A fairly random entry...

To commemorate my return.

According to my last entry, the last thing I wrote here was back in bloody April, so I can safely say my blog feels neglected. My Grandmother recently sought information on how to create a blog, so I told her about my own, and where she could start hers, which she has. And she already has as many entries as I do! So I'm here to try and catch up again, On to my topic!
---


Vitriol and Hyperbole!

Hate and Exaggeration!

...In other words? The midterm elections.

Really... Any election in this country any more, it seems. And I know that the Citizen's United Supreme Court decision has been talked about to death, and no one really likes it, (Except the only people that matter, that is: Politicians.) but Cit. Uni. is an enormous contributing factor to the vitriol and hyperbole this election season. What better way to demonize the administration and the Democratic Congress than with $2 billion in negative ads?

Who cares if the people you're campaigning for are batshit fucking insane, as long as they vote the way you want them to, which, of course they will, because they know damn well who got them elected. I mean, for God's sake... Sharron Angle!? If people didn't hate Harry Reid, and she didn't have $30 million dollars and Sean Hannity, people might think she was literally a Saturday Night Live sketch.

Of course, the same can be said for *insert Tea Party Candidate here* or pretty much any other Republican on the ticket this year. And you might ask me, then, "Chris, what about the Democrats? Don't they run the same type of negative ads?" And I would have to say, "Yeah, probably, but have you even seen any of them this year? Probably not, cause they don't have any damn money."

I mean, sure Unions have always been pretty supportive of Democrats, and environmental movements, and gay rights groups, etc give, and even some more impartial large corporations thankfully give equal contributions to both parties, but in the end, none of that helps, because it is ALL special interests, and they ALL want something in return. And the more money they have and freely give, the more likely they are to achieve their legislative goals, be it rampant deregulation of safety standards on oil rigs and in mines (Thank you Deepwater Horizon and Massey Energy), or the complete dismantling of everything we're worked for in the Health Insurance industry bill, the Republican talking points are gaining way too much ground with the common idiot-- sorry... Voter.

All those batshit insane Tea Partiers are running on Conservative talking points about social issues and then the even more batshit ideas of dismantling systems vital to the proper functioning of the very states and counties they're running to represent. Dismantling public school systems and transportation, ending state funding of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, and ending taxes entirely. Now, ending taxes entirely sounds appealing now, but just wait till the state has literally no money... See how good everything looks then. (Seriously. See Missouri Prop A. They want to make it so the people can vote on whether they are taxed or not. No one WANTS to be taxed, but there are fucking reasons for it, fools!)

If the middle 45% (Supposing the extreme Right and Left equal roughly 25-35% each) weren't being blindfolded and tossed into a glass shard pit and told to find their own way out, this country might stand a chance. As it is, the Citizen's United ruling just pulled the ladder out of the pit, so now the majority of independents are just rolling around cutting themselves to ribbons with the vitriol and hyperbole of the extremes. (Mostly the extreme right, whose shards are exceptionally sharp)

Now, this weekend, we have our last chance, I think, of returning to sanity, and climbing out of that damn pit. And it's all thanks to John Stewart.

I highly encourage anyone who may happen to read this to watch the Daily Show all this week. (Barack Obama is on tonight!) As he is preparing for his "Rally to Restore Sanity" in Washington D.C. this weekend. (There will also be a lesser rally this weekend hosted by Stephen Colbert to "Keep Fear Alive" but you don't have to go to that...) Stewart is doing a great series on his show all this week in which some of his correspondents have assembled a group of people from various different backgrounds and political opinions, but the important thing is that they are, TADAH! ALL SANE! They have civil political discourse without resorting to the kind of ridiculous vitriol and hyperbole exampled above. (Even in what I wrote ABOUT the right, not just FROM the right... >_>)

You can go to the Daily Show's web page and see the first two episodes from this week in their entirety. Some great interviews as well as the first two parts of this sane political discourse.

American Terrorists

No one can deny the power of the media.

FOX News says that Obama is a Socialist Nazi who wants to kill your grandmother and take all your money so they can subvert your right to own weapons and speak out against them, the government.

MSNBC news says people like Sarah Palin and Timothy McVeigh are insane because they believe the things that FOX news says, and want to defend themselves, in any way possible.

CNN tries to play middle ground, but everyone knows that they're part of that liberal media, and are only trying to cover up for the government.

But what do you think?

Do you even know?

Or are you undeniably influenced by everything that you see and hear in today's overwhelmingly oversaturated world.

I was watching Rachel Maddow's (Yes, I know, I'm one of those insane Socialist Nazi's who watch MSNBC!) sneak peek of "The McVeigh Tapes: Confession of an American Terrorist," (Due to air on April 19th, 2010, the fifteenth anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing) and I couldn't help but ask myself this same question.

