, he's trying to make his own point about how candidates are becoming increasingly bought-and-paid-for by private financiers. Hopefully, he and I agree that the public financing of presidential elections was implemented for a reason... and a good one at that... to avoid bought-and-paid-for politicians who govern for and on behalf of special interests. And, once again, the problem is on both sides. Candidates of both parties have refused public monies in favor of private fundraising. Yet (and I feel like this is the exact same issue... if you disagree, feel free to rebut), in the Democratic rebuttal after tonight's State of the Union, Sen. Jim Webb (from his wow-I-didn't-know-they-grew-them-that-tall high horse) said:
"It falls upon those of us in elected office to take action. Regarding the economic imbalance in our country, I'm reminded of the situation President Theodore Roosevelt faced in the early days of the 20th century. America was then, as now, drifting apart along class lines. The so-called "robber barons" were unapologetically raking in a huge percentage of the national wealth. The dispossessed workers at the bottom were threatening revolt. Roosevelt spoke strongly against these divisions. He told his fellow Republicans that they must set themselves "as resolutely against improper corporate influence, on the one hand, as against demagogy and mob rule, on the other." And he did something about it."Wow, Sen. Webb... you think we are drifting apart along class lines? You don't say! Not when it takes a mere $100 million to throw your hat into the ring for President. Can I buy a vowel? Well, how about an election? And, in your opinion, Sen. Webb, I wonder just who are today's "robber barons"? Oh, no doubt, we can lob a few word grenades at each other, point fingers across the aisle, and talk about the other party behind its back. Of course, they are the robber barons. COME ON... you're ALL the robber barons! Look at your own W-2s when they finally arrive within the next month (and you better be counting all sources of income, mind you... no tax cheats among us holier-than-thous, right?). Freakin' hypocrites. And please don't tell me that YOU'RE going to be the Theodore Roosevelt of our time by standing up and doing something about it. I dare you to try. Unfortunately, that's one thing both parties agree upon (and that's absolutely vital to the lifeblood of our two-party system). You can talk all you want, invoke the memory of great leaders, spew rhetoric out your... well, you know. But you cannot, under any circumstances, actually change anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment