What would a true third party candidate say in a debate?
Watching last night’s debate, I was pretty sure that other than McCain’s lack of poise when listening to Obama- that the undecided wouldn’t be energized one way or another. With the polls being as close as they have been, I’d say neither side can declare a victory.
But- or course, both sides think their guy won.
The operative word has been “change” in this election. First Obama owned the word, and now, McCain is trying to position himself as the “tested” maverick (as opposed to a testy one- but, that’s my opinion creeping in). I’m still terrified of McCain’s choice for VP, and I’m even more scared that their are signs popping up saying SARAH in big letters and McCain down below it.
It wasn’t till tonight, sitting and watching the movie “Election” that it hit me- when the “third party” candidate stands up and says:
Who cares about this stupid election? We all know it doesn’t matter who gets elected president of Carver. Do you really think it’s going to change anything around here; make one single person smarter or happier or nicer? The only person it does matter to is the one who gets elected. The same pathetic charade happens every year, and everyone makes the same pathetic promises just so they can put it on their transcripts to get into college. So vote for me, because I don’t even want to go to college, and I don’t care, and as president I won’t do anything. The only promise I will make is that if elected I will immediately dismantle the student government, so that none of us will ever have to sit through one of these stupid assemblies again!
[Student body erupts in huge cheers] Tammy Metzler: Or don’t vote for me… who cares? Don’t vote at all!
It was the part about “everyone makes the same pathetic promises” that struck home.
McCain’s answer is to control spending, promise less regulation, lower taxes and smaller government- while attacking Obama as a “liberal” who will turn over your health care to the government (even though that’s who takes care of John’s health care).
Both of them remind each other of all their votes against things that are tied together with other things- as if voting records in Congress have anything to do with true leadership.
Obama talks about protecting the middle class, tax cuts, providing health care, getting out of Iraq and investing in education, but, of course- he apparently isn’t old enough to lead our country or experienced enough if you listen to McCain.
The reality is, Congress is what actually makes the laws, and after listening to the two of them evade giving a real answer on what has to happen to straighten out the economic disaster in this country- I started fantasizing about what someone like Ross Perot would say right now. Not that our country would be smart enough to take a third choice seriously or even allow a third voice.
We’ve devolved into a society that is binary in nature. Coke or Pepsi, Red or Blue States (note- Coke is Red, Pepsi blue) – it’s as if we’ve simplified the system to the point of pointlessness. With our ballot process still in question by some- and the Electoral College still in place, we’ve even stripped the people of their voices down through arcane machinations that gave us our current failure in chief.
Tammy Metzler even urged people not to vote, which, in previous elections has been the case- with our “democracy” lucky to have 50% voter turnout. At some point, shouldn’t we be backing up and looking at this system and asking if the founding fathers actually got it right?
In the parliamentary system, when things start breaking like our economy, there is an election pronto. We’re still tied to a set schedule, which forces us to wait 4 years to vote the bastards out. We’re spending $5 billion on elections this year- that’s a billion more than the tax cuts for the oil companies that Obama accuses McCain of supporting.
There is no question in mind that Obama is the better choice and the right choice to be our next president, but, the real question is- are we electing someone to be president of a system that’s totally and completely broken beyond repair? Has our system failed us?
Looking at the economic mess- the war- our standing amongst other nations- and our mud-slinging, incredibly expensive system of elections, maybe it’s time to consider a real change- to something that we can afford and works.
That would be a real change.
Still living in Plunkitt of Tammany Hall. Winner takes all. Restricts ideas and the ability to create consensus. Yeah the system is broke especially considering how few people understand it. But I don’t want to change it.
We don’t want the uneducated voting now do we?
On the positive side, remember that Obama is refusing to take money from PACs and corporate lobbyists. If Obama wins, it shows proof-of-concept for campaigns that avoid the big money corruption system that we currently have, and it proves that you don’t have to sell your soul just to win the election.
