killerz
now that the election is nearing its final phase, i guess i am finally starting to get in the mood to be active again in political conversations. i have sort of stepped away from talking about politics for awhile, mostly because it seems the conversations have become stale, and the election season seems to have been going on and dragging on forever.
the republican primary is what i think really just turned me off after awhile. it was like watching paint dry with how boring these candidates were, and all the while, you just knew not a single one of them (including romney) doest actually have a legitimate chance of unseating obama as president. its like a big drawn out process, and you basically already know the end of the story. i had said months before romney was chosen that he would be the guy, and it wasnt because of some great insight -- it was simply because i personally feel like republicans are predictable enough to pick the guy that most looked the part, and romney was the guy that fit that part and also seems to be the most ambitious. no real magic to it. the truth is, mitt romney is a terrible candidate. he is boring, boring, boring -- and really, the only reason a logical person would struggle with a choice is because they simply have a problem with obama the man, and not the politician (ie, black guy in the white house). maybe that is not a completely fair statement, but for me, an informed and rational person would see the difference between the two guys as simple as night and day.
now that i have written all that, its time to shift gears....
i had posted on a facebook comment earlier that was made by david sirota -- david sirota is a guy that started out filling in for jay marvin on AM760, which is a progressive radio station. eventuall jay marvin got really sick, and david sirota started to fill in on a "semi-permanent" basis, and eventually was given his own show. at first i liked his commentary and perspective on things, but over time he just started to become kind of annoying with his overly liberal talk. dont get me wrong, im a pretty liberal guy, but i get easily annoyed when a bleeding heart starts to cloud reality...eventually i just kind of got tired of the shit he talked about and started listening to a lot more NPR, where there is less opinion and more news.
so anyway...
the post he made was in regards to this being the anniversary of the united states (the obama administration) killing a terrorists suspect named "anwar al-awlaki" that happened to also be a united states citizen. his take is that the united states is illegally using drone attacks to murder known terrorist, thus eliminating the idea of "due process" and "innocent until proven guilty" -- but, anwar al-awlaki was no normal american...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki
the dude was a known al-qaeda member that used his unique status as an american to recruit potential terrorists. my opinion on this guy is -- fuck him. i dont lose sleep with a fear that this guys assassination amounts to the united states all of a sudden just killing its citizens for fun. i personally feel that it means...if you dont want the united stated to blow you up with a drone attack, dont hang out with a bunch of terrorists in yemen when you know that is how the united states conducts its business affairs in regards to al qaeda operatives. just like -- if you dont want to get rolled up in a drive by shooting, then dont hang out a party where you know everyone is bangin and there is a risk of a drive-by. if you dont want to die in a car accident, then dont get in a car when you know the driver just pounded a bottle of vodka with no assistance.
we all make our own luck, and al-awlaki's ran out.
i guess my point to all of this is that we live in a world where people need to be realistic...
yes, its great to be hopeful, and its great to want big things and have big ideas...but all of those things need to be grounded in reality. we only have two candidates that could actually be elected. there are probably like 20 guys that are running for president that you have never heard of, but realistically, only 2 political parties (democrats and republicans) that have legitimate contenders for president...so what is the point of voting for these guys that stand zero chance of actually winning? why not just bet $100 bucks on the colorado rockies to win the world series as they approach 100 losses in a season? to me its about the same sort of prospect. people will say "vote your morals", but voting with your heart for a person that has zero ability to make an actual impact on how you live makes no sense. i dont love obama unconditionally, and i find it especially annoying that he ends his speeches with "god bless the united states of america", but i like him a lot better than mitt romney, and personally feel he really has done a good job as president.
i understand the drone strikes arent always accurate, and sometimes result in tragedy. the death of innocent civilians is very unfortunate, and i do believe it stains the image of the united states -- but -- the reality is that so much of what is happening in the world is rooted in religious ideology, and these drone strikes just happen to be the safest way for us to combat terrorism while also avoiding invading countries and being sucked into 10 year long wars that eventually become a religious struggle.
the bleeding heart liberal believes any and all violence is wrong (and honestly, i am not too far from that) but a realist knows that sometimes we all must bite the bullet and just accept hard facts that we do not like as part of the world we live in. nobody says we have to like these hard facts, but hating something does not make it go away.
