American Political System Broken
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By Gary [email protected]
Good.
I tire of the tomfoolery. I scoff at the buffoonery.
Is it just me or does anybody else think the entire political system in America is broken?[[In-content Ad]]Maybe it's because I'm getting older and more crotchety. Maybe it's because I'm paying more attention, I don't know.
But honestly, at the end of each of these two conventions, I had to replace the needle on my B.S.-ometer.
You couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a misrepresentation, obfuscation, or outright lie.
The minor speakers were the worst, but the nominees themselves did a pretty good job.
It was amazing to hear Barack Obama talk about how he was right on Iraq all along and it's W who is finally coming around to Obama's way of thinking.
This because the Iraqi government has suggested that it can finally police itself and that perhaps some of the troops can be withdrawn.
This development was precipitated by the surge of troops that Obama voted against, but never mind. Take credit, not responsibility.
Now Obama says the "timetable for withdrawal" was his idea all along. He makes it sound like W is stealing his ideas on Iraq.
Unbelievable.
And amid record deficits and a weak economy, Obama wants to give us a budget-busting entitlement like national health care.
And then there's "committed Catholic" Joe Biden blathering on about traditional family values.
"I was an Irish Catholic kid from Scranton," he said.
Yeah, well, the Catholic Church strongly opposes abortion, and NARAL Pro-Choice America was thrilled with Biden's selection: "Sen. Biden has consistently expressed support for a woman's right to choose... Most notably, Sen. Biden has a strong record of opposing judicial nominees with hostile anti-choice records."
I guess maybe I don't see pro-abortion as a values issue and I don't know any "committed Catholics who are ardently pro-abortion.
And the Republicans?
For months they beat up on Obama's lack of experience then chose Sarah Palin, the 20-month governor of Alaska, for VP.
Listening to all the GOP talking heads waffle on the issue of experience was quite enlightening. Suddenly, experience wasn't that big of a deal. Isn't that delusional thinking?
And when Palin gave her amazing speech, she talked about how she stood up to lobbyists and special interests and decried those wasteful earmarks.
Really? Because any third-grader with an Internet connection could see that she was the first mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, to hire a Washington lobbyist to bring home the bacon to her hometown.
And that during the 20 months she was governor, Alaska pulled in $453 million in earmarks.
And that bridge to nowhere?
Well, yeah, she may have said "thanks, but no thanks" to the bridge, but Alaska still got the $240 million allocated for it and used it for other projects.
There was no bridge, but the taxpayers didn't save a dime.
John McCain told us: "I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them."
Not so much.
According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, both McCain and Obama have proposed substantial tax cuts. McCain proposes a $4.2 trillion cut over 10 years. Obama proposes $2.9 trillion. Obama would raise taxes on some high-income taxpayers, while McCain would not.
McCain said Obama's plan "will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government-run health care system where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor."
Well, Obama's plan doesn't require families to enter a public insurance program, but it would make one available. It also offers subsidies for small businesses.
So who's a guy to vote for?
I toyed with the Libertarian, Bob Barr.
But here's a Libertarian who voted for the Foreign Intelligence Security Act - you know, wiretapping.
And he was a big proponent of the Defense of Marriage Act. Now, any good Libertarian will tell you those two issues are as anti-Libertarian as issues can be.
Makes you want to throw in the towel.
And if the candidates aren't enough to bum you out, there's the media experts who analyze them.
Sometimes the bias is excruciating. I can't watch Fox because they are so pandering to the right.
So I watch CNN.
I found it interesting that after Palin's speech, many of their "experts" went on and on about Palin's speechwriters. The consensus was that while it was a good speech, all she did was deliver it. Somebody else wrote it.
But she was the only one they said that about.
Don't you supposed that all the candidates have speechwriters and an army of advisers to guide them?
And when Republicans gave speeches, the CNN people kept talking about the "room full of party faithful" and "appealing to the base" and all the "conservatives" and "hard-right" constituents at the convention.
Yet, when the Democrats gave speeches, I never heard the word "liberal" or the phrase, "hard-left."
I don't get it.
The Republican convention is a room full of conservatives.
The Democrat convention is a room full of liberals.
So what? Why downplay half of that equation?
Just for grins, I went to cnn.com. I searched CNN News for:
Right-wing, 1,179 hits.
Left-wing, 630 hits.
Hard-right, 37 hits.
Hard-left, 15 hits.
Why? I don't get it.
The National Enquirer put out a story saying Sarah Palin had an affair with some guy in Anchorage.
I saw that reported on CNN.
The National Enquirer put out a story saying Barack Obama had a gay tryst and snorted cocaine in a limo.
I didn't see that reported on CNN.
Maybe it's time I just stop watching this stuff. It's driving me insane.
