Palin(dromics)

The recent announcement by Governor Sarah Palin that she is going to step down from office in a few weeks has come as a complete surprise to everyone, especially those in the Republican party who were likely looking for an impending resignation from a governor from a state a bit more to the south and to the east of Alaska. While the trials and tribulations of Gov. Sanford were only pushed from the headlines by the sudden deaths of Farrah Fawcet and Michael Jackson (remember Farrah?), he still managed to galvanize the political pundits with his antics and talk of ‘soul mates’ … and then there’s Sarah.

That seems to be the entire summation of Sarah Palin’s political career: and then, there’s Sarah. One begins to wonder why someone would decide to even enter the political scene in the United States, knowing that it means every aspect of your life becomes fodder for the media, when you want to be a ‘private’ individual. The fact that Governor Palin wrote e-mails that vehemently defended her husband’s non-membership in a political party that advocates secession from the Union, for example, demonstrates the lack of connection that she has with that precious thing we call reality. Todd Palin is actually on record as being a member of the AIP for seven years – that is something quite a bit different from accidentally checking the ‘independent’ box on their voter registration forms. Fine, I can understand missing mixing up ‘Independent’ for ‘Alaskan Independent’, but, as this article shows, the registration forms actually say ‘Alaskan Independence Party’, not ‘Alaska Independent’. One must wonder about the level of literacy if this is the excuse that the candidate for VP really wanted people to accept (yes, my husband is an idiot, but I love him).

From the moment Sarah Palin was picked by Senator John McCain to be his running mate for the 2008 presidential election I watched very carefully. While I am not an American citizen it is of great interest to me as a Canadian how the American political system plays out for the simple reason that the American system has a massive influence on our Canadian system, as demonstrated by the recent economic moves made as a coordinated effort by both of our governments. In that light I have taken more than a small interest in the political races, particularly the presidential races, and watch with no small amount of concern as candidates try to convince the most amount of people that they should be entrusted with the running of the nation.

From the first time I heard her speak I was convinced that there was a serious problem with Sarah Palin: it was as though I was listening to someone who had read the dust jacket of a book but had not bothered reading the actual book itself. Her comments were a combination of slogans and platitudes, cheers spoken slowly – hardly anything with any sort of well reasoned political insight. Not to mention the fact that there was hardly ever an issue that was broached – both she and McCain preferred to attack their opposition rather than propose any substantive alternative platform to that offered by Obama – they only wanted to attack, offer connections to ‘terrorists’ and pray that they could cause enough ‘level headed’ people to fear the ramifications of voting in a Democrat after eight years of the ‘safety’ provided by the Republican … well, seven years – there was that unfortunate incident on 9/11 after all. But, fear mongering failed and the people of America saw through the lies of the Republicans, and Sarah Palin.

The Governor that had the highest approval rating suddenly saw things going terribly wrong: she was found guilty of abusing her power, her daughter’s ‘beau’ dumped her – and there were drug charges filed against the mother of said beau … and, on top of that, Governor Palin could not resist the temptation of continuing to talk to the press … something that had never really worked out all that well for her during the campaign (unless it was an ‘interview’ on Fixed News or Fox Noise – one of the ‘friendly’ channels).

Perhaps, then, it is true that Governor Palin has decided to leave the office of Governor simply because she feels there is more that she can do to effect change outside of the constraints of the political office to which she is currently tied. With 18 months remaining in her term, however, it seems odd that she would leave her office and expect to land as the front-runner for the Republican nomination for the 2012 presidential election. After all, the last election campaign was about as long as one could imagine – and as a sitting president it is not likely that President Obama is going to begin his re-election in 2010, the job is simply too demanding (though, as I understand it, the process for re-election never really ends once elected – but the candidate himself doesn’t exactly get too invested in the process while in office).

What Palin’s plans are is anyone’s guess: there were even whisperings to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that this announcement from Governor Palin marked her permanent departure from politics. If that is the case perhaps there is probably much more to this story than we have been given, more that will be revealed over the next few days, weeks and even months. Investigations, after all, continue whether or not that individual remains in office. If there have been any wrong doings by the Governor that need to be addressed, perhaps this resignation came as a ‘pre-emptive’ act in the hopes of mitigating any potential future acts.

We will have to await the results of the autopsy.

Happy Independence Day … and a belated Happy Canada Day!

America Can Change

If a picture is worth a thousand words, a video must be worth one million. While this video is a song in a language you may not speak, the message speaks volumes and should not be missed by anyone who still has not made up their mind about the upcoming November election, or who feels conflicted by all of the racial rhetoric that has been flung into the political arena by certain candidates.

This song, along with the video, Si Se Puede Cambiar was made by Andreas Useche and is, in my opinion as a composer, not only a brilliantly beautiful ballad, it is an effective political piece that will hopefully reach the hearts and minds of many undecided voters.

Enjoy.

Si Se Puede. Yes We Can.

Shifting Paradigms in American Politics: Observations on Political Obfuscation and the Presidential Elections

Elections may be a time of fascination for anyone remotely interested in the world of politics and the wild scheming that accompanies this great game, perhaps one of the greatest of all human past-times. What we are observing is the modern expression of the ideal of the democratic process that the founding fathers of the Republic of the United States bestowed upon their fledgling nation with the establishment of their constitution. While the initial intent of the founders may have been subverted by the passage of time and the changing moral standards of the people, the great experiment that became America continues despite the greatest attempts by those who would see the Republic crumble under the weight of corruption and tyranny.

Illustration © by Ben Heine
So long as we remind ourselves of the difference between the idea of democracy today and the initial vision offered by the founding fathers it will be very easy to appreciate the importance of exercising that most sacred right of a citizen on the 4th of November: today it is the right of all citizens to vote, regardless of the colour of their skin, their sex, or even who they happen to worship while the original “democracy” was intended for white men; privileged land owners who controlled the laws of the land and the lives of those who were not considered to be fully on-par with whites by virtue of their skin colour. How much more can democracy have traveled in that the current front-runner in the campaign is a black man, a man who would not have even been counted as a “whole person” at the beginning of American history? Senator Barack Obama is not, however, a significant candidate solely because he is the first “black candidate”, or “African American” – he is not, the Communist Party of the United States nominated an African-American women named Angela Davis in 1980 as their candidate for Vice-President; Obama’s significance as a candidate stems from his deep understanding of the issues at play and the remarkable poise with which he has faced this marathon campaign.

While many people find politics to be something fascinating and rather like a spectator sport there are times when it seems to devolve into something more akin to a high-school popularity contest mated with a three-ring circus; the primary difference being the amount of money being spent by those involved and, ultimately, the prize awarded at the end of the contest. The invective comments that have been spewed of late by certain candidates demonstrates that the closer you get to the actual election the worse the rhetoric becomes as the desperation level is elevated to new heights.

Since there is no incumbent running in this election – for some odd reason Vice-President Dick Cheney did not decide to seek the position of President after his eight years in office – Senator John McCain finds himself in the unenviable position of inheriting the legacy of what many political analysts and historians have already described as being the worst president tenure of the 20th century, if not American history. McCain has no choice but to run on the record of the incumbent president, but cutting all ties with the Republican Party would be political suicide – even more so than tying himself to the record of George W. Bush. Sine the record of the present Republican administration has done such a stellar job, embroiling the nation in a war without a foreseeable end, a crushingly high unemployment rate, record job losses, a mortgage fiasco that may cost the nation hundreds of billions of dollars with nary a chance of recovery and still result in a recession the likes of which has not been seen since the dark days following the market collapse of 1929, it only makes sense that John McCain would now – more than ever – want to show that he really is not completely aligned with President Bush and his policies. The truth, however, is much easier to see: after supporting the policies of President Bush – proudly – over 90% of the time during the past eight years McCain has demonstrated that he is much less of a Maverick and much more of one of the “good old boys” that he pretends to rail against when ranting about the ills of “the system”. This is the system that his top economic advisor, former Senator Phil Gramm, had a very large part in engineering. Is it any wonder that the Republicans would rather attack their opponents rather than face them on the issues? Senator McCain made the conscious choice of attacking Senator Obama on the most trivial of matters in the a desperate attempt to divert the public’s attention from the true issues at hand: the failure of the government of the past eight years – the Republican Presidency of George W. Bush – to effectively protect the American taxpayer from the unregulated greed of Wall Street and their lobbyists.

Once it became obvious that the call for “change” being heralded from the Obama camp was being taken up across the nation the McCain camp decided to recast their message to show that their candidate was the one that represented real change. Rather than facing the issues, rather than addressing things of substance, they worked on a slogan – a slogan that had already been in use by the other side. These are tactics to turn the attention of the people away from the fact that this is the same man who has been trying to distance himself from the record of President Bush while at the same time, during speeches to partisan crowds, McCain spoke proudly of his voting record over the two terms of President Bush; having voted for the things that have caused the problems currently plaguing the United States of America, including the mortgage scandal. John McCain has clearly demonstrated one thing about his abilities as a perspective leader and decision maker: he lacks the insight into issues that an American President requires in order to fully execute their responsibilities. He is also unable to consider an issue past the partisan politics that it may represent and the ways in which it will effect his own political future, despite his claims of “reaching across the aisle”; he also shows that he is not above overtly lying about what he, and others, have done in order to make it look as thought things “aren't as they seem”.

While the presence of rhetoric, particularly during a presidential election, will never be lacking, this present campaign seems to have been endowed with an extra-large and potent dose. Unfortunately, the quantity of the words being spouted does not necessarily equate to the quality of what is being said; or, for that matter, does it have anything to do with the veracity of the statements. As though any examples were needed, it only took the announcement of the running-mate by Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, to raise the level of rhetoric past the point of manic hysteria. The sudden injection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin into this political equation has, in effect, turned everything on its head. Could anyone have imagined that the selection of a running-mate after having only known her for a short period of time and having had a single thirty-minute meeting would have generated such a sense unease for so many and an upsurge in the lack of confidence of the Senator's choice and in his decision making abilities, not to mention his judgment?

