I still don't know who I am going to vote for*. I liked to think that I'd have made up my mind by this point, but...
There isn't anything, no quality what-so-ever, to either of the candidates that inspires any optimism or excitement in me. On one hand, we have McCaine, who purportedly isn't "Republican" enough for the Right. His history as a war vet and his present as a crotchety old man leads me to believe otherwise. On the other hand, we have Obama -- The Champion of "Change". Change, however, is vague and ambiguous in-and-of-itself. While the road we are on clearly isn't working, changing our course can either be beneficial or harmful. And change doesn't just happen. Rome wasn't built in a day, as the Fella says.
Who's to say that, if not elected for a second term, Obama can muster and solidify this "change" in his Presidency? If he starts and, come election time, is replaced by another candidate touting such a vague goal, who is to say whatever good Obama can manage will not be immediately undone?
What's worse is the continuing problem of a political system built around "special interests". On one hand, we have a party that would see the rich getting richer. On the other hand, some would see the poor profit beyond recent recollection. I have no love for the rich, and no disdain for the poor (those who cannot pick themselves up by the boot-strap, at any rate); however, this country was built by (and mainly consists of) the men and women in the middle -- neither rich, nor poor.
Still, it is the middle that feels the pang of economic hardship, the bite of social uncertainty. While the rich remain as such, as the poor remain poor, the Middle Schmuck (that's what they've been reduced to for decades now) can fall on either side of the fence at any given moment. They live an existence with territory staked upon the edge of a knife; it could go either way. While the parties bicker over who sustains and supports the "common man", neither truly do.
All the while, the Middle Ground wavers from left to right. The unstable footing could give way at any time, and the last solid foundation for the country could come crashing down. Then we are left with only The "Rich" and The "Lecherous". This is why the country needs -- no, clamors for -- a candidate whose aim is not to help one third of the nation, but the whole nation.
Of course, were such a candidate to emerge come next election, I am certain he/she would stand no chance in the polls. After all, whichever candidate truly desires a win can always buy it. It's happened before, countless times I am certain.
Alas, we live in a day and an age when being a Moderate is akin to being a "Socialist" (or even the dreaded "Communist"). Capitalism does not thrive off of families that can barely manage to make ends meet, as they are ignored by those who would promise to represent them. And brick-by-brick, the fragile wall between Stability and Instability begins to weather and erode. Most would rather see the country collapse (with most on top, of course) than be labeled something as vile and awful as "Socialist" as our home remains stable.
"A house divided cannot stand."
I'm willing to bet most of my countrymen would be unable to tell me who said this, and therein lies the problem. Instead of fighting for what America could have/should have been, and instead of emulating men like Washington or Lincoln, the big questions are: "Who can be the next Reagan?" or "Who can be the next Clinton?" As if either man did enough good to deserve such respect. And, depending upon where you may stand on the political spectrum, you will either love me or hate me for saying that.
We fought and bled (and, regretfully, even murdered) for a country that gave power and rights to the common man/woman. Whatever you think of tactics in our past, remember that every civilization exists because they fought, bled and, yes, even murdered in order to sustain what they felt was right and just.
But back on topic...
This country was founded for the sake of the man/woman who had no loyalty to "left" nor "right". But along came "change", and now there can only be two acceptable walks of life. Any other road seems a path to heresy and disloyalty. And while I, myself, clamor for "change" I am also aware of where it can take us. And in this country, there are only two choices: The Left, or The Right.
I don't know about any of you, but to me the future down either path looks rather grim. They've already proven themselves as such.
* Fuck it. I'll cast my vote for Christopher Walken.
There isn't anything, no quality what-so-ever, to either of the candidates that inspires any optimism or excitement in me. On one hand, we have McCaine, who purportedly isn't "Republican" enough for the Right. His history as a war vet and his present as a crotchety old man leads me to believe otherwise. On the other hand, we have Obama -- The Champion of "Change". Change, however, is vague and ambiguous in-and-of-itself. While the road we are on clearly isn't working, changing our course can either be beneficial or harmful. And change doesn't just happen. Rome wasn't built in a day, as the Fella says.
Who's to say that, if not elected for a second term, Obama can muster and solidify this "change" in his Presidency? If he starts and, come election time, is replaced by another candidate touting such a vague goal, who is to say whatever good Obama can manage will not be immediately undone?
What's worse is the continuing problem of a political system built around "special interests". On one hand, we have a party that would see the rich getting richer. On the other hand, some would see the poor profit beyond recent recollection. I have no love for the rich, and no disdain for the poor (those who cannot pick themselves up by the boot-strap, at any rate); however, this country was built by (and mainly consists of) the men and women in the middle -- neither rich, nor poor.
Still, it is the middle that feels the pang of economic hardship, the bite of social uncertainty. While the rich remain as such, as the poor remain poor, the Middle Schmuck (that's what they've been reduced to for decades now) can fall on either side of the fence at any given moment. They live an existence with territory staked upon the edge of a knife; it could go either way. While the parties bicker over who sustains and supports the "common man", neither truly do.
All the while, the Middle Ground wavers from left to right. The unstable footing could give way at any time, and the last solid foundation for the country could come crashing down. Then we are left with only The "Rich" and The "Lecherous". This is why the country needs -- no, clamors for -- a candidate whose aim is not to help one third of the nation, but the whole nation.
Of course, were such a candidate to emerge come next election, I am certain he/she would stand no chance in the polls. After all, whichever candidate truly desires a win can always buy it. It's happened before, countless times I am certain.
Alas, we live in a day and an age when being a Moderate is akin to being a "Socialist" (or even the dreaded "Communist"). Capitalism does not thrive off of families that can barely manage to make ends meet, as they are ignored by those who would promise to represent them. And brick-by-brick, the fragile wall between Stability and Instability begins to weather and erode. Most would rather see the country collapse (with most on top, of course) than be labeled something as vile and awful as "Socialist" as our home remains stable.
"A house divided cannot stand."
I'm willing to bet most of my countrymen would be unable to tell me who said this, and therein lies the problem. Instead of fighting for what America could have/should have been, and instead of emulating men like Washington or Lincoln, the big questions are: "Who can be the next Reagan?" or "Who can be the next Clinton?" As if either man did enough good to deserve such respect. And, depending upon where you may stand on the political spectrum, you will either love me or hate me for saying that.
We fought and bled (and, regretfully, even murdered) for a country that gave power and rights to the common man/woman. Whatever you think of tactics in our past, remember that every civilization exists because they fought, bled and, yes, even murdered in order to sustain what they felt was right and just.
But back on topic...
This country was founded for the sake of the man/woman who had no loyalty to "left" nor "right". But along came "change", and now there can only be two acceptable walks of life. Any other road seems a path to heresy and disloyalty. And while I, myself, clamor for "change" I am also aware of where it can take us. And in this country, there are only two choices: The Left, or The Right.
I don't know about any of you, but to me the future down either path looks rather grim. They've already proven themselves as such.
* Fuck it. I'll cast my vote for Christopher Walken.
however, this country was built by (and mainly consists of) the men and women in the middle -- neither rich, nor poor.
You need to take some history lessons.