The clips Rachel showed seemed to point to the singularity that Tim McVeigh felt when he and Terry Nichols watched the actions of the Federal Government against the anti-government cultists at Waco, TX. The immediate and violent action taken against a compound of otherwise mostly non-violent people, which ended in many deaths. (Granted, they had guns, and they defended themselves when the army showed up in tanks and SWAT teams, but what were they gonna do, give up!? *gasp*)

Were those lost not to be avenged?

That was the question Tim McVeigh asked himself. He was a decorated war veteran, and he saw an immense injustice in those actions, taken by the government, against her people.

But were they warranted?

In Waco? Perhaps not. Who's to say now that over a seventeen years has passed... But the question now turns to McVeigh and his reactions.

In response to the fiasco at Waco, he and Terry Nichols, and to a lesser extent, Terry's brother James, organized what essentially was a domestic terrorist attack against the government. It was centralized at a government owned building in Oklahoma City, presumably because they would not want to be caught near where they had planned the entire attack in Michigan. (though that is simply conjecture on my part)

They killed over one hundred and sixty people that day, and injured over five hundred more.

Was it warranted, given the heinous actions taken against the right-wing extremists in Waco?

Is it warranted again, even though no such heinous actions have been taken against the right-wing extremists now calling for the death (at most) and impeachment (at minimum) of our President, and others who would do right by the democratic process?

Obviously, I say no, but I'm a Socialist Nazi, so my opinion is worthless.

The point I'm trying to make here is that our political system has become so full of violent, hateful, inflamatory rhetoric, that nothing can be distinguished as mere metaphor any longer.

Sarah Palin says her "Reload" catch phrase is simply a way to get her base energized, that it isn't a call for violence... But the very act of saying the words "Reload" is in itself a call to violence. It implies that one has already fired off an entire clip of bullets at their adversary, who has yet to fall, and that they MUST reload and begin to fire again immediately, lest all be lost.

To her, it may be nothing more than a simple metaphor, and for many who follow her, it will be much the same. I have no doubt that the majority of Sarah Palin fanatics will indeed NOT go out, reload their guns and fire wildly at liberal strangers, or even worse, liberal lawmakers.

However, should she cater her message so that the fringe members of her group (those in the same vein as McVeigh and Nichols) be more or less subdued, to avoid the kind of tragedy we all faced in 1995?

And what of Glenn Beck? Sean Hannity? To a lesser extent, Bill O'Reilly? (He has gotten marginally better over the years, marginally being the key word)

Beck spends every hour of his television (and as far as I understand it, his radio) shows dedicated to conspiracy and mistrust of the government, in every facet possible. From the Census being a way for the government to cull the number of "free thinking citizens" to any number of other absolutely ridiculous conspiracies, (Obama's Birth certificate, Death panels, Progressiveism being code for Socialist Nazi takeovers of the government, plus an uncountable multitude more...) Beck's rhetoric simply fuels the very same fire which destroyed the American hero inside Tim McVeigh.

With the recent actions against the Hutari militia, (a radical fundamentalist Christian group, preparing themselves both for judgment day, and the day the government swarmed down upon them) one can only guess when the next Oklahoma City bombing will occur...

Every day FOX news, MSNBC, and CNN, all fuel the fire from both sides. Conservatives, Liberals, even Moderates, to an extent, are growing tired of the constant bickering and hatred infused into our culture, perpetuated by decades of conflict.

How does one solve it?

I can honestly provide no answer to this question. My job is simply to try and explain the ridiculousness of the entire situation. If one were to ask me, my advice would be to simply accept new and innovative technologies, rid the world of currency and trade entirely, and simply allow a world of constant production, with no restrictions or limitations on creation.

Naturally this world is impossible, perhaps because we are so ingrained in our system as is, but think about it...

You live in a modestly sized house, perfectly suited to your family, in every way. It isn't too big, but it has plenty of room, as well as all the amenities one can expect from a middle class life, a big screen plasma TV and all that business, because, who wouldn't have one if it were possible?
Meanwhile, you will always have the food you need, because everyone would always be needing something, so demand would never decrease, and supply would always be abundant. And technological progress would always be driven, not by the greed of corporate finance, but by the desire for man to better his world, and his people, for the simple sake of bettering his world and people.
Gone would be the days of sixteen foot marble wine fountains and three hundred and fourty foot pools behind the eighteen room mansion, and gone would be the celebrity worship and idolatry we revel in today, but everyone would have a modest and acceptable income, with still more than enough to preserve a sane level of happiness within their family unit, which would be driven not by the desire to be greater than thy father, and best his accomplishments, but to simply love thy father, and treat others as ye would like to be treated.

Is it so much to ask for?

Perhaps it is, for some.

But for those of you who can look at the world I've created and say, "Well that's just fine!"...

I salute you.