This first executive decision, which McCain says he made with more than enough information to ensure that Governor Palin was the right choice for the job and is not only qualified to serve as the Vice-President, but is also more than prepared to serve as President should something happen to him during his term as president demonstrates a clear disconnection with reality. He is completely confident in his choice, confident that Governor Palin is capable of running the nation, and yet the nation has barely had a chance to hear her speak outside of the campaign trail save for a few interviews. Since her acceptance of the nomination it hardly seems odd that even with the support of Senator McCain and several other Republicans Governor Palin has been under a state of constant attack from certain elements of the media; could this be explained, in part, because of the McCain campaigns extreme restrictions on what the Governor can say, and to whom she can speak? Having the press take pictures while the candidate sits with foreign dignitaries but refuses to answer questions just does not generate a great deal of trust; we cannot read her mind, we need to hear what she has to say on the important issues.

Of course, once the public has an opportunity to properly investigate Governor Palin through the same process that Senators McCain, Obama, and Biden have been through – scores of print, radio and television interviews – the citizens will have had the opportunity to judge her in the same light that the other three have been judged, based on their own words, measured against what they say and what their records reflect. When you have an opportunity to truly see where a politician stands on every aspect of their platform it is much easier to decide whether or not you will support them or not; this has not been possible with Governor Palin, especially with the way the “Straight Talk Express” has been handling her every move since the convention. When the campaign has permitted interviews they have been turned into catastrophic events due entirely to the candidate herself; not knowing the “Bush Doctrine” and having an opinion on whether or not she supported it, misrepresenting the amount of energy that the State of Alaska produces – on numerous occasions, not knowing the names of foreign leaders, and not being able to cite a single United States Supreme Court decision with which she disagrees (aside from Roe v. Wade) does very little to help build one’s image in the eyes of the electorate. There is a difference between someone who is “plain-spoken” but knows what they are talking about and someone who is down-right “ignorant” and aspires to appeal to the “average Joe six-pack”; based on her interviews Governor Palin has been coming across as someone who simply does not know what she is talking about. She sounds more like someone repeating a carefully crafted script of party-line answers to standard issues without having a thorough understanding of the fundamental issue being discussed.

The McCain campaign’s answer to these missteps: It was the interviewer’s fault; they should not have asked such difficult questions. Now, it must be said – in defense of Governor Palin – that she may not be completely to blame here: after all, it has been reported that she is being coached by some of the same people that coached George W. Bush before his debates with Al Gore. Considering the past eight years of having George W. Bush as the model for America's children (and, apparently, some of her adults as well), the idea that mediocrity should be something to be attained rather than surpassed seems to have entered the consciousness of the American psyche to the extent that there are many people who actually aspire to achieve as little as possible, believing that they will ultimately succeed in life simply because they are “good” people and therefore “deserve” to be rewarded out of the general benevolence of the world in which they live. In reality, this is merely a contemporary bastardization of the old idea that “ignorance is bliss”, whereas now we have many individuals who are, in effect, “blissfully ignorant”.

Without regard for what is being reported and believing that the main stream media is entirely biased against the Republican message and, therefore, must not be trusted, those in support of the Republican ticket seem to be turning to “alternative” news sources, without bothering to listen to anything that has substance behind it or any basis in fact. They look at the “news” as something that is barely a step above a reality show being broadcast on television, the only difference being that the news directors are unable to create the most violent acts ... at least, not yet. The most sensational stories capture the imaginations – and attentions – of those tuning in, and the same goes with the coverage of the political sphere; does it matter what the truth is behind the story or is the “sound bite”, usually taken out of context, more important? In an election year where the McCain-Palin ticket has complained about impartial media coverage it is interesting to survey the viewing on the Fox network. One could well call it the Republican National Network without much of a stretch of the imagination. Rupert K. Murdoch is not apologetic for his support of right-wing candidates and issues, but to then call his news channel “Fair and Balanced” is, in a word, ridiculous. True, there are dissenting views represented on the Fox network, but they are made to be caricatures of their ideals by their own colleagues, ridiculed for adhering to views that are so “un-American”.

The primary theme of the McCain-Palin campaign, rather than focusing on any of the issues facing the nation, or the economic crisis that could paralyze the country, or the war in Iraq, has been a string of lies and personal attacks on the character of Senator Barack Obama. At the beginning of the campaign his faith was questioned, if not by the candidates themselves then by the friendly – and helpful – folks at Fox Noise, repeatedly referring to him as a Muslim, even when there is more than ample proof to demonstrate that he is a true believer and a devout Christian. One might ask of Senator McCain, would a true Christian attack another, or allow attacks on another, knowing them to be false, accusing them of being a Muslim ... no, I didn't think so either. Obama and his wife were accused, by commentators on Fox News, of being a part of some sort of underground Muslim group because of the “fist” greeting they shared onstage at some event; proof that if a commentator has nothing relevant to say at Fox they will not be deterred, they will spew out anything they can in order to assist their candidate on his quest for the White House. This “innocent” comment aroused heated debate regarding Senator Obama’s patriotism, his fitness for office, and many other irrelevant issues that all served to distract from the true issues of the campaign.

