Voting, Idealism, Cynicism, and the Jaded

I suppose you could call me an idealist. I'd like to find another term, because I think that word has too many connotations of naiveté and unattainable goals. I don't think there is anything naive about expecting the best out of myself, and others (including my government). In fact, I would consider it practical to be an "idealist". If you expect the best, you're more likely to get the better. If you expect the worst, you'll most likely get it.

I started thinking about this after I read this article:

Obama woos blue collar voters with beer taste

Oooh look! Beer and politics in the same post! And I haven't even gotten to the beer review! I'll quote the bit that irked me:

"Where's my beer?" he asked, loud enough for the reporters to hear.

He eyed an array of fine micro brews on tap, from the amber Maharaja IPA to the "naturally cloudy" Blanche Bruxelles. He zeroed in on the mass market.

"PBR," he said, choosing Pabst Blue Ribbon, an inexpensive lager, before working the crowd.

Last week the 46-year-old senator visited a Veterans For America clubhouse, and ordered a Budweiser, while in Pennsylvania, where his campaign beer-drinking began, he found himself drinking Yuengling, a popular local brew, but had to double-check the name of the beer, anxious that “it’s not some designer beer or something”.

OK, I don't really give two shits about what kind of beer he really drinks. I mean, sure, my beer geekiness was kind of offended, but not that much. It's just that this was so obviously a calculated move. Frankly, I am fucking tired of this stuff. Almost everybody I know talks about Obama like a fat kid talks about a ham sandwich. But you know what? He's just as much a typical politician as the rest of them. He'll do and say whatever it takes to get elected. Shouldn't we hold our "leaders" to higher standards than that?

I made that point to someone last weekend, and she said something to the tune of "Well, everybody in politics does it. That's just the way things are. If he wants to make changes, he has to play the game."

That is so much bullshit it makes me sick to my stomach. If you believe that our democracy works the way they want us to think it works (highly debatable) then the people have the power. If politics is a game, we make the rules!

If you take her argument to its logical conclusion, the reason we have a two party system is because third party candidates stick to their convictions and don't pretend to be something they are not! Wow. Those foolish, naive idealists.

The way I see it, people choose to vote the two-party line because voting third party is throwing your vote away. Third party candidates can never win. Well that's because everyone votes the two-party line!

It's so unbelievably obvious, it blows my mind that few people can see it. If we were to vote for candidates we actually believed in and not just those who had a chance of winning, I have no doubt in my mind we would have a much more honest political discourse.

For example; I voted for Ron Paul in the Virginia primary, not because he represents everything I believe, not because I thought he has any chance of winning, but because he speaks honestly. I will support anybody who says what they believe, and stays true to themselves despite how the "game" works. If everyone were to do that, we would have many more options, and a system based on IDEALS and getting things done, not a government based on games and lies.

I'll get into what I think about government another time. I'm spent for now. Just remember one thing: People shouldn't be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Thank you Alan Moore.

I'll add a beer review some time later this week.

On a different note, Dickie and I just bought tickets to Boston for the


June 20-21
Click on the pic to buy your own tix!
(See what I did there?)

Expect a full report from one or both of us on the drunkenness and blasphemy that is sure to follow!