Log in

No account? Create an account
Previous Entry Share Next Entry

(no subject)

Well. Enough moping, back to work. Art waits for no angst.

So, my final statement. Since most of us are sick of politics, go ahead and skip it. It's harsh and not at all conciliatory, and keeps the partisan rift nicely bloody. You've been warned.

If you voted for Bush, I'm holding you personally responsible for every single lousy, stupid, unethical thing his administration does. The first time, sure--that came out of left field. Coulda been blindsided. No hard feelings. But you all know exactly who he is now, and you voted for him anyway. That makes you entirely morally culpable. It's your fault from here on out.

He pushes for anti-abortion laws? Your fault. He pushes for an anti-gay amendment? Your fault. He wrecks the environment by pandering to industry? Guess who's fault! He fucks up the war in Iraq even more? You get half credit for that, we need to save some for insurgencies, but I'm sure there'll be plenty of blood for everbody's hands to get a nice speckling.

Somebody at this point will doubtless say "But I'm pro-choice, too!" or something like that. Tough shit. You voted for him. People should know by now that what you believe means nothing compared to what you've DONE. If I stole something, and then tried to claim that I knew stealing was wrong, so I shouldn't be held accountable, what kind of defense is that? It may even be worse! If you believed differently, you should have acted differently.* You made your choice. Beliefs are great, but actions are real.

Now, if you're a mature adult, I imagine this really shouldn't be a problem. You'll be willing to be held accountable for your actions. I certainly am. I'll be held responsible if the people I voted for get in office and do bad things. If the governor here tries to secede from the union or ban religion or something, I'll take my lumps. I voted for him. I share the blame. That's the way it works. I voted for Nader in 2000, and he turned out to be a crazy jackass, and I share a moral culpability for having supported him. I accept that. You want to go off about what an idiot Nader is, I'll sit here and take it. I deserve every word. Hell, I'll chime in during the slow bits. I know all kinds of synonyms for "barking moonbat" and I'm willing to use 'em.

We are responsible for the actions of administrations we support. If you don't want to be responsible, don't support them.

But there's a silver lining! If Bush does something really great, I'm happy to dispense credit to y'all too. Fair is fair. He cures cancer or negotiates a working Palestinian peace accord, it's all yours. I'm bitter and angry and petty, but if he turns out to be Rushmore material, accolades will be forthcoming for all who supported him, and I'll freely admit that I was wrong.

And come on. Surely you must believe that Bush will do great things rather than stupid or dangerous things. After all, if you thought he was an idiot who'd screw things up, you surely wouldn't have voted for him in the first place! So really, you shouldn't have anything to worry about at all. As long as Bush is good for this country, you have absolutely nothing to fear at all.

And that, gang, is my last word on the subject until Bush does something stupid. Tune in next time for nothing to do with politics whatsoever.

*Not neccessarily voting Kerry, mind you, there are lots of moral issues there that I can easily see people disagreeing with, but there's a handy write-in slot too. The options were limitless. What you chose binds you.

And this is EXACTLY why people don't vote - there isn't a single politician out there who I *don't* think is evil and corrupt, so I refuse to support... well, any of them. I'd rather spoil my ballot paper.

On the other hand, I'm in the UK. 75% of those polled over here voted for Kerry...

Now, I think that not voting means "D) All of the above"--a tacit decison that you support anything that happens.

Lack of action is an action in and of itself, and can be a morally reprehensible one, as Kitty Genovese learned.

(Deleted comment)
One significant improvement in the administration announced so far is John Ashcroft is bailing.

Bad news is Colin Powell is highly likely to also leave. :-/ We do indeed live in interesting times...


There are also stories out there that say Bush is now speaking out in support of gay civil unions....a complete 180 given that the marriage amendment he was supporting earlier this year would have outlawed them.

I was surprised at the results of a survey that, claimed anyway, that a more-than-50% of Bush supporters polled attributed to him positions very different than those he actually held. This may have been a joke like some others, or improperly carried out, of course, and I'd agree immediately to any rejoinder ;) that ignorance means a responsibility to inform oneself, not a lack of responsibility in the results...

"But you all know exactly who he is now, and you voted for him anyway."

That's the sad part. Almost every state that went Bush in 2000 went Bush in 2004.. again. As one of the CNN anchors said, it's strange that we've had such an eventful four years and people are still voting the same way they did in 2000!

I saw one of those red/blue maps of the US - it looks like even more states voted Republican, or at least not Democrat.

Should we demand that the US remove all its nuclear weapons?

(Deleted comment)
Barking Moon Bat?


You might consider that bloody, but it makes perfect sense. If all the angst I've seen was so logical, I'd happily put up with it.

Though I thought Dean was evasive, that "whoop" that ended his campaign actually made me like him more.

I like Wesley Clark - though he didn't get a lot of coverage around here so I don't know all about him.

*much applause and acolades*

Speaking for myself, my fiancee and my entire extended family:

Ursula, you ROCK!