Now, thanks to the level of the invective rhetoric and outright misinformation that has been spread by the opposition campaigns there have been calls for the killing of Obama at McCain-Palin rallies while others shout out that the “real Obama” is a “terrorist” because of the fact that he served on a public housing board in Chicago – with both Republicans and Democrats – and William Ayres, who had committed acts of domestic terrorism back in the 1960’s ... when Obama was EIGHT years old. As a result of the fear-mongering that Senator McCain has fomented he was forced to tell one of his own rallies that they “had nothing to fear” from an Obama presidency and that “Obama was a decent man”. McCain was booed by his own supporters for these comments, the people just did not want to hear that they should not distrust this black man with the odd-sounding name – after all, it does sound an awful lot like “Osama” ... it was even printed that way (by mistake) on 300 advance poll ballots in the State of New York. Barack Hussein Osama – Obama. Having a Sherriff, in uniform, introducing Governor Palin at an event where he used Senator Obama's full name – including the middle name, Hussein, was clearly inflammatory, and the result was clearly effective: many of those entering a McCain rally, when asked, indicated that they believe that Barack Obama was “a Muslim” and could not be trusted – or that he was a “traitor”.

He has been described as a “Manchurian” candidate by some, though one would think that supporters of McCain would want to avoid that inference given the fact that it was their guy who spent five years in Hanoi with the North Vietnamese; if anyone is a “Manchurian” candidate his name is Senator John McCain. It is a well known historical fact that he decided to pursue his career in politics after his father died – being the son of a full Admiral was apparently a burden for the war hero and his true ambitions, but surely his desire to serve his nation in any capacity would have been acceptable to Admiral McCain ... unless the North Vietnamese were using him to get information while he remained in the military. Once his usefulness was over (once access to the Admiral was gone) there was no need to remain where he was and his political path began. [You see – that is how easy it is to manufacture this fiction – forty-five seconds and there you have it, the Manchurian background to Senator McCain ... if anyone is interested I will provide an appropriate background from the prison – the making of the candidate – leave a request in the comments.]

The manipulation of what his opponent has said and the outright lying whenever it is convenient seems to have become standard policy for the McCain-Palin ticket. Rather than projecting an image of respectability and true honour they have stooped to the level of those who have no discernable moral compass. It is certainly not the image that one would expect to find from people professing to be Christians, individuals seeking the trust of their fellow citizens as they seek the highest offices of the land: their actions speak much louder than their words. When Senator Obama commented on the McCain economic plan and said that it was like “putting lipstick on a pig”, the title of a book by a Republican strategist and a phrase used by McCain himself, the McCain campaign took those words and turned them around, claiming that Obama had made the comment about Governor Palin. Even after demonstrating that this was false (something that should not have been necessary given the original context of the comment and the speech in which the comment was made), the ad ran showing that McCain and the Republican party have, in fact, not changed from the old style dirty tricks and smear tactics that have been present in their arsenal for generations of elections. The truth for the Republicans, alas, is only an optional concept; winning is all that matters.

When there are so many people that have virtually instant access to this thing called the Internet it takes a very brave individual to go onstage and lie in front of television cameras; for this reason alone we can have no doubt about the fortitude of John McCain. During one of his speeches where he introduced Governor Palin as his new running mate McCain stated that Palin had put the Governor's jet on EBay and sold it for a profit. Well, that is only part of the story: this airplane was purchased with taxpayer's money so they deserve to hear the truth. The jet was listed on EBay – listed – not sold. Palin actually sold the jet through a private broker; there is nothing wrong with using a private broker to sell something, but it is not the same as selling on EBay and McCain should know better, not to mention the fact that Governor Palin has had numerous opportunities to correct her running mate but has not done so once. Rather than attempting to set the record straight she has allowed the lie to be repeated over and over, as well as the myth of the profits that were generated by this sale: rather than the mythical profit made through the EBay sale the jet was actually sold at a loss of several million dollars, not the glamour sale you will likely hear about from McCain-Palin though; in this case fiction makes for much better press, they do not want anyone to hear about their failures, only things that make them look good – regardless of the veracity of the story. On top of that little lie, her subsequent travel expenses have cost the Alaskan taxpayers over $400,000 (in only 20 months!), since she travels with the entire family ... that private jet (taking back the millions lost) is looking much better now, especially if you consider getting back that $400,000 for commercial travel and the millions lost in the sale of the jet. The operational cost of the private jet, being used as it had been initially intended, would likely have seemed far more economical when measured against such wasteful uses of taxpayer dollars, something that Governor Palin has said she is very much against. Not quite the same success story as before, is it, nor will you likely hear it coming from the McCain campaign.

