Back to Gaffer's Archives.
I don't know what to do about government. There's
no one to vote for or against anymore. The current ‘ins'
advocate a government of restraint. They seem to say that government
cannot and should not do everything; that less government is better
government; that the cost of government must be controlled; that
regulation has become an intruding monster. This all seems to
be true.
Unfortunately, however, these are the very same people who seem to believe that women are more or less property to be used as domestics and incubators. These are also the very same people who want to let the religious crazies into our schools to coerce, intimidate, and indoctrinate our non Christian children. These are also the very same people who think that everyone in the country should be packing heat.
The current ‘outs' espouse a philosophy that has, several times, almost bankrupt the country without fixing anything. They seem to have the idea that you can fix anything with enough money, be it correcting social ills or paying blackmail to foreign adventurers. They seem to think that its all right to bleed the middle class workers to death to support these failed programs. It seems that if only they can throw enough money at the problems, their solutions will start to work some how. Besides, it is the moral thing to do, they say.
On the other hand, they believe that women are actually citizens, equal to men, and that they have the same rights and freedom of choice as men. By implication, they believe, though it has never been formally stated, that women have minds and are an enormous untapped resource. They seem to believe the same about our minorities. They also believe, so they say, that guns are terribly dangerous things which should be controlled. In addition, they are dead set against letting the religious crazies into our schools.
What to do? What to do? Vote for a bankrupt country which could still produce free minded children who may figure out how to recover, or vote for the intimidation and emotional corruption of our children's minds so that they may live in economic stability, but be fearful of expressing their beliefs. There is no rational way to go.
Many times, we have been offered alternatives to these two traditional adversaries. What an offer. What an alternative! Pee-rot, the madman millionaire who made his fortune off of government programs. They bring us a wrestling clown governor as an example of the party's wisdom. And, standing in the wings, a money merchant thug, ready to Trump us.
Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I believe another alternative is possible. Here is a partial description of the person who would get my vote, regardless of the political flag she sailed under. First and foremost, she would believe in people. All people. She would actually believe that all people are created with certain unalienable rights. Our declaration names life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. She would believe, as do I, that we cannot afford to waste an enormous human resource by shutting out more than half of our population because of physical characteristics.
She would believe in the public education of all people. She would insist that educational opportunity be equally available to all children. She would also believe that religious philosophy is much to important to be confused with and mixed in with basic education. She would believe that faith is a private matter. Thus, she would trust God to bring his message to the little ones without the help of Fat Jerry and his forceful friends.
She would trust people. Rather than throw money at them to buy them off, she would act to make sure they had opportunities to be productive and creative. Her strongest emphasis would be on providing learning opportunities and behavioral modification environments for our traditional losers. She would expect them to step up and accept responsibility for their own success. She would expect them to become productive citizens.
Like any rational person, she would be astute enough to recognize the difference between a bird gun and military hardware. Like any brave person, she would point out that Heston is an out-of-work actor, not an intellect or philosopher. Even so, she would understand that while it is possible to make possession of military hardware a crime, it would be impossible to enforce such a law. If Hitler demonstrated nothing else, he demonstrated that. Even in his peak of power, when civilian possession of a weapon was punishable by summary execution, his victims had guns. When the time came, they got them out and used them against him.
These are just a few of the features from my
portrait of a perfect candidate. It's enough to convey the idea.
I doubt if someone like that would run for office, even if they
existed at all. Oh well. Sigh.
Back to Gaffer's
Archives.
|
|
|
|