Skip to main content

Insistent on being Switzerland (neutral)

My father is kind of funny when it comes to politics. He just simply will not talk about it. One problem is he doesn't follow it at all, so he rarely knows what's going on. When the topic arises, he repeats the same old line over and over again - "I don't talk about politics. I've voted Democrat, Republican and Independent before." Then that's the end of his piece. What he doesn't explain is why he voted for these people/parties. The only time I recall him voting Republican is when he was younger and a GOP candidate said he wanted to lower the drinking age to where it'd be legal for my father to drink alcohol. That's far from the Republican Party platform of today. He's still not 100% sure why he voted Independent (Perot), perhaps because he was a tad funny looking and Dana Carvey did a great impersonation of him - I don't really know. I'm not even 100% sure why he's voted for Democrats in the past, outside of the fact his parents (father especially) were very Democratic and often times after a Republican had been in office for 4-8 years, my father will ask the question, "Am I better or worse off than I was before he entered office? Worse...so I'll go with the Democrat." I find it interesting why people vote the way they do. Often times, people's voting patterns are reminiscent of their parents or perhaps what the religious community teaches or because it's popular amongst certain circles. With my father, I still have no idea how to figure him out and my brother is starting to follow in his footsteps. I can empathize with my brother's position, because his wife and in-laws are rather staunch conservatives and he's much more liberal than they, so he tends to keep his mouth closed on such matters. With my father, it appears as if he's attempting to become nicknamed Switzerland. Perhaps I'll start calling him Berne, after the capital city of the country.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"