When issues such as these untruths are raised, or issues surrounding the qualifications of Governor Palin to serve as Vice-President – or President should McCain die in office – are mentioned in the main stream media the reaction of the McCain-Palin ticket is quick and too the point, usually supported by their surrogate press-agency, Fox Noise: “the main stream media is controlled by the liberals and is biased against us” - and “we aren't getting fair coverage in this election”. When you consider that the McCain camp has virtually kept their VP nominee under lock and key since naming her, only allowing her to speak to a select group of interviewers under very controlled conditions, it is difficult to take these claims with anything less than a massive grain of salt: having observed the political coverage on several of the main stream media channels it is very easy to see that the Republican ticket is receiving its fair share of coverage. Is Senator Obama being mentioned more times than Senator McCain? I am not about to count the number of times that the two names are invoked at any particular time, but consider this: if a politician has something to say that is worth reporting there is a greater likelihood that this will be reported rather than having a long report about a stop in X-ville where the candidates delivered the same old stump speech for the umpteenth time; the news does not like “reruns”, it does not make for interesting reporting.

While complaining that the media is being unfair to them it would seem odd that Senator McCain would want to shoot himself in the foot with a cannon, but that is precisely what he did when he called up David Letterman and blatantly lied to him about his reasons for not being able to appear on his popular television show. The Late Show is taped in the early afternoon and Senator McCain was scheduled to appear but called Letterman to tell him that he had to return to Washington that very afternoon to help fix the economic crises. This was, in fact, another lie. While the show was being taped they found out that Senator McCain was in another CBS studio, taping an interview with Katie Couric; while some would argue that he wanted to avoid an appearance on a comedy show during an economic crisis, remember this, McCain appeared on the Conan O'Brien Show right after hurricane Katrina, and David Letterman has done serious interviews with people in the past when called for by the situation. Letterman was visibly annoyed with the fact that he had been lied to, particularly after McCain had used his program to launch his campaign – taking advantage of the 6 million regular viewers that tune in every night. As for the return to Washington, a one hour flight from New York, McCain was still in New York that night – speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative, and he was there the next day.

When he finally returned to Washington he dropped in at the end of the meeting with Secretary Paulson, said a few words about his own proposal (having indicated in an interview of a few days prior that he had not read Sec. Paulson's proposal) and then leaving. He then went to another campaign stop (during his now suspended campaign) and told them how important it was for him to get back to Washington so he could help fix the economic mess that he was now accusing Barack Obama and his “cronies” of causing. “Cronies”: McCain referring to Obama and “his” cronies. Now I am wondering if I have tuned into an episode of the Twilight Zone, or, even worse, if a psychotic episode is in the near future … I cannot imagine what could make someone who has spent the first part of this campaign taking aim at the “lack of experience” that Barack Obama has and his “lack of readiness” to serve as president has morphed their message into him suddenly having had enough experience to have “cronies” all of his own; this coming from a man who has spent the past twenty-five years in Washington calling himself a “deregulator” with great pride. When the proposal by Secretary Paulson contained no oversight it was, by the way, the Democrats that fought to ensure there would be an apparatus in place to help protect the taxpayer's money. The deregulations that Senator McCain is so proud of are a very key part to what led to the atmosphere that contributed to the economic crises facing the U.S. government, much to the chagrin of Senator McCain who is now being forced to face economic issues in this campaign for the first time.

If these actions sound like those of an honest, trustworthy politician, Senator McCain is your man, otherwise, you might want to find out some more about his opponent. There is no shame in being undecided when there is so much at stake for the nation and the people – especially the people. If you think that more of the fiscal management that has resulted in the country tottering on the brink of economic collapse is something that you want to see more of, there is a clear choice for you: the Republican ticket represents a continuation of that which has brought America and its economy to its knees. Accepting the idea that the Republican ticket represents real change must be seriously examined in light of the record of the past eight years and the nature of those involved. Governor Palin represents the extreme conservatism that the Republican base did not see in Senator McCain or the person who had been very prominent in his campaign before the selection of Governor Palin, Senator Joseph Liebermann. Governor Palin embodies the most extremist views of the Republicans, including those which the majority of women would find repugnant. The very idea that she was chosen to lure disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters away from Senator Obama, merely because they will have an opportunity to vote for a woman and thereby shatter the proverbial “glass ceiling”, clearly demonstrates the dim view the Republican strategists have of women: do they really believe that women are so shallow that they will choose to vote for an extreme conservative simply because they are female rather than supporting a candidate that shares their fundamental views, regardless of their sex or colour, who has not only been endorsed by their candidate of choice but by their own words and actions can be seen to be more concerned with women's issues than the female Republican Party’s candidate for Vice-President? The idea is, quite frankly, an insult to all women with even the slightest amount of intelligence and a modicum of personal integrity.

