Political musing (feel free to skip)

[flewellyn]

Following the primaries, I'm still very much undecided whether I want to support Obama or not. Both my first choice (Edwards) and my second (Clinton) have come out in support of him, and that says a lot to me.

But then I hear about stuff like this, in which protestors and dissenters at an Obama rally were systematically excluded and dismissed by his campaign's operatives. And it makes me wonder...isn't this Bush stuff? If Obama means to unify the party, how come his campaign's actions seem geared toward unity through purge?

Very discomfitting. If Obama turns out to be Bush Lite, then my choices at the ballot box will be Bush Lite or Bush Redux. Not much of a choice, is it?

Comments

[cheekyweebisom.livejournal.com]

If sufficient numbers of people would vote for candidates they actually DO like and believe in, rather than settling for the "least" corrupted, the system would eventually change.

Okay, this is the logic that I don't get. First of all, yes, by definition, "sufficient numbers of people" are enough to effect whatever change you want. That's what makes them sufficient numbers. So, how about instead of "sufficient numbers" we go with "all the dissatisfied Democrats and all the progressives who feel so disenchanted that they don't vote at all." That's still probably a pretty big number. Is it a sufficient one? I don't know.

Then we get to "the system would eventually change." And in the mean time, how many lives are ruined? How many children don't get medical care? How many women are denied abortions? How many soldiers die? How many civilians die because of our wars? Etc.

I was 11 years old when Bush was elected. This is the political climate I've known for the entire time that I was actually paying attention. I don't feel like I can afford to play hard to get with political parties or candidates. The name of the game is damage control. Lest you think that I'm totally resigned and cynical, I should mention that I don't intend to limit my efforts to voting. I want to go to law school; I think I can better the system--even if it's in a small way--by devoting my career either to politics or to civil liberties work.

But when it comes to this election, I believe with all my heart that the country--and the world--will be better off with Obama in the oval office, so I will vote for him with head held high and a spring in my step.

"The lesser of two evils" sounds so blasé and hopeless, and my willingness to compromise is neither of those things. I prefer Voltaire: "The best is the enemy of the good."

[cacahuate.livejournal.com]

IAWTC. This is why, while I don't actually disagree with it, I generally don't use the phrase "lesser of two evils."

[cacahuate.livejournal.com]

So, have you quit IM entirely or have you just switched services or something?

[cheekyweebisom.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty much never on. I'll try to change that maybe Idon'tknowI'mkindofaflake.