(no subject)
So of course, now that the election results are in, I've got to join everyone in posting to lj about it.
actually I just need to get it off my chest, because I wanted to post about halloween, and other things that have happened over the last month or so, but all I can think about is the election.
I listened to Kerry's concession speech, and as much as he gave a heartfelt and hopeful speech, it made it s little more clear why he lost. Nice guys finish last. He was up against a truly shameless administration who was telling the nation repeatedly that voting for Kerry was like voting for Terror, and all kinds of horrible and untrue things, and he stood there and took it. Just like when a bunch of analysts told him that statistically there was no way for him to win the election after having lost Ohio, he just stood there and took it. He didn't fight back against the logic, the way that the illogic right was fighting against him.
And perhaps they're right after all -- in spite of his calls for change in America, perhaps if he had won he would have graciously admitted to defeat at the hands of the status quo just as he admitted, graciously, to his defeat in the elections.
I think that the whole thing stinks. Apart from the fact that Bush won, I think there are a lot of suspicious things about this election that I'm afraid will be ignored. We certainly can't count on Kerry to call them into question: Electronic voting.
The guy who makes the voting machines is a huge Bush contributor who said he'd do anything he could to get Bush re-elected; people, expecially democrats, have been reporting that they found it difficult to place their vote for Kerry on these machines, and seemingly few republicans have reported any similar problems, and voter exit polls seem to show that more people were leaning towards Kerry than was indicated by the official results.
It would be Extremely easy for the people who programmed the electronic voting machines to skew the results just enough in their favor that they woudl still be realistic, and it would be extremely difficult to catch them, even with impartial observers brought in from other countries. Who's going to challenge results this close anyway? If the votes turned up 90% in Bush's favor accross the country we'd know we had a problem. But since they're so close, no one is going to risk the time, money, and possible embarrasment of making themselves a thorn in the country's side and making sure that the votes reflect the truth.
Anyway, I can't stop thinking that there's a rat in the electoral system, and his name is Wally O'Dell
Kerry called for unification in America and I agree that in the long term that's a good goal to work towards. No one would disagree with that. But he said in his speech that No matter what happened this morning, we all woke up Americans. And I think there he missed the point. This morning we all woke up a bitterly divided country full of undereducated, unrepresented, and unemployed people, pouring money we don't have into futile war against an abstract concept of an enemy, led by a brain-dead frat boy with a minimal grasp of his own first language, and a hoard of wealthy friends who could care less about people who's lives they influence.
.............
I just listened to Bush's acceptance speech and one thing stood out to me. He, like Kerry, called on "those people who voted for my opponent" to work with him towards a brighter American future [or something like that]. He said a new term meant a new opportunity for him to gain our trust, etc. And it all sounded good -- almost like that compassionate conservatism he promised four years ago. But it struck me that he had no idea what he was talking about. I don't think he or Kerry understands just how far the gap has widended between the right and left, in spite of how similar Kerry and Bush are in the first place. It's like Mac and PC -- essentially the same thing, but incompatible, and people side with one or the other religiously and never the twain shall meet, so to speak. But in any case I could see why so many people voted for him. He spoke with an optimism that was unhampered by reality, and with a self assurance that can only come of an empty head.
And I think a lot of Americans want to be coddled into a false sense of optimism and self-vindication -- it feels so much better than opening your eyes. I almost felt myself saying "yeah, it's not so bad.. good economy, spreading democracy, enemy brought to justice..." until I realized it was all a lie.
to quote Alanis Morissete "But it's easier not to."
It's not so much that Americans are incurably stupid, perhaps, as that it is human nature to prefer the security blanket to the quagmire of reality? Or am I just oversimplifying things.
In any case, I spent the last four years waiting for someone to either assasinate bush or impeach him, or at last resort remove him from office via democratic process.
I don't want to wait another four years.
actually I just need to get it off my chest, because I wanted to post about halloween, and other things that have happened over the last month or so, but all I can think about is the election.
I listened to Kerry's concession speech, and as much as he gave a heartfelt and hopeful speech, it made it s little more clear why he lost. Nice guys finish last. He was up against a truly shameless administration who was telling the nation repeatedly that voting for Kerry was like voting for Terror, and all kinds of horrible and untrue things, and he stood there and took it. Just like when a bunch of analysts told him that statistically there was no way for him to win the election after having lost Ohio, he just stood there and took it. He didn't fight back against the logic, the way that the illogic right was fighting against him.
And perhaps they're right after all -- in spite of his calls for change in America, perhaps if he had won he would have graciously admitted to defeat at the hands of the status quo just as he admitted, graciously, to his defeat in the elections.
I think that the whole thing stinks. Apart from the fact that Bush won, I think there are a lot of suspicious things about this election that I'm afraid will be ignored. We certainly can't count on Kerry to call them into question: Electronic voting.
The guy who makes the voting machines is a huge Bush contributor who said he'd do anything he could to get Bush re-elected; people, expecially democrats, have been reporting that they found it difficult to place their vote for Kerry on these machines, and seemingly few republicans have reported any similar problems, and voter exit polls seem to show that more people were leaning towards Kerry than was indicated by the official results.
It would be Extremely easy for the people who programmed the electronic voting machines to skew the results just enough in their favor that they woudl still be realistic, and it would be extremely difficult to catch them, even with impartial observers brought in from other countries. Who's going to challenge results this close anyway? If the votes turned up 90% in Bush's favor accross the country we'd know we had a problem. But since they're so close, no one is going to risk the time, money, and possible embarrasment of making themselves a thorn in the country's side and making sure that the votes reflect the truth.
Anyway, I can't stop thinking that there's a rat in the electoral system, and his name is Wally O'Dell
Kerry called for unification in America and I agree that in the long term that's a good goal to work towards. No one would disagree with that. But he said in his speech that No matter what happened this morning, we all woke up Americans. And I think there he missed the point. This morning we all woke up a bitterly divided country full of undereducated, unrepresented, and unemployed people, pouring money we don't have into futile war against an abstract concept of an enemy, led by a brain-dead frat boy with a minimal grasp of his own first language, and a hoard of wealthy friends who could care less about people who's lives they influence.
.............
I just listened to Bush's acceptance speech and one thing stood out to me. He, like Kerry, called on "those people who voted for my opponent" to work with him towards a brighter American future [or something like that]. He said a new term meant a new opportunity for him to gain our trust, etc. And it all sounded good -- almost like that compassionate conservatism he promised four years ago. But it struck me that he had no idea what he was talking about. I don't think he or Kerry understands just how far the gap has widended between the right and left, in spite of how similar Kerry and Bush are in the first place. It's like Mac and PC -- essentially the same thing, but incompatible, and people side with one or the other religiously and never the twain shall meet, so to speak. But in any case I could see why so many people voted for him. He spoke with an optimism that was unhampered by reality, and with a self assurance that can only come of an empty head.
And I think a lot of Americans want to be coddled into a false sense of optimism and self-vindication -- it feels so much better than opening your eyes. I almost felt myself saying "yeah, it's not so bad.. good economy, spreading democracy, enemy brought to justice..." until I realized it was all a lie.
to quote Alanis Morissete "But it's easier not to."
It's not so much that Americans are incurably stupid, perhaps, as that it is human nature to prefer the security blanket to the quagmire of reality? Or am I just oversimplifying things.
In any case, I spent the last four years waiting for someone to either assasinate bush or impeach him, or at last resort remove him from office via democratic process.
I don't want to wait another four years.