I think you speak for pretty much everyone who has ever heard of Ursula.

Somebody at this point will doubtless say "But I'm pro-choice, too!" or something like that.

I ran into someone on lj this morning who popped out with this little gem:
I'm pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-gay rights and a Pagan female. And I voted for Bush.

I am currently politely trying to talk with her and figure out why on earth she voted for someone who's already said that he's against three of those.
I did go off like a small yield nuke in my own LJ about it, though. Because, y'see, I just don't understand how someone can cheerfully vote for someone who is pro-life, anti-gay rights, and doesn't think that Wicca qualifies as a real religion, when they themselves are pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and freakin' Pagan.

Then again, I don't know why anyone would really vote for Bush after the past four years, but hey! Let's hear it for keeping those evil nasty gays from getting married! -SNARK-

I hear that under their clothes they walk around naked. And they masticate in public.

As long as Bush is good for this country, you have absolutely nothing to fear at all.

The problem is that what you think is good for this country, and what I think is good for this country, is not what the people who voted for Bush think is good for this country. The things that you listed are topics on which the people who voted for him apparently agree with him, and therein lies the basic problem in America. I'm not sure I ever really believed that there were two Americas, previous to this last election, but I'm starting to think there are. There's the America you and I want to live in, and there's the America that Bush supporters want to live in, and they are just not the same place.

I mean, not that I'm disagreeing with you. I hold people who voted for Bush personally responsible for any of the stupid shit that happens in the next four years, too. But I just don't think they'll see it as stupid shit the way you and I do.

And so this is where I'm beginning to wonder. We manage to continue to function as a socity, despite this split right down the center of us, half for Liberal America and half for Conservative America. I would far rather live in a country where that split is allowed to exist than is not, but at the same time, I don't know. Maybe I'd be happier in a country that had more of the same beliefs I do--like nationalized health care, extensive social services, well-funded schools... I mean, I know I'm a socialist. I used to think that America was bound to move to a more socialist viewpoint. I'm not so sure of that anymore, and... I don't know. When forward motion in what I consider the right direction can be reversed so shockingly by changes in administration, I find that I have to start asking myself if this is where I really want to be.

I think I'm all worn out again now. Drat.

I know exactly what you mean about the polarized divide, which really sucks when you find yourself torn right in the middle of it. I consider myself a Moderate--not specifically Conservative, not specifically Liberal, but with a mix of views that tend to be featured by both sides. I'm pro-gay rights and gay marriage but anti-abortion. I'm for the privatizing of social security but against faith-based initiatives that get religion and state way too close together. I support removing "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegience, "In God We Trust" from currency, and the Ten Commandments from courtrooms (even though I myself am Christian), but also support the right to bar arms and oppose excessive gun control. Neither party--and thus, neither side of the Great Divide--represents me or the nation I want to live in. And it bloody sucks.

Everyone obviously knows who I voted for, but don't get me wrong--I still think Bush is bastard. I just thought Kerry was a bigger one is all. Either way, I wouldn't be supporting the kind of nation I wanted to live in--and that's the drawback of our deeply ingrained two-party system. It's either/or, and any other option effectively doesn't count. At least, it doesn't until enough people start voting that way, which may be what I'll do next time around. The attitude of "a vote for an independant candidate is a voted watsed" is what keeps the two-party system in power, and I have to shake *myself* free of that attitude. We're going to have to get some other parties in viable play or this country will likely tear itself right down the middle with the polarization. This kind of divide can't last peacefully for long. :-(


And even if people argue that they don't want to vote because inevitably both candidates are somehow morally retarded in one form or another and don't want to be held accountable for either of their actions, this is when the 'lesser evil' comes into play. There will never be a 'perfect candidate' for you, even if you were the one running, you would have to alter your ideals slightly to become elected and to make the general public happy! So whose actions would you rather have on your conscience?

Personally I'm a bit biased but I can't understand these people arguing that they were both bad choices so it doesn't matter. There's are slight and significant differences, do the damn research and note what changes from candidate to candidate. If you think they're on equal footing you aren't well informed and aren't doing your duty to this country, it's people, and yourself.

*shushes now*~
XP Sorry. Just.. get a bit riled up you know?

Daaaaamned skippy. I'm going to link this from my journal.

Rock to the socks. Link'd.

Yes, both Bush and Kerry are bad, and Nader is insane. This is why I voted for Badnarik. The worst thing HE did was get arrested for trying to protest his exclusion from a debate, by breaking through a police line. And then he submitted when they arrested him. Peaceful protests are good things, and more people should try it, rather than ineffectual bitching, and then voting in the same damn problem again and again. The problem isn't just Bush vs. Kerry. It's Republicrat vs. Republicrat. Unless we can break out of the 2-party pigeonhole, we're never going to change anything.

I couldn't possibly agree with you more!


Ride the counterculture! If we're lucky, the underground in America will be something to remember.

"Hey hey, LBJ, how many boys you kill today..."