Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Presidential Debate 2

Today is Wednesday, 17 October 2012.

Georg Buchner was born on this date in 1813.  Many regard his Woyzeck as the first truly modern drama.  It was also the first literary work in German to employ working class members as the main characters.

Today is the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty Day.  (Smirk and Snicker Day in the Romney and Ryan families.)

Herewith, a few observations on last night's Presidential debate.

"And brought us whole binders full of - of women."

One hopes Mitt meant loose-leaf notebook binders, not handcuffs and leg irons.  Given that Mitt fervently embraces a religion in which  women are relegated, by the god of this particular planet, to an inferior, not-quite-so-human-as-males status, I wonder.  Presuming that the "binders" in question were loose-leafs, would Mitt really have preferred handcuffs and leg irons?

Mitt believes that individual employers should dictate the extent of access to coverage that female employees may have in matters of female-specific health care issues.  By Mitt's principle, employers may choose to exclude contraception and abortion, so why not breast and uterine cancer?

Hardly surprising, Mitt is consistently a male chauvinist whose political positions are driven by the morally-obscene values of his cult.  Many would consider this a form of sexual deviance and perversion.

Another obscenity is the political hay manufactured by Mitt and Repugnicans over the American deaths in Benghazi.

America is, Mitt, as you wish it to be, an empire.  Empires are always at war.  Empires always eat their own, as well as those they conquer, exploit, and murder.  Again, Mitt's hypocrisy and lying.

Mitt is now a rabid proponent of coal as a major American energy source.

However, as Massachusetts governor in 2003, he said of the Salem Harbor coal-fired power plant near Boston:  "That plant kills people...I will not create jobs that kill people."  In a press release at the same time, Mitt said:  "If the choice is between dirty power plants or protecting the health of the people of Massachusetts, there is no choice in my mind.  I will always come down on the side of public health".

Vote Mitt-Ryan for continuously increasing oppression.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I know a number of folks who belong to political parties that they completely disagree with. I have variations of this conversation all of the time:

Me: You believe women have the right to choose?
Her: Yes. I don’t like abortion and I would never have one myself, but I believe women should choose for themselves.
Me: You believe gay people should have the right to marry?
Her: I don’t see what that has to do with me. I don’t care what they do.
Me: You believe in evolution? Global climate change?
Her: It’s pretty hard to ignore the evidence. Yes.
Me: You think we should go to war with Iran?
Her: I think we’ve had enough war. We should find a different solution.
Me: You still in the Union?
Her: What do you have against unions? Unions built America. As a woman, it’s the only way I’m getting a decent paycheck and retirement and maybe a promotion.
Me: So then you think you’re lesser than men? That you should be subordinate to men? That you should make less money than men for doing the same job? That you should be barefoot and pregnant and more ladylike?
Her: Screw you.
Me: And why are you a republican again?
Her: Because liberals are baby eating communists who hate America. Also, Nazis.

And so on.

I know folks who vehemently disagree with every single plank in the GOP platform, and yet they will only vote Republican. Period. They can’t even conceive of voting for somebody who isn’t a conservative. I don’t understand this. It’s like Slaves Against the Cotton Gin or PETA for More Animal Experimentation or …well, Log Cabin Republicans.

For these folks, the labels are what matter.

Even if it means voting repeatedly against their own interests.

It’s not the ideology. It’s not the beliefs. It’s not the messages. It’s the label.

They were born one thing or the other, their parents and grandparents were one thing or the other, and so that’s what they are. Period.

The labels are more important than the details. It’s not an intellectual position, it’s an emotional one. That’s why these people get so angry when the wrong labels are applied to them. That’s why they see labels as such an affront and why they hurl labels as insults. Somebody calls you gay and you’re not – what the hell do you care? Really? So what? Somebody calls you a liberal or a conservative, and you’re not – again, what do you care?
But for a lot of people, labels are everything.

I suspect that debates primarily pander to the dumbed-down Reality TV mentality that has become so pervasive in recent American society. It is my considered opinion that debates pander to exactly this mentality. To the label makers and the label takers and the label throwers.

Political debates are spectacle for the small minded.

And the problem with spectacle is that it’s designed to take the population’s focus off what really matters, it distracts from the real issues.

1:01 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home