P: 11/8/02

Work Diary, 11/8/02

"I think a lot of people are saying, you know, gosh, we hope we don't
have war. I feel the same way, I hope we don't have war. I hope this
can be done peacefully. It's up to Saddam Hussein, however, to make
that choice." -- President Bush

This past Tuesday, after I'd voted and watched the Republicans win
anyway, it occurred to me that I don't know much about politics.
Actually, I don't know much about a lot of things, but it's campaigning
season and that's what seems to matter.

What, exactly, is the difference between Republicans and Democrats?
George Bush is a Republican, and by association all other Republicans
appear to want war. But the South is full of Democrats (who still can't
forgive Abraham Lincoln for taking away their livelihoods), and you'd
be hard-pressed not to find some Southern cracker who didn't want to
"blow them gosh dern A-rabs to bits."

Republicans say they're far more fiscally responsible, and yet their
policies have increased national debt exponentially. I think what
Republicans mean is that they are more fiscally responsible with their
own, personal funds. That makes sense to me, of course - who wouldn't
like to think he was smart with his money? But there's a big difference
between running the checkbook of a country and being cheap.

Anyway, what do the Democrats have to show? Clinton was a fine
president, but will he be remembered for his efforts in the Middle
East, or for using Monica Lewinsky as a human humidor? Sometimes, a
cigar isn't just a cigar.

I feel so stupid. Feeling that way just makes me lean towards apathy, a
dangerous place to be. Also, I'm not sure where I'm supposed to fall in
the political spectrum. I'm not rich but my partner's and my combined
income is over four times that of the median household income in the
United States. Does that mean we should play the laughably misnamed
fiscally responsible ticket and vote Republican? Or should we pretend
to be open-minded liberals and join the leagues of hypocritical
Democrats?

Better yet, should we just become tiny Libertarian ripples in the
election results?

Where are the historians in all of this? Bush is holding war over
American heads like Christmas mistletoe. Some people can't wait to kiss
up to him, and others can't believe they got stuck having to kiss up to
him. Why no news stories or letters-to-the-editor analyzing Bush's
intents? Or how war is so often a political maneuver, valuable only for
its ability to draw in votes and stimulate a greedy economy?

Had he beaten Bush, would Al Gore be playing the same cards?

Perhaps the difference between Republicans and Democrats lies in their
social views. Republicans appear to believe in "every man for himself"
(while secretly developing a good ol' boy network that could populate
every square foot of Texas and Florida). Democrats believe government
should play a big role in helping the less fortunate (effectively
satisfying the poor just enough to keep them from pounding on the front
doors of wealthy Democrats' half-million dollar homes).

I hate being confused by the issues. How tiring it is to listen to the
drunken prattle of people who can't do their own taxes, but who can
repeat - verbatim - the political rhetoric of some televised talking
head.

Must everything be distilled into its simplest, most clich?-ridden
form?

Cynical? Maybe, but in the end, it all comes down to money, egos, and
an utter disregard for anything human. "Keep America's children safe!"
shout the Democrats and the Republicans. Yes, indeed, but I bet plenty
of Iraqi mothers and fathers would prefer their children intact, too,
thank you very much.