And hopefully, after people see that it’s not necessary to buy into the system just to win, hopefully people will stop buying into the system and we can see some real change.
But it all depends on whether Obama wins and provides that proof-of-concept.
(BTW: Not impressed by either Barr or McKinney. Which is sad, because both Badnarik and Cobb were excellent in 2004, and after Kerry’s pissass performance and refusal to fight over Ohio, I really wish I’d voted for one of them instead of wasting my vote on Kerry)
>the undecided wouldn’t be energized one way or another.
Truer words.
I watched the debate and still have no idea who I’m voting for. I’m drawn to third parties, and have been for most of my voting life. The platforms are clear, concise, have no hidden crap I have to read between the lines to find.
>Has our system failed us?
Hell no. We failed the system. How we moved so far away from the Constitution- a document, an inspired piece of writing- that still leaves me in awe and can still move to tears is beyond me. That is our system and that is fail-proof provided we don’t veer from it. Alas, we’ve veered way off course. And I mean we as in us, not we as in them. Let’s all take responsibility for our own part in this shitstorm- *that* would be a real change.
I don’t understand everyone’s fascination with the constitution. It is a terribly flawed document that is archaic and way past its prime.
The problem with America and its governmental system is we promote an all inclusive ideology but our government, especially the constitution, is built on principles that are anything but that. This is an elitist’s society no different than the many that came before it. The sooner we realize this the sooner we will realize that the majority of the “we” gets used. While the biggest upper middle class society ever lives happily ever after. Most people on here are living happily ever after in my estimation.
>I don’t understand everyone’s fascination with the constitution.
I can’t speak for “everyone’s” fascination, I can only speak for myself: There is no other document that provides a road to individual freedom, under any form of government, better than the constitution. Flawed? Well, it’s written by humans- imperfect- so sure, it’s flawed. But is there a better plan?
>we promote an all inclusive ideology
Who is “we” and what “inclusive ideology” are you referring to?
>but our government, especially the constitution, is built on principles that are anything but that.
I think the constitution is about freedom- individual freedom to pursue the life you choose without undue interference from a governmental entity.
>While the biggest upper middle class society ever lives happily ever after. Most people on here are living happily ever after in my estimation.
I don’t understand. Should I read this as saying that you think a class of people should, by virtue of their economic status alone, not be happy?
If I were poor I would not be happy. Actually, that is not true. I was poor and very happy, but a lot of poor people are not happy. But then again so are a lot of rich people. Socrates said it best when he said that money does not make one happy, rather it is easier to be happy if you have money – or something like that. Poor people probably need to pay more in taxes so the feel more a part of regular society, the society that is getting SCREWED by all of these BS politians and thieves on Wall Street, not to mention the thieves that are located through out Dayton, white collar criminals to the greedy handout bums. They all should be shipped of to Iceland and leave the 200 million decent citizens alone. This shit is getting old.
“I don’t understand everyone’s fascination with the constitution. It is a terribly flawed document that is archaic and way past its prime.”
The US was a failed state twice in its history.
1. The failure of the Articles of Confederation as a loose federation, requiring the writing of the Consitution.
2. The failure of the Constitutional system to accomodate political confilict prior to the Civil War, failure leading to resolution via armed conflict.
“I think the constitution is about freedom- individual freedom to pursue the life you choose without undue interference from a governmental entity.”
Its really about creating a “more perfect union”. Here is the Preamble:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
I guess ‘secure the Blessings of Liberty” would imply freedom, but the original Constitution as ratified doesn’t lay this out. The freedoms come in the first 10 amendements, the Bill of Rights (and certain subsequent amendments). But the Consitution can also be amended to resitrict freedom, as with the 18th Amendment.
>“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
That’s a thing of beauty.
We can break this down, phrase by phrase, but yes, “We the People” not “I the King” or “We the Almighty Government” says to me, right off the bat- individual people have joined together to figure out how to live together to protect ourselves and find our own way to happiness- thus creating a more perfect union. Anyway. It’s a remarkable work, still valid today.
