The Politics of Voting

For Nellie.

I don't usually like to wax political on you fine folks, partly because I am so ill-read on the subject, and partly because my opinions change like the wind on some issues. But for the benefit of those of you out there who could use a good political read (ok, maybe not a good read, but nonetheless an opinion) here is my take on the what's what.

Politics never really played a part in my life. I just accepted, nay, I took for granted that everything was fine, Democracy, Senate, Congress, rah rah rah, sis boom bah. When I hit 18, immediately I felt slighted as a "voter" because, why, at age 18, can you

1. vote for who is going to run the entire country...
2. go off to war and die for said country...
3. potentially be drafted to go to a war...

BUT you have to be 21 to be considered "adult" enough to buy alcohol? I know, it is a moot issue since I'm not a drinker, but it's a principle issue.

So, on principle, I didn't vote. Then, I hit 21, and my reasoning changed for not voting. Now, I will vote when "I see a candidate that I deem worthy to vote for." You know, the JFK, FDR, Lincoln type presidents that come around infrequently at best. This excuse held up for a long time...I mean, George Bush? Who really thought Clinton was a JFK figure when he came around? W? Al Gore? Not on my watch.

It wasn't until this year that it hit me...even the "good" to "great" presidents weren't perfect. They just did a job that kept us free and happy. Think about it:

1. Thomas Jefferson - Ever hear of Sally Hemmings? She was the slave Jefferson had with whom he had an illegitimate son.

2. Abraham Lincoln - When he was 22, his business failed. When he was 23, he lost a bid for U.S. Congress. When he was 24, he failed in business again. The following year, he was elected to the state legislature. When he was 26, his sweetheart died. At age 27, he had a nervous breakdown. When he was 29, he was defeated for the post of Speaker of the House in the state legislature. When he was 31, he was defeated as Elector. When he was 34, he ran for Congress again and lost. At the age of 37, he ran for Congress yet again and finally won, but two years later he lost his re-election campaign. At the age of 46, he ran for a U.S. Senate seat and lost. The following year he ran for Vice President and lost. Finally, at the age of 51, he was elected President of the United States. Plus, there is the whole, "he was gay" rumour...not that there's anything wrong with that.

3. FDR - 1933-1945...that's 12 years, people...a little longer than the 8 you are Consitutionally bound to serve. He was still damn good, but a close acquantance once said "If [President Roosevelt] became convinced tomorrow that coming out for cannibalism would get him the votes he so sorely needs, he would begin fattening a missionary in the White backyard come Wednesday."

4. JFK - "Happy Birthday, Mr President..." Hello, he was banging Marilyn Monroe and was married to Jackie O.

Reagan may or may not have had Alzeimer's in the White House, Nixon = Watergate, Clinton and the cigar on Monica Lewinski, I could go on, but the point is this:

Even the Presidents held in the highest reguards had faults.

So, maybe I'll vote this year. Who is a better candidate? Bush? Kerry? Maybe Charles Jay from Indiana on the Personal Choice Party...he does have a Porn star as his running mate (no joke).

Maybe Leonard Peltier from Kansas on the Peace and Freedom Party. What? He's not really from Kansas? He's just serving time there for a double murder of FBI agents? And he's running for President?!? Doesn't matter anyway, he's only on the Californian ballot.

Double Murder though...wow.

I'm not going to officially take a side at this point. I do know the following:

1. I don't care if Kerry served in Vietnam, or served fries at Viet Cong's Burger Shak.
2. I don't care if Bush dodged the draft, if he served, if the papers were forged, or if he was honorably discharged or not.
3. I don't care if Bush sat in that schoolhouse on 9/11 reading the book to kids for another 7 minutes or 70 minutes (I do care that he, intentionally or not, had the presence of mind to not spook the children.)

I heard an interesting theory (sorry Nellie) from Rush Limbaugh and it potentially makes sense. The Democrats are using Kerry to intentionally lose to Bush so that Bush can go for his 4 more years, and then the Democrats can run Hillary Rodham Clinton in '08.

Crazy? Not really. Hillary really wants to run, but it would be silly for her to run against Bush because even if Bush's supporters are 50/50 on Bush, it's possible that of the 50 percent that hate Bush, maybe 25 percent hate Hillary even more, and those votes would go to Bush or, gasp, Nader (could you imagine the Clinton household's humiliation to get beat in the election by Bush AND Nader?)

The Democrates throwing Kerry as a pawn makes sense for two reasons. One, the party loved Bill, loved his term, and would love to have another Clinton in the White House. Two, Hillary would rather run against a Rebuplican candidate who isn't already established in some voters as Dubya is. Some people love him, some hate him...but everybody knows him, and knows how he is now...that could sway people away from Hillary.

If Kerry looses, then Hillary campaigns fresh. If the Democrates had a candidate who would win (maybe Kerry will), then Hillary has a snowballs chance of being the Democratic nominee in '08. So, the Democrats use Kerry, and his campain which seems to be 'I am just like Bush, but I have a brain..." so that the people will just go with Bush. They also use the next potential big Democratic person, Edwards, sparingly, as the VP nominee, so that Hillary doesn't have to compete with him in '08.

Maybe that's crazy...but it makes sense to me. Will America vote for Hillary in '08? Maybe. Maybe not.

I would like to see a woman in the White House...or an African American. I would like to see how they would change things. It would be refreshing. Hillary? Maybe not so much.

I have the voter registration here in front of me, but I still don't know if I'm going to fill it out. I should. I think the President should make voting manditory. That way I would have to quit procrastinating and vote.

Maybe I'll just go Nader.