Accepting everything that is being said by any of these politicians is, in a word, silly; they each have their own agendas and their own desire to sit in the Oval Office, but we must still ask ourselves whether the words being spoken carry a hint of desperation and more than a little hysteria as one side seems to change their script from day to day. A political campaign should not mean that those involved cannot pursue their goals through honorable means; it simply means we must be careful as we listen to them, making sure that we are especially careful to discern the truth from the sweetened condiments added to make the messages more appealing for those who have not yet made their decisions. Election campaigns are not for the members of an individual party; those people will take very little convincing to vote for “their” candidate. Campaigns are for the much-coveted “undecided” voter and the “fence-sitter”, those who can still be swayed even up to the day of the election. These individuals will be watching everything from the way the candidate talks about their opponent to the way they tie their ties or wear their hair.

Ultimately, the decision that someone makes on November 4th will be guided by a set of priorities that each individual will have to assess on the basis of their own conscience. If honesty enters into the equation, however, and people force themselves to examine each candidate on the merits of their individual platform, without the filter of lies and obfuscations that the opposition uses to distract people from the real issues they may just discover something significant, perhaps the truth about the tax-plans from either candidate ... or the health-care platforms. In the first two Presidential Debates Senator McCain blatantly misrepresented Senator Obama's tax-plan and health-care plan, but he made the tactical error of doing so in an arena where his opponent was there to rebut his assertions. This left him standing there looking like an angry old man, impotent with rage at the realization that his attack had been foiled yet again by this young upstart; but that, Senator McCain must be reminding himself more and more these days, is the name of this game called politics.

For those of us less inclined to call politics a game, to those who see the ramifications of such elections extending far beyond the borders of the United States, Senator McCain’s actions indeed leave the impression of an angry old man shouting at the children who have wandered into his yard, but also of one who has altogether lost the plot and is stumbling around, unable to find his way in the dark.

Is America Ready?

For the past week I have been preparing a special post for this blog that is almost finished, but before posting that I must post this, inspired by something that I found at BlondeSense. Of course, I should not be at all surprised by what is contained within the short video, but it is nonetheless disheartening to hear so many examples of neo-conservative thinking that simply defies logic. But I am getting ahead of myself … you don’t know what I am talking about if you have not watched the video that is just below this paragraph. Go ahead … I’ll be patient for the few minutes it will take … it is worth your time to watch the video, and you will not regret taking the time. You may need to lean close to your monitor to read all of the quotations.

There you go ... pretty horrible, right? Well, welcome back.

Before this presidential race began, so many months ago, the question as to whether America was “ready” for a woman president or an African-American president seemed to be on the lips of everyone and their dog. The arguments were impassioned, vexatious, and mostly spurious; an individuals qualification for political office has nothing to do with the colour of their skin or of whether they sit down or stand up while going to the washroom. What qualifies someone is their mind, their ideas and ideals, and whether there are enough other like-minded people around who are willing to support them in their run for that office. That is the ultimate qualification for the job, not their colour or sex.

Of course, many elements in the media did not get that memo. While the leering eye of Chris Matthews is sadly pathetic, as are his comments from the debate regarding how important cosmetics will be, the comments from the representatives of “Fixed Noise”, which is also known to some as “Fox News” seemed to have a stranglehold on the best of the worst comments, something that is best represented by their flagship personalities: Bill O’Reilly, Hannity & Colmes.

That the United States is 68^th in the WORLD when it comes to female political representation should not surprise; in a nation that allowed 20,000 Florida voters to be disenfranchised (in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14^th Amendment AND the 15^th Amendment of the United States Constitution) there should be no surprise when the majority of the population receives the least amount of representation from their government, nor that they are routinely treated as second-class citizens.

The “downside” of having a woman in the White House? one “man” is asked: “… the PMS and mood swings?” How much more of a cheap, gutless attack could you make at someone? This is the heart of the ad hominem attack, a device used by people in an argument who have reached a point where they are unable to come up with anything relevant with which to support their point thus forcing them to rely on personal attacks and fictionalising. It is a sign of desperation and usually indicates that the individual has conceded the argument insofar as their ability to continue shall only last for as long as they are able to invent more lies and unrelated mudslinging.

How is being a woman any less of a disadvantage to being a male senior citizen (one who has, by the way, been demonstrating some serious cognitive impairments while delivering his prepared remarks … something that would seriously concern me if I was a supporter of said septuagenarian)? Arguing that the voice of the candidate reminds men of their wives, that it makes one fear for their privates (that was Hannity of FN), that everything she wears is calculated for effect, all perpetuates the myths that men are so easily ensnared – that she is something of a Jezebel seeking “our power”.

Hilary Clinton did not become a Senator because her husband had an affair. She became a Senator because she wanted to [eventually] run for the office of the president of the United States. For Chris Matthews to suggest otherwise is not only pathetic, it belies his political astuteness that is, quite honestly, something that I ordinarily have a great amount of respect for. One does not make a run for the office of the nation’s Chief Executive without having first been proven in another branch of the government; after all, her husband had been the Governor of some hick state, no? The reason Hillary chose to run for the New York Senate seat should be well known to Matthews: Daniel Patrick Moynihan had announced his retirement in 1998 after serving as the Senator from NY from 1977 (his term ended in 2001). Many prominent figures in the Democratic Party urged the former First Lady to enter the race, so the Clintons purchased a home in Chappaqua, New York, in 1999, establishing her legal residence requirement to run for office.