The 18th amendment is an example of the beauty of this: It’s fluid. In the history of government, this is truly remarkable, astounding thinking. For a group of disparate people to come together and hammer this out? Mind blowing.
What happened to “promote the general Welfare”- I’ve seen a lot of promoting of the generals of the economy-
Not much promoting of the privates. This bailout is the latest example. Where are the penalties for those who got us into this latest financial mess? All reward, no risk and the taxpayers to bail them out?
Jefferson would be pissed.
—-“I can’t speak for “everyone’s” fascination, I can only speak for myself: There is no other document that provides a road to individual freedom, under any form of government, better than the constitution. Flawed? Well, it’s written by humans- imperfect- so sure, it’s flawed. But is there a better plan?”
The constitution promoted slavery! Provided no road for women in respect to any kind of freedom. There are new governmental documents being written everyday, some might actually be better (Iraq’s constitution anyone?)
—–Who is “we” and what “inclusive ideology” are you referring to?
We = the people. Inclusive ideology is that we promote an idea of the “American dream” but history and social statistics show that this is hardly the case.
—–“I don’t understand. Should I read this as saying that you think a class of people should, by virtue of their economic status alone, not be happy?”
In regards to the myth of the “American Dream”, yes.
———-
The American system does not allow socialism, facism, communism…. so how free is it? Wouldn’t these systems be more “for the people” than what we have now? Haven’t we in the past outlawed this type of individual freedom? Don’t we now by the product of our political system (there are no mention of political parties in the constitution) restrict individual freedoms?
There are systematic reasons why 3rd parties fail and why freedoms voiced and acquired through political participation are limited. Historically this was obviously the case and that precious constitution does little to protect or promote them today.
David-
>Jefferson would be pissed.
As should anyone with a functioning brain.
My saying the Constitution is an incredible document, doesn’t imply that every President or Congress is a great example. Humans= flawed= all the way down the line.
J. R.-
The Constitution gives an opportunity to change and grow as the nation changes and grows. That’s the beauty of the thing. If we want it to change and grow more, we have to speak up, as has happened throughout history.
>we promote an idea of the “American dream”
The American Dream is an idea created by advertisers, after WWII if I’m not mistaken. You can hardly blame Jefferson, et al. for anyone buying into that.
>The American system does not allow socialism, facism, communism…. so how free is it?
The American system allows for the open discussion of other systems, it allows us to borrow from other systems. This is used and abused all the time, but it doesn’t take away from the fact that we are free to do it.
>socialism, facism, communism… Wouldn’t these systems be more “for the people” than what we have now?
Historically, these systems allow for extensive horrific abuse of the people, by some people, so no, they have not proven to be “more for the people”.
>There are systematic reasons why 3rd parties fail and why freedoms voiced and acquired through political participation are limited. Historically this was obviously the case and that precious constitution does little to protect or promote them today.
I agree. Let’s change it.
The Constitution is hardly original in the concepts it engendered, or in the freedoms it espoused. The Magna Carta predates it by nearly six centuries and though it was intended to be a short-term solution to a political crisis, has endured as the most important legal document ever, setting the precedents for constitutional law and providing the basis for modern civilization.
It is important to remember that the U.S. Constitution is open to interpretation and that those can and do vary so widely that rarely does the Supreme Court return a unanimous reading on a single point of constitutional law.
To be certain, it is an essential and important document in our history, but the Bush administration has done a phenomenal piece of work in rendering both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights little more than sentimental artifacts.
Bob Barr – Libertarian. He now is getting my vote. He may go by Robert, but he is always Bob to me. And since everyone on this site loves to slam conservatives (which I am fiscally conservative, not socially) I thought I would share this funny thing sent to me via my good friend Gary (a true blue liberal) which was sent to him from his buddy Denise, a true blue libertarian, or so he says:
http://www.gargaro.com/liberalif.html