When I was eighteen, I was so excited to have the opportunity to vote, though ironically I didn't have the slightest clue about politics. I just knew that I didn't like Ronald Reagan, so therefore I must not like Republicans (as foolish on the surface as that assumption is, it turned out to be quite accurate). So I cast my first vote for a loser, the Democratic contender Michael Dukakis, a child of immigrants, living the American dream (cue the flag-waving and the brass band), the whole red-white-and-blue nine yards. I bought it. And after that three-ring-circus, otherwise known as the Debates that included millionaire businessman (and SNL soundbite) H. Ross Perot, George H.W. Bush won the election.
Then we were launched into war. When I was a junior in college, I knew young men who could conceivably be drafted for what appeared to be a senseless overseas exercise in bloodshed. I didn't know what the chant of "No Blood For Oil" truly meant, but I knew I was anti-war, and it was the early Nineties, after all. Everyone was a neo-pseudo-wannabe hippie back then, protesting for or against anything and everything, especially if they were college age. It was your God-given right to protest and oppose the Establishment, and pass out pamphlets about Amnesty International during music festivals. Funny how history seemed to recycle itself after twenty years passed. We simply traded tie-dye for plaid flannel.
When I was twenty-two, I proudly cast my vote for Democrat Bill Clinton. Even though he won the overall election, my particular vote didn't count toward his victory, as it had been cast while living in the Red State of Texas. Still, there was a swelling sense of hope, and even 70's icons (and Clinton favorite) Fleetwood Mac reunited for his inaugural bash, because their hit "Don't Stop" had unofficially become the Clinton campaign song of hope for the future. I was so excited to watch the spectacle on television. It felt as if the future was indeed in our hands, and the world was going to change for the better as a result of the MTV Youth Generation voting Clinton all the way.
The U.S. economy thrived during this time, even though between the ages of 22 and 28 I myself was still living at home, despite having completed a B.A. (albeit in the sketchy realm of Creative Writing), barely scraping by with menial work and for most of the time zero benefits (except, ironically, for my three-and-a-half year stint at a grocery store, when I had the best FREE health coverage I've had in my entire lifetime. By the way, those days are OVER, kids).
The U.S. economy continued to thrive despite a sex scandal in the White House, and still thrived despite a movement for impeachment that loomed over the Clinton administration. And all the while, Al Qaeda was looming as well. But we were all too busy going to Lollapalooza and Woodstock revivals and mourning the death/debating the cultural relevance of Kurt Cobain to notice.
Then, as it is with life, all good things must come to an end. Republican George W. Bush infamously stole the election from Al Gore, and the Great Hanging Chad Debacle in Florida once again made America (and the Conservative South) the butt of every joke around the world. And I had cast my vote for yet another loser.
And the warnings of impending doom continued to be ignored, first by the Clinton administration, and now the new Bush Junior regime, expertly puppeteered by grimacing Dick Cheney's hand up Bush Junior's ass. It was the latter administration who would pay for it in spades.
Well, in truth, 2,977 innocent people would be the ones to pay for it with their very lives, as that's how many casualties there were on that long-ago sunny sky-blue morning in September of 2001, when the world went grey and silent under ash for a time.
On the surface, it appeared that the world united over this tragedy. Everyone held hands and sang Kumbaya. Everyone had telethons and tributes around the clock. Everyone waved American flags that were ironically handcrafted in Chinese sweatshops. And over time, everyone became desensitized by the ubiquitous images of two buildings being hit by airplanes and crumbling into plumes of toxic dust.
I can only speak for myself, but to this day, nearly 14 years later, I can honestly say that I still feel my stomach lurch and my skin crawl with chills when I see any of those events replayed. It is a sense memory that I will likely never shake from my being. The only logical thing to do now was send our troops to war with a nation that had nothing to do with the attacks. Oh, and keep holding hands with the country (Saudi Arabia) from which the 19 hijackers came. Because both of those things made perfect, logical sense.
And the wounded, clueless American public somehow thought these things were okay, or at least, didn't put up too much of a fuss initially. To do so would be "un-American."
Somehow, this imbecile Bush Junior (otherwise known as "Shrub" by the brilliant, late journalist and author Molly Ivins) won a second Presidential term. I wasn't thrilled with John Kerry as a choice, but in my foolish stranglehold on retaining my youth (even at the ancient age of 34), I actually convinced myself to believe in the concept of a "lesser of two evils" and voted for him just to keep Bush Junior out. I especially didn't like Kerry's running mate, John Edwards. To me, there was just something innately despicable about him. I even said it out loud to someone once, with no basis or provocation: "I don't like him. Look at how much he's smiling. No one smiles that much. He's hiding something," And sure as shit, the truth came out much, much, later, during Edwards' own 2008 bid for the Presidency. Just another sex scandal. But in a Shakespearean twist, his mistress had their secret (and outrightly denied) lovechild out of wedlock, and the loyal wife was now dying of incurable cancer. Yeah, never good to have these things unearthed while you're running for the highest office in the land.