To imply anything else diminishes the entire Senate as an institution, not to mention Chris Matthews and his network’s credibility for allowing such libelous ideas to be broadcast without being taken to task.

This is not journalism, it is the blatant smearing of women, not just Hillary Clinton; it is violence against women, all women. This is the worst sort of male chauvinism and only serves to remind us that, more than anything else, America is in desperate need of real change; not just of its political leadership, but of its fundamental attitudes.

America, we have seen what you really believe in your heart, we have heard your opinions and have been exposed to the vitriol and the fear you harbour at losing control, of losing power, and it is an ugliness that defies comprehension; an ugliness that defies definition, and yet it defines so many who call themselves “American”.

Is America ready for change after the end of George W. Bush’s second term as president? Judging by the comments in that video, they deserve whatever change they get, but that is not really what I wanted to say; my first response had been … and, alas, still is, that (after watching the miserable excuses of men that could not keep their idiocy to themselves) I feel ashamed to be a man. If that is the perception of how “real men” think, then yes, I am ashamed; ashamed that more people do not have an opportunity to hear real, enlightened opinions on these matters, ashamed that the only voices that seem to get heard are the most asinine rather than the reasonable and responsible.

I feel ashamed because it becomes too easy to sit back and let others carry the banners while these frauds continue to spread their lies without any opposition. But, now that I have shared this, that shame is somewhat mitigated and I feel slightly more proud to say that I am a man and that real men would not speak that way about women.

Real men would not show such disrespect to women, after all, our mothers are women and to disrespect your mother is an act too despicable to contemplate. When men disrespect women they demonstrate that they are small-minded, impotent, weak-willed creatures that are incapable of carrying out healthy, loving relationships. Their lack of respect is emblematic of the psychological scars that prevent them from developing normal relationships with women and, subsequently, they lash out at them either verbally or worse, with violence.

It is time for all the real men to take a stand and say they are not afraid of standing up against the sexism being perpetrated against women in the media. These misogynistic acts must be stopped and they can be, if enough viewers demand that the stations broadcasting this trash change their broadcast standards. This is not about censorship; it is about the freedom to be who you were born to be, it is about the freedom to be a man or a woman and to celebrate the differences. Is America ready for that?

The Duty of a Citizen

Contemporary society has developed into one in which expectations run high: we expect a great deal from a vast number of things, especially when it comes to things relating to our governments and what they are supposed to do for us, but what about what we are supposed to do - what are the duties, if any, of a citizen? What of the famous words uttered by John F. Kennedy, when he said, “ask not what your country can do for you– ask what you can do for your country.” These words were spoken on January 21, 1961 during his inaugural address, as he became the 35th president of the United States. They are words that still resonate after nearly forty-five years, but are actually listening to what was said?

If we are to believe that the words spoken after what is described as the bloodiest period in American history, the Civil War, by president Abraham Lincoln hold any meaning and have passed down a lesson to the present generations it is also to say that those who died, the dead that Lincoln is invoking in his text, are still being honored by the fact that a lesson learned means there is something gained. At the dedication to the cemetery at Gettysburg Lincoln closed his short comments with the following lines: “we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the Earth.”

The words have, obviously, made an impression on western society in general, which is why we hear such terms as "civic duty" tossed around. Ultimately, however, we must look at our status as citizens – individually – and understand exactly where we stand in the grand scheme of things.

On the rare occasion that the government deigns us worthy to interact with us, such as having open hearings or some other such event, the people that end up attending are usually the press and a selection of special interest groups who are in attendance to ensure that none of their pet-projects (client's projects) are being risked. How many ordinary people would go to Senate Committee Hearings ... on any issue? I confess that while living in the capital city of Canada and having the government right at my fingertips I have not availed myself of the opportunity to explore the inner machinations of what the “suits” do while the rest of the world earns a living. Part of the reason is simple procrastination; I keep meaning to go, and put it off for another day.

The one time that the "average Joe" is given an active voice, however, is when an election is called and we suddenly become something that the politicians need; citizens of the nation are called upon by a suddenly sociable group of politicians that are solely interested in where we place the mark on our ballots on Election Day. With ballot in hand, a citizen wields the most powerful tool of democracy: the vote. This is the position I found myself in on Monday, November 13 as I voted in our Municipal Elections.

While this election didn't have the same energy attached to as the recent Midterm Elections south of the border, it was a necessary function of democracy, and it resulted in my thinking a great deal about the issue of what it meant to be a citizen.

When I arrived at my polling station (Bay Ward, Poll 7, in case you care) I was absolutely thrilled to see a rainbow of humanity represented. As I have mentioned in previous posts, I live in a neighborhood that is richly diverse ethnically: well, it is great to know that there doesn't seem to be a racial barrier to voting.

