Queue on 3/8/2010 at 15:56

---

It's Primary Season! Have you shot yours yet?

So I'm driving up Michigan Ave. yesterday, on my way to the farmers market (since my favorite spot at the local wireless joint was being occupied by a couple of fat, cackling cunts toasting each other's wittiness with foamy cappuccinos) and I come up on a mini-van with the slogan

[CENTER][/CENTER]

written across the back window in large, yellow letters. Now as I pass the vehicle, I see that it must surely be Bob's campaign wagon, since his stupid grinning face that's plastered to the side of the van - surrounded by a cloud of campaign slogans and whatever the hell Bob's running for; I don't know, drain commissioner or some fucking thing - is also the same stupid grinning face driving the van.

Now I ask you, does anyone honestly think that by voting '4' Bob, they'll get a job? Is Bob suddenly going to start handing out applications the moment he gets into office? Yet this is now the mantra being vomited out of every one of these fucking charlatans' politicians' mouths this time around--much like 'Wanna be safe" or 'Wanna see change' were a few years ago. The very notion of any of these slogans is complete and utter bullshit, empty words designed to rally the ignorant and uninformed into going out and voting since W is gonna keep us safe, Obama is gonna give us change, and Bob is gonna give us a job.

I swear, anyone found using yet another cliched campaign slogan should be branded with a large, scarlet 'S' and summarily beaten. Bob can suck my dick.

And what the hell is the deal with politicians trying to sound all folksy and illiterate? "Wanna" and "4"...why not just have your campaign signs written up in text-speak, huh? I don't want someone who can't spell, or hasn't the time to write out the word 'for', being in charge of anything--not even a fucking drain. I want smart people with smart ideas running the joint. I don't want someone that I'd like sit around and maybe have a beer with, stroke their beards lovingly, or someone that's 'Just like the rest of us.' I WANT BETTER THAN US!

Now I can understand the sentiment behind these 'Jobs For All, and Passage To The Promised Land' slogans--people, especially here in Michigan, need jobs. But please quit playing to the ignorance of general society. And general society, don't be stupid in thinking that by voting for some politician that suddenly prosperity will rain down like manna from heaven. Jobs don't just happen by voting for somebody, nor does the country need to be 'Taken back!' from the clutches of godless baby killers hell bent on taxing your daughters for marrying homosexuals and catching the AIDS.

How about instead of slogans, and empty lip service, and campaigns that focus on such irrelevance as being 100% pro-guns and 100% pro-life and 100% pro-jobs (what, and the only thing, that every fucking republican candidate who's running for a lesser office is offering us in their adds) that these bastards, many of whom will soon be "going to work for us" and making a damn good living off of our hard-earned dollars, give us ideas and plans for the future?

GIVE US SOMETHING TANGIBLE!

But then again, I forget that we live in a sound-bite society, one in which even media outlets disallow their news to be delivered beyond a third-grade level, where the general public have been trained not to make choices based on such frivolities as facts, plans, and reasonings.

And for that, it really does seem that we get what we deserve.

Bob may not be able to give you a job, but the likes of Bob, when elected, sure as hell will make a good living in office--and may soon be able to get rid of all those shitty mini-vans.

---

Now on a related note, the morality of this was recently questioned on NPR:

In my case, I am a longtime registered Republican. But seeing that I haven't affiliated myself with the Republican party since 1990, being that I'm more-or-less what one could call a Goldwater Democrat, I (with one or two exceptions) always vote Democratic. But this time around, there is no chance in hell that any of the Democratic gubernatorial candidates could win the election--there's going to be a Republican in office. So, I, as are many registered Democrats, am voting for a certain Republican candidate in the primary who is a highly intelligent, outspoken, and decidedly moderate (i.e. not a religious lunatic) in the field instead of voting between the two democratic candidates. I did this because I don't care who runs as the Democrat, even though I vote Democratic, but I certainly do care who runs as the Republican. If the Democrats lose, I want a Republican in office who's not the typical Republican (promising a return to God, Guns, and hatin' Fags. Oh, and he'll give you a job, too.) running this time around.

So the question was posed, is this moral for Democrats to crossover and vote on the Republican side in order to pick a favorable candidate to run against their own candidate?

june gloom on 3/8/2010 at 16:45

---

Fuckin' A, Queue.

It's not even about "chance to win" though that definitely plays a part. For me it's about "whoever is least likely to fuck everything up."

demagogue on 3/8/2010 at 17:22

---

I might be even one step further since I often think in affirmative action terms ... Balance them out so the fuck ups of one side somewhat counteract the fuck ups of the other. Especially if there are like 8 people on some commission and they're all from the same party, I'll vote for the other party just to get their perspective at the table. That sort of thing. At least for local politics. For national politics the stakes are higher so if I don't really trust any of the candidates I might not vote as an affirmative stand, or I'll look for at least one issue that a candidate agrees with me on, so I'll feel at least they'll push for that one little thing. :erg:

CCCToad on 3/8/2010 at 17:57

---

The rhetoric around the economy has gotten amusing. Now that both parties seem to be admitting (begrudgingly) that the economy sucks, a blame-game has begun. Its either Bush's fault or Obama's fault depending on who you ask, with neither one willing to concede that Geithner has a much more direct influence over the economy than either president did.



Thing is, quite a few of the politicians ARE people with smart ideas. However, those smart ideas are of how to better things for themselves, not for you. Its not hard to tell that both major parties have woken up to the anti-establishment and anti-insider fury that has swept the working class, but its also obvious that neither has any intention of representing those people's interests. So instead of offer any substantial changes, they turn up the folksy rhetoric, wear the hillbilly clothes, and adopt a twangy accent.

But why are so many people so ignorant of politics that such stuff affect them? The "media class" should look in the mirror: the major news networks do a pretty crappy job of covering anything important. Apparently trivia such as what Sarah Palin posted on her facebook page, debating who might appear on the next American Idol, or who Nancy Pelosi insulted is far more important than anything else going on. For example, the revelation of a private security firm that has been warrentlessly (http://www.examiner.com/x-27653-SF-Technology-Examiner~y2010m6d21-Secret-group-aids-fight-against-terror) tapping the majority of internet traffic in America , the "loss" of 90% of Iraq reconstruction funds, and the recent issuing of an Executive order to implement the Law of the Seas treaty were all less important this week than Gossiping about Brett Favre.

fett on 3/8/2010 at 18:55

---

He burned you with BIG WORDS