Skip to main content

An American politics rant

While I proudly call myself progressive and tend to lean Democratic as far as party affiliation goes, I still can't stand the political system in this country. More than two parties should be able to have a legitimate chance at winning on election day. Voting should be encouraged and made easier, so that every eligible voice can be heard and counted. A national holiday should be implemented so more people are able to take election day seriously and make certain to go and vote. Corporations should not be able to donate unlimited dollars to certain candidates. Misleading ads should not be permitted. Every candidate should have a voice during debates. "News" personalities should not be able to persuade the public through lies (if they do, it should be made mandatory that the program is referred to as opinion and not "news"). Fact-checkers should be given more time after debates (and speeches) to sort through the questionable comments, as opposed to party representatives whom likely continue to repeat their party's candidate's talking points, regardless of their level of accuracy. Lobbyists and special interest groups should not be able to possess the sway they do on politicians' commentary and votes.

Many politicians, and Americans in general (especially those on the far-right it seems), like to proudly declare that America "is the greatest country in the world" and the "best democracy in the world." While the former point is highly debatable (studies indicate otherwise, however), the latter point is downright laughable.

Democracy is defined as, "government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system."

In the United States, we have a system where corporations can provide unlimited donations to candidates and lobbyists, while people can give limited amounts. Lobbyists and "news" personalities can freely lie to the public about candidates and issues. Politicians regularly attempt to make it more difficult for certain demographics to vote on election day (the ones that likely won't vote for them). Not only that, but the outcome of the (presidential) election is not based on the total number of votes by the people, and in the past, the candidate with fewer votes has actually won. Even in taking all of that into consideration, some people still have the nerve to say this is the best "democracy" in the world?

Multiple times every day, I receive emails suggesting I donate $5 to a certain candidate. If I did this every time I received such an email, I'd be bankrupt. Not only that, but doomsday scenarios are regularly laid before me: "We're doomed!" "A big blow!" "It's over!" The strategy is pretty simple - paint the dimmed picture possible, instigate fear of the worst possible scenario, and manipulate people into donating money. Both parties do this. I may be more Democratic than Republican, but I'm not naive in thinking that only the Republican Party takes part in such tactics. I've seen first-hand that the Democratic Party resorts to such measures as well.

It's sad. Politicians want American citizens to believe that their voices, their votes, are what really matters. Yet, at the end of the day, we see the rich spending millions upon millions of dollars not to improve this country at large and help make a better life for families nationwide (and their futures), but to protect and increase their wealth while sacrificing the happiness, health, and well-being of millions of other families, through lying. Voters aren't told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They're constantly told lies and half-truths, and at the end of the day, are provided distorted images of each and every candidate; and their voices, their votes, are typically reflective of that. Politicians weren't put in place for a career opportunity, to make millions off lying, and to represent the rich few, as opposed to their millions of constituents. Politicians should be more like volunteers - there to serve a good cause, to try to best serve the community/country they grew up in and love so dearly, and to try and improve it as much as possible in the limited time they have in office. Sadly, anymore, a sign I've seen posted several times seems to ring true at the very front and center of American politics: "Rich people paying rich people to tell middle-class people to blame poor people." When this happens, the middle-class and poor people suffer, as they point fingers toward one another, all the while the rich laugh, and get richer.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/democracy?s=t

http://upriser.com/posts/news-rich-people-paying-rich-people-to-tell-middle-class-people-to-blame-poor-people

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!"