All of these people from all over the world who had one thing in common: they had made Canada their adopted country, and were now participating in the democratic process of their new homeland. It reminded me of the scripture in the New Testament, from one of the letters that Paul wrote in his epistle to the Galatians, “These is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28,KJV) The message is beyond simple: we are all the same.

Seeing all those people voting made me think about my own citizenship here in Canada. By virtue of my birth, having been born in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, I am a Canadian citizen, and this can never be taken away from me. I love Canada and being Canadian, and on the occasions that I have traveled, upon returning home that is the overwhelming feeling that I experienced: I was home. I have also been told that, because my parents were both born and raised in the United States and have never gone through the act of officially denouncing their citizenships, if I desire, I can apply for U.S. citizenship.

Save for a rather strong yearning to vote in the 2008 Presidential race, I have no other desire to seek dual citizenship, but this raises a third issue relating to citizenship and my life; the "right of return". By virtue of my background, having Jewish ancestors on both sides of my family for as far back as we know, I know that I can get onto an airplane and go to Israel and become a citizen as soon as I arrive as a result of the "Right of Return".

Why wouldn't I want to do this, you may ask? The answer is simplicity itself: I could never accept citizenship in a nation where my blood brother cannot. The son of my father, whose mother is not the same as mine, is not considered to be a Jew, so he has been told that he does not have the "Right of Return".

How can this be? One brother a Jew, welcomed to return to their “homeland”, yet the other is, for all intents and purposes, a pariah, even though our father is the same man – a man who is the father of all Jews, the patriarch of all Israel.

If being a citizen means the betrayal of my brother, my own blood, it is a price that I cannot bear to pay, and will not pay.

Having considered this issue I was reminded by the way citizenship was dealt with in a novel by the late sci-fi author Robert A. Heinlein. The novel, which was published in 1959, was made into a movie in 1997 which was probably seen by more people than had read the book (I confess, I have not read the book – yet – though I was, at least, aware that Heinlein had written it when the movie came out). In the movie “Starship Troopers” we learn that it is through “voluntary Federal Service” that someone earns their full rights as a citizen, those rights including the ability to vote and hold public office. Of course, “voluntary Federal Service” involved going to war against vicious, man-eating bugs that were intent on the eradication of every human being in the universe, but that seemed to be a minor point to the hundreds of thousands who were volunteering to be the next ones to become members of the Mobile Infantry.

Is this the price of citizenship? What brought Heinlein’s concept to mind was what would happen if I did decide to seek Israeli citizenship, and the moments afterward. While I can’t actually imagine that anyone with any semblance of sense would hand me any sort of weapon that was loaded, the idea that citizenship in Israel comes with automatic membership in the IDF or the reserves (depending on physical ability and age, of course) only adds to the reasons to reject the offer.

Israel has, without trying, turned Robert A. Heinlein into something of a prophet. Without meaning to, Israel has managed to become the “federation” battling a war that seems to have no end while constantly saying, “we want peace”, even as they perfect new ways to kill their enemy.

You cannot have peace with your neighbour when you are excluding your own blood from returning to the homes from which you have driven them. We, as citizens of whatever country we happen to be in, are blessed by the fact that there are laws in place to protect our rights. What of the rights of all people, oh Israel? What of my brother? When will he and his family be allowed to return to the land of his father; the land of our forefathers?

To deny the children of Abraham their inheritance is nothing short of an abomination before the Lord, and you, oh Israel, shall pay the price, for you have crossed a line that cannot be uncrossed. You have murdered the innocent in the name of national security; in the name of self-defense you have wiped out entire families and then had the audacity to say, “it was an accident”. Allowing Zionist fascists to have any control of a government is an accident; slaughtering innocent civilians is murder.

By birth I am a Canadian and a Jew. Being a Jew is something that transcends the issue of race; it is a cultural identity that can never be removed from who I am even if I have never attended a service in a Synagogue (save for one I once led). By choice I am a Christian, and as we all are, I am a human. Under the surface there is no difference, neither between Jews nor Greeks, nor any other races. What we are distinguished by, as citizens, is our actions. When we have an opportunity to exercise our right to vote – a right that has been paid for with the blood of some of our finest, and youngest, citizens through the wars that sought to strip us of those rights – when we exercise those rights we are committing an act that celebrates all that is good in the democratic system.

Whether the candidate that I voted for wins or not is really not the important issue, the issue is that the true freedom here, in a country where it doesn’t matter what your background is in order for you to become a citizen, is the exercising of the right to vote. To exercise your vote is to make your voice be heard and effect change, without the need for violence and any innocent lives being eradicated in the process.

When the Zionist fascists in Israel wake up to the fact that the people they are denying the “right of return” to are the blood of their blood, perhaps they will have a change of heart … of course, that would be contingent upon their having hearts in the first place, and that’s another issue for another time. Until them, I remain as ever, proudly Canadian.

Tags: Canada, Citizenship, Democracy, Elections, Israel, Politics, Right of Return, Voting, Zionist Fascism,