The next one who would have received a check-mark on my ballot during the post-Bush Jr. era was Hilary Clinton. In my unabashed ignorance, I still believed that I was a Democrat, and therefore had to vote as such, and she seemed like such a strong contender. And then the underlying dialogue became "Do we want the first Female President or do we want the first African American President?" Because those were the two choices now for the Democratic Party. But Clinton was blown out of the water by that young senator Obama from Illinois.
When Hilary was destroyed during those final debates, I actually went to bed and cried that night. I had never felt so helpless or hopeless at the hands of politics. And there was something inherently insidious about this Obama character to me. There was something too cocky in his swagger, and I was quite alarmed by the immediate embrace that the Media seemed to throw around him and his campaign. For me, an election has nothing to do with race or gender, religion or bank accounts. If you're an untrustworthy asshole, that's really all that matters. But vibes are not viewed as a relevant source for judgment of another human being, so all of the red flags I felt seemed to mean nothing to anyone else.
But I sure as hell didn't want a privileged pasty out-of-touch Republican rich boy like Romney in the White House, either, much less that overly-folksy Alaskan twat VP wannabe who had no concept of geography or politics in general.
There was no third party option to speak of for voters. No one else got any air time during the debates, much less during the hideous commercials that aired. I felt completely lost and adrift. And the mudslinging quickly turned to shit-slinging, racial slurs, and general ignorant commentary from both sides of the fence. I had never in my life witnessed such hatred and ugliness during a political race. I couldn't talk to anyone about my feelings. And what I was beginning to notice was even more alarming-- you had to choose a side. And no matter which side you chose, it was wrong.
The problem was, both sides were VERY wrong to me. And I couldn't understand why no one else seemed to notice just how wrong they both were.
I found that I could not have an intelligent conversation about this horrible discovery with anyone without it devolving into the following exchange:
"So if you're not voting for (Obama, Romney), you're basically saying that you'd rather that (Romney, Obama) was in the White House? Are you telling me you would rather have (Obama, Romney) in the White House, in control of this country and its people? You would rather have that moron (Palin, Biden) just a heartbeat away from the Presidency?"
I'm like, can you hear yourselves...?
You're exactly alike. You're saying the exact same shit about each other, but you're just swapping out the names.
(Looking to the Right): You're calling Obama a Muslim non-resident who wants to grant amnesty to all the illegals in this country.
(Looking to the Left): And you're calling Romney a supporter of the Right Wing Christian Coalition who wants to take away all women's reproductive rights.
All likely ugly, inconceivable stretches of the truth. Or maybe not. Maybe both of these ass-hats really are just that horrible.
So I'd ask them, the Right and the Left, why are you choosing one over the other? The standard, easiest, most common response I would get was as follows.
"Well, sometimes you just have to choose the lesser of two evils."
In the case of choosing who is to be running our country, I'm sorry, I don't believe there is a lesser of two evils.
And, by the way, why are there only two choices?
And why do we still have a fucked-up system like the Electoral College in place?
But see... all of those points I raised to both Democrats and Republicans were too confusing, too scary, too much for them to deal with and think about, because time was of the essence. So instead, they both took to deflecting and defending and making me feel like there was something very wrong with me.
For the first time in my lifetime, I did not cast a vote for a new President of the United States in 2008. I felt horrible. I felt guilty. But more than anything, I felt angry toward all of those people who made me feel horrible and guilty. In truth, I had not done anything to feel horrible about.
I firmly believe that if you're too lazy to get up off your layaway couch, brush the Taco Bell crumbs off your fat ass and waddle off to cast a vote, or if you're a ditzy, plugged-in, self-gratifying 20-something who "doesn't have time for politics" but does have time to devote hours to Worlds of Warcraft or Candy Crush, the Kardashians and Dancing With the Stars, then yes, you have no right to bitch about the results of an election. To a point, that is very true. But my case was not even remotely the same. And I hated anyone who dared to hint that my actions were the equivalent of said fat-ass morons who were content to bitch about the results of an election but too lazy to get up and do their "civic duty."