Good.
I tire of the tomfoolery. I scoff at the buffoonery.
Is it just me or does anybody else think the entire political system in America is broken?[[In-content Ad]]Maybe it's because I'm getting older and more crotchety. Maybe it's because I'm paying more attention, I don't know.
But honestly, at the end of each of these two conventions, I had to replace the needle on my B.S.-ometer.
You couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a misrepresentation, obfuscation, or outright lie.
The minor speakers were the worst, but the nominees themselves did a pretty good job.
It was amazing to hear Barack Obama talk about how he was right on Iraq all along and it's W who is finally coming around to Obama's way of thinking.
This because the Iraqi government has suggested that it can finally police itself and that perhaps some of the troops can be withdrawn.
This development was precipitated by the surge of troops that Obama voted against, but never mind. Take credit, not responsibility.
Now Obama says the "timetable for withdrawal" was his idea all along. He makes it sound like W is stealing his ideas on Iraq.
Unbelievable.
And amid record deficits and a weak economy, Obama wants to give us a budget-busting entitlement like national health care.
And then there's "committed Catholic" Joe Biden blathering on about traditional family values.
"I was an Irish Catholic kid from Scranton," he said.
Yeah, well, the Catholic Church strongly opposes abortion, and NARAL Pro-Choice America was thrilled with Biden's selection: "Sen. Biden has consistently expressed support for a woman's right to choose... Most notably, Sen. Biden has a strong record of opposing judicial nominees with hostile anti-choice records."
I guess maybe I don't see pro-abortion as a values issue and I don't know any "committed Catholics who are ardently pro-abortion.
And the Republicans?
For months they beat up on Obama's lack of experience then chose Sarah Palin, the 20-month governor of Alaska, for VP.
Listening to all the GOP talking heads waffle on the issue of experience was quite enlightening. Suddenly, experience wasn't that big of a deal. Isn't that delusional thinking?
And when Palin gave her amazing speech, she talked about how she stood up to lobbyists and special interests and decried those wasteful earmarks.
Really? Because any third-grader with an Internet connection could see that she was the first mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, to hire a Washington lobbyist to bring home the bacon to her hometown.
And that during the 20 months she was governor, Alaska pulled in $453 million in earmarks.
And that bridge to nowhere?
Well, yeah, she may have said "thanks, but no thanks" to the bridge, but Alaska still got the $240 million allocated for it and used it for other projects.
There was no bridge, but the taxpayers didn't save a dime.
John McCain told us: "I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them."
Not so much.
According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, both McCain and Obama have proposed substantial tax cuts. McCain proposes a $4.2 trillion cut over 10 years. Obama proposes $2.9 trillion. Obama would raise taxes on some high-income taxpayers, while McCain would not.
McCain said Obama's plan "will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government-run health care system where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor."
Well, Obama's plan doesn't require families to enter a public insurance program, but it would make one available. It also offers subsidies for small businesses.
So who's a guy to vote for?
I toyed with the Libertarian, Bob Barr.
But here's a Libertarian who voted for the Foreign Intelligence Security Act - you know, wiretapping.
And he was a big proponent of the Defense of Marriage Act. Now, any good Libertarian will tell you those two issues are as anti-Libertarian as issues can be.
Makes you want to throw in the towel.
And if the candidates aren't enough to bum you out, there's the media experts who analyze them.
Sometimes the bias is excruciating. I can't watch Fox because they are so pandering to the right.
So I watch CNN.
I found it interesting that after Palin's speech, many of their "experts" went on and on about Palin's speechwriters. The consensus was that while it was a good speech, all she did was deliver it. Somebody else wrote it.
But she was the only one they said that about.
Don't you supposed that all the candidates have speechwriters and an army of advisers to guide them?
And when Republicans gave speeches, the CNN people kept talking about the "room full of party faithful" and "appealing to the base" and all the "conservatives" and "hard-right" constituents at the convention.
Yet, when the Democrats gave speeches, I never heard the word "liberal" or the phrase, "hard-left."
I don't get it.
The Republican convention is a room full of conservatives.
The Democrat convention is a room full of liberals.
So what? Why downplay half of that equation?
Just for grins, I went to cnn.com. I searched CNN News for:
Right-wing, 1,179 hits.
Left-wing, 630 hits.
Hard-right, 37 hits.
Hard-left, 15 hits.
Why? I don't get it.
The National Enquirer put out a story saying Sarah Palin had an affair with some guy in Anchorage.
I saw that reported on CNN.
The National Enquirer put out a story saying Barack Obama had a gay tryst and snorted cocaine in a limo.
I didn't see that reported on CNN.
Maybe it's time I just stop watching this stuff. It's driving me insane.
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092