the republican primary is what i think really just turned me off after awhile. it was like watching paint dry with how boring these candidates were, and all the while, you just knew not a single one of them (including romney) doest actually have a legitimate chance of unseating obama as president. its like a big drawn out process, and you basically already know the end of the story. i had said months before romney was chosen that he would be the guy, and it wasnt because of some great insight -- it was simply because i personally feel like republicans are predictable enough to pick the guy that most looked the part, and romney was the guy that fit that part and also seems to be the most ambitious. no real magic to it. the truth is, mitt romney is a terrible candidate. he is boring, boring, boring -- and really, the only reason a logical person would struggle with a choice is because they simply have a problem with obama the man, and not the politician (ie, black guy in the white house). maybe that is not a completely fair statement, but for me, an informed and rational person would see the difference between the two guys as simple as night and day.
now that i have written all that, its time to shift gears....
i had posted on a facebook comment earlier that was made by david sirota -- david sirota is a guy that started out filling in for jay marvin on AM760, which is a progressive radio station. eventuall jay marvin got really sick, and david sirota started to fill in on a "semi-permanent" basis, and eventually was given his own show. at first i liked his commentary and perspective on things, but over time he just started to become kind of annoying with his overly liberal talk. dont get me wrong, im a pretty liberal guy, but i get easily annoyed when a bleeding heart starts to cloud reality...eventually i just kind of got tired of the shit he talked about and started listening to a lot more NPR, where there is less opinion and more news.
so anyway...
the post he made was in regards to this being the anniversary of the united states (the obama administration) killing a terrorists suspect named "anwar al-awlaki" that happened to also be a united states citizen. his take is that the united states is illegally using drone attacks to murder known terrorist, thus eliminating the idea of "due process" and "innocent until proven guilty" -- but, anwar al-awlaki was no normal american...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki
the dude was a known al-qaeda member that used his unique status as an american to recruit potential terrorists. my opinion on this guy is -- fuck him. i dont lose sleep with a fear that this guys assassination amounts to the united states all of a sudden just killing its citizens for fun. i personally feel that it means...if you dont want the united stated to blow you up with a drone attack, dont hang out with a bunch of terrorists in yemen when you know that is how the united states conducts its business affairs in regards to al qaeda operatives. just like -- if you dont want to get rolled up in a drive by shooting, then dont hang out a party where you know everyone is bangin and there is a risk of a drive-by. if you dont want to die in a car accident, then dont get in a car when you know the driver just pounded a bottle of vodka with no assistance.
we all make our own luck, and al-awlaki's ran out.
i guess my point to all of this is that we live in a world where people need to be realistic...
yes, its great to be hopeful, and its great to want big things and have big ideas...but all of those things need to be grounded in reality. we only have two candidates that could actually be elected. there are probably like 20 guys that are running for president that you have never heard of, but realistically, only 2 political parties (democrats and republicans) that have legitimate contenders for president...so what is the point of voting for these guys that stand zero chance of actually winning? why not just bet $100 bucks on the colorado rockies to win the world series as they approach 100 losses in a season? to me its about the same sort of prospect. people will say "vote your morals", but voting with your heart for a person that has zero ability to make an actual impact on how you live makes no sense. i dont love obama unconditionally, and i find it especially annoying that he ends his speeches with "god bless the united states of america", but i like him a lot better than mitt romney, and personally feel he really has done a good job as president.
i understand the drone strikes arent always accurate, and sometimes result in tragedy. the death of innocent civilians is very unfortunate, and i do believe it stains the image of the united states -- but -- the reality is that so much of what is happening in the world is rooted in religious ideology, and these drone strikes just happen to be the safest way for us to combat terrorism while also avoiding invading countries and being sucked into 10 year long wars that eventually become a religious struggle.
the bleeding heart liberal believes any and all violence is wrong (and honestly, i am not too far from that) but a realist knows that sometimes we all must bite the bullet and just accept hard facts that we do not like as part of the world we live in. nobody says we have to like these hard facts, but hating something does not make it go away.
Comments