I lost sleep over it. I got into screaming matches with people because of it. I'm pretty sure people stopped talking to me because of my daring to voice my views on what a fucked-up process this had all turned into. I felt like I was an alien life form dropped unawares onto the surface of a very inhospitable planet comprised soley of black and white, baseless hatred, and fear tactics rather than thoughtful discourse, compromise, or a single solitary shade of grey.
When Obama won, I felt slightly sick, but during the Inauguration, I honestly (read: foolishly) believed that because this was the final result, because there was no going back and changing it, all I could do was hope for the best. I prayed that all of my inexplicable, irrational misgivings about him were completely misguided emotions and nothing more; that he had indeed been elected our President, I needed to give him the benefit of the doubt, and allow nature to take its course. Time would tell, and I was willing to accept that.
But nothing got better from that day forward. If anything, the people in this country only got uglier, and his swagger got to be more unbearable. His love affair with the Media has yet to relent, even now late into his second term. And he has done nothing to improve what is happening in our world.
Plain and simple, Obama won by a landslide because people hated George Bush, blamed him for 9/11 (even though a few Presidencies were ultimately to blame for that), blamed him for our continued presence in Iraq (well, yes, that part is true), and therefore, they wanted anything BUT a Republican. Yes, I understand the visceral reaction there, and who doesn't want change for the better? But the American people's first-- and perhaps, only-- mistake was that they looked no further than those two columns, Democrat and Republican.
So here we go again. Obama's on his way out, and the ones who grew to hate him-- whether for rational or irrational reasons-- are now going to cause the pendulum to swing to the far Right this time, if I may be so bold as to make a prediction. But seriously, is that the answer?
During Obama's second run, I started researching other alternatives, because I was not going to leave the Presidential portion of my ballot blank ever again, no matter how dismal the choices I was "given," and no matter how ugly and hateful the dialogue became. My vote is, quite frankly, no one's business.
I took online quizzes and tests, examined polls and read articles in an attempt to figure out where in the hell my political loyalties did lay. It was a very confusing process, because I agree with a handful of classic Democrat views and a handful of classic Republican views. The thing is, I don't see any of these views as "Democrat" or "Republican," though. I see them as Common Sense.
I support the freedom to love and to marry-- let's not get into gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or other such labels and stir up even more hornets' nests. I believe in the enforcement of restrictions on immigration to this country-- our borders can only contain so many more human beings, and shouldn't those human beings come here through a legal system? Those are two big ones.
I believe in the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use-- marijuana is a plant, and all pharmaceuticals have their bases in plant life; and on the other side of the coin, does anyone remember a little thing called Prohibition? Does anyone remember how well that worked? I believe in smaller government-- doesn't anyone recall the phrase "...government by the People, for the People"? Do you really want the government deciding what type of health care you personally deserve, or what sort of personal reproductive rights women should have? Don't you want to live in a world where people are actually held accountable for their own actions, including our Government?
None of these views makes me a Democrat or a Republican. I know very few people who hold all of these views, therefore the PERCEPTION is that the views are surely diametrically-opposed, which is ludicrous, because they are not. One has nothing to do with the others.
So after wading through several questionnaires, it turns out that the party who best reflects the MAJORITY of my core beliefs and values is the Libertarian Party.
Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party has gotten something of a bad rap since Ron Paul attempted to run under their banner in the second Obama race. To me (and to many, I'm sure), he came across as a bit of a kook. Maybe not as much of a kook as Ross Perot back in 1988, but a kook nonetheless. A kook who flip-flopped and jumped on the Republican bandwagon when he realized that being labeled a Libertarian wasn't going to win him any races.
What are the basic tenets of the Libertarian party?
(Taken from The Party of Principle website, http://www.lp.org/platform#1.0)
Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government.
That last line requires some exposition for me, personally. Does it mean that no one can stop a riot, or a crime in progress? If it does, then what's the point of having any laws or regulations? I do not agree with this, if this is what it is saying.
That last line requires some exposition for me, personally. Does it mean that no one can stop a riot, or a crime in progress? If it does, then what's the point of having any laws or regulations? I do not agree with this, if this is what it is saying.
Individuals own their bodies and have rights over them that other individuals, groups, and governments may not violate. Individuals have the freedom and responsibility to decide what they knowingly and voluntarily consume, and what risks they accept to their own health, finances, safety, or life.
If this means what I think it does, well, corporations and the Government have both lied to us about the quality of our air, water and food-- so I'm not sure how we as citizens are supposed to arrive at the truth about the ensured safety of these basic needs. If what the phrase means is that people are free to smoke a bunch of dope and do stupid shit, then by all means, go for it. They do that now, and they do it with legal substances.
