Showing posts with label democrat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democrat. Show all posts

Saturday, November 11, 2006

What Upsets Me About The Recent Election

While I was quite happy to attend John Yarmuth's election (and victory) party on Tuesday evening, and while it is encouraging to see such local progress reflected in the nationwide tide of Democratic victories, there are still a few things about this week's election results that are troubling to me.

For instance, Bob Corker defeated the Democratic candidate Harold Ford, Jr. in the Tennessee Senate race. Shame on the non (or disgruntled) Republicans in that state who didn't turn out to vote for Ford. But what is more upsetting is that so many people would vote for Corker, considering that he is known to have been involved in shady land deals where protected wetlands were sold to Wal*Mart. Yes, Wal*Mart. How anybody could vote for somebody who would sell such an important natural resource, to Wal*Mart, is beyond me. Furthermore, Corker is known to be willfully ignorant in the face of the scientific evidence regarding global warming. That such a candidate didn't result in an additional victory for Democrats is astonishing.

Also, it is startling that John Shimkus so easily defeated the Democratic candidate Dan Stover in the Illinois Congress race. Again, any Democrat voters who stayed at home on Tuesday should be ashamed. But it is surprising that Shimkus won by such a wide margin, when it is known that he kept his fellow Page Board members in the dark concerning his knowledge of Foley's impropriety, back in late 2005. At best, such behavior is extremely suspicious, and I wouldn't have anticipated so many people voting for Shimkus in spite of it.

I find both of these instances troubling, but it's obvious that we are blind to the local circumstances, issues, and campaign advertising (except for that smutty, racist anti-Harold Ford attack ad), and their effects on the outcome.

However, the import of both of these examples is exceeded by other voting results, not for candidates, but for initiatives. In seven out of the eight states where such an issue was on the ballot, people voted to ban same-sex marriage. While the new Democrat majorities in both Houses of Congress is surely cause for celebration, such a victory is quickly tempered when we consider the passage of these marriage bans. It may be true that people across the country have voted in favor of fiscal responsibility, scientific integrity, accountable governing, and sensible foreign policy. But the sobering reality is that many people are also voting in favor of bigotry and religious discrimination.

Progressives and moderates will do well not to take too much solace in the congressional switch-over, knowing that there are still very important issues requiring serious attention and diligent effort in the years to come.

Friday, October 6, 2006

Attention Republican Party

Dear GOP,

The cost of obtaining my vote has gone up. The new price requires rational and logical support for planks in the platform, and policies that are honest, accountable, and responsible.

My vote will no longer be obtained by appeals to neo-Fundamentalist values. I will not be swayed by a "pro-life" banner that contains mutually contradictory positions (anti-abortion but pro-death penalty and pro-war; anti-stem cell research but pro-invitro fertilization, et cetera). My vote will not be won by religiously-motivated "abstinance only" campaigns that have spent billions on an "education" program that has been proven (time and again) to be ineffective, and that often includes overt lying to children.

Furthermore, the trumpeting of conservative "family values" that represent nothing more than bigotry, thinly veiled oppression, fear, religiously-fueled discrimination, and hatred, will absolutely not convince me to vote in your favor.

I will no longer vote for a party who has shown repeatedly that it has no respect for scientific integrity.

My vote will not go to a party who's leadership has consistently engaged in illegal activities (secret military tribunals, unconstitutional wiretaps, blatant cruelty and torture and seemingly endless violations of the Geneva Conventions) and steadfastly refuses to admit to any wrong-doing. In fact, rather than own up to its deeds, the administration had instead asked for "clarity" in an attempt to re-write the rules and legalize the torture they've been caught doing. Such behavior is completely appalling and absolutely unacceptable.

Speaking of illegal activities... How many people in the current administration have been indicted now? Libby, Noe, Safavian, DeLay, and soon Frist, and others? My vote will not be had by any Republican who ignores or approves of such wide-ranging problems.

I will not vote for any candidates that engage in their party's new "strategy" of using name-calling and made-up-words to marginalize opposing views and obfuscate legitimate matters of importance. The new fad of using empty transitory slogans, one-liner (or recently, one-worder) epithets, and divisive polarizing rhetoric will simply not earn my vote, and should be recognized for what it is: childish and an obstacle to progress.

My vote will not be given to the party that repeatedly attempts to cancel programs that hold it accountable for its policies. Examples, such as trying to silence the SIPP because it proves an increase in US poverty, railroading the OSC by dispensing with whistleblower protection, and granting the Pentagon arbitrary immunity from the FOIA, are indicative of Orwellian government and should be exposed and decried, not tacitly approved of.

I will not vote for a party who's fiscal and economic policies have encouraged or caused one of the largest deficits in history (including a nearly 9 trillion dollar national debt), and promoted the enrichment of the rich. Furthermore, I will not vote in favor of an administration that seeks to increase spending on propaganda while cutting support for real reporting from PBS and NPR.


The above is a brief explanation of the many reasons I have for reconsidering how I spend my vote. It should be clear that even without considering the increasing problems and mistakes of the "war on terror" (and the administration-leaked NIE report that says invading Iraq has made terrorism worse), the reasons are plentiful. I would encourage others to think carefully and weigh the value of your vote, and join me in my resolve not to give that vote away for far too cheap a price.