If this means what I think it does, well, corporations and the Government have both lied to us about the quality of our air, water and food-- so I'm not sure how we as citizens are supposed to arrive at the truth about the ensured safety of these basic needs. If what the phrase means is that people are free to smoke a bunch of dope and do stupid shit, then by all means, go for it. They do that now, and they do it with legal substances.
We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.
Libertarians advocate individual privacy and government transparency. We are committed to ending government’s practice of spying on everyone. We support the rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, property, and communications. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure should include records held by third parties, such as email, medical, and library records.
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, since only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. We support restitution to the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. Private property owners should be free to establish their own conditions regarding the presence of personal defense weapons on their own property. We oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, registering, or monitoring the ownership, manufacture, or transfer of firearms or ammunition.
Libertarians want all members of society to have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.
As respect for property rights is fundamental to maintaining a free and prosperous society, it follows that the freedom to contract to obtain, retain, profit from, manage, or dispose of one’s property must also be upheld. Libertarians would free property owners from government restrictions on their rights to control and enjoy their property, as long as their choices do not harm or infringe on the rights of others. Eminent domain, civil asset forfeiture, governmental limits on profits, governmental production mandates, and governmental controls on prices of goods and services (including wages, rents, and interest) are abridgements of such fundamental rights. For voluntary dealings among private entities, parties should be free to choose with whom they trade and set whatever trade terms are mutually agreeable.
We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. We oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production.
All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a "Balanced Budget Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.
We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Markets are not actually free unless fraud is vigorously combated and neither profits nor losses are socialized. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We support a halt to inflationary monetary policies and unconstitutional legal tender laws.
Libertarians support free markets. We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of entities based on voluntary association. We oppose all forms of government subsidies and bailouts to business, labor, or any other special interest. Government should not compete with private enterprise.
Employment and compensation agreements between private employers and employees are outside the scope of government, and these contracts should not be encumbered by government-mandated benefits or social engineering. We support the right of private employers and employees to choose whether or not to bargain with each other through a labor union. Bargaining should be free of government interference, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.
Education is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality, accountability and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Recognizing that the education of children is a parental responsibility, we would restore authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. Parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children's education.
We favor a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want (if any), the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions. People should be free to purchase health insurance across state lines.
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.
The protection of individual rights is the only proper purpose of government. Government is constitutionally limited so as to prevent the infringement of individual rights by the government itself. The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments.
We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.
The defense of the country requires that we have adequate intelligence to detect and to counter threats to domestic security. This requirement must not take priority over maintaining the civil liberties of our citizens. The Constitution and Bill of Rights shall not be suspended even during time of war. Intelligence agencies that legitimately seek to preserve the security of the nation must be subject to oversight and transparency. We oppose the government's use of secret classifications to keep from the public information that it should have, especially that which shows that the government has violated the law.
American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense against attack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreign entanglements. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
Libertarians embrace the concept that all people are born with certain inherent rights. We reject the idea that a natural right can ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that "right." We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should neither deny nor abridge any individual's human right based upon sex, wealth, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Members of private organizations retain their rights to set whatever standards of association they deem appropriate, and individuals are free to respond with ostracism, boycotts and other free market solutions. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs. This statement shall not be construed to condone child abuse or neglect.
We support election systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. As private voluntary groups, political parties should be allowed to establish their own rules for nomination procedures, primaries and conventions. We call for an end to any tax-financed subsidies to candidates or parties and the repeal of all laws which restrict voluntary financing of election campaigns. We oppose laws that effectively exclude alternative candidates and parties, deny ballot access, gerrymander districts, or deny the voters their right to consider all legitimate alternatives. We advocate initiative, referendum, recall and repeal when used as popular checks on government.
Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to agree to such new governance as to them shall seem most likely to protect their liberty.
After reading all of this, all I could say was... "Well, DUH..??!!!!"
At times I may not be blessed with an overabundance of common sense all of the time (particularly in the areas of mathematics and time management), but why is it that the concept of being responsible for one's own actions is such an alien one to the general population?
It's sort of like being trapped in one of those nightmares where you are trying to explain something to everyone and they either ignore you, or they yell at you, and you can't get your point across no matter what you do or say. Only this time, I'm awake and surrounded by the people of the world, and they would all rather be zombified by their iPhones and iPads, with eyeballs glued to the next blockbuster smash-up movie, and plugged into their newsfeeds than to recognize that something is truly wrong with our political system (and most importantly, to be willing to desire and bring CHANGE). Voters should be able to have a voice behind their choice.
A Voice for Choice... If I were more clever, I could market that, couldn't I? Unfortunately the word "choice" has become inextricably linked to the topic of Abortion and Reproductive Rights. So maybe not...
