Political Pigpin

[FyberOptic]

Considering that the number of days congress has been in session since Bush took over was the lowest it ever was in history as far as I'm aware, I don't think it could get any worse.  Especially now with 5 day weeks implemented, much to the chagrin of the republican side.

[Prox]

I'd like to make something clear which has been bugging me for all times.

Just because a majority is held in Congress doesn't make Congress purely aligned with that political party. Also, just because a congressman is a Democrat doesn't mean that he's a straight-ticket lefty, nor does it mean if he's a Republican that he's blinded by the right. Politicians are individual people, and so they make rational decisions like individual people. They're all different, so they all think differently, which means they'll make different choices.

ALSO, politicians only want to have power. Altruism is nonexistent in our world. Politicians only try to appease people so they can keep their positions. They try to make people think that they're perfect and elicit blind trust so that they don't have to keep them happy all the time. No matter what anybody says, politicians from everywhere on the scale are prone to mistakes, corruption, laziness, and other such maladies. Just because people support a certain political party's mindset, they should never allow themselves to follow that party without judgement. Not only is it their right to question authority, it is their duty as citizens. The only way the world will truly be right is if people can have the sense to think for themselves.

That is all.

[FyberOptic]

The staggering rise in pork barrel spending that occured over the last several years pretty much shows us that most of the last congress was willing to pander to anyone or anything.  Majority republican or not, it was time for them to gooooo. 

The fact o the matter is, once you get in politics, and to that level of the playing field, you have to make choices that you might personally not agree with.  They have an image and a party to appease, which I'm sure in many cases comes to the forefront over personal opinion.  If you want to get ahead in your party, you have to be a good boy. 

Then of course there are many matters, such as those regarding technology, where these people know nothing of the subject, and just go with party lines or outside influence.  I have a feeling that this is the case with many other subjects they decide as well, but nobody's going to admit it in those cases, where as with technology it's rather obvious to somebody like myself. 

So they shouldn't blindly follow party lines, no, but the majority do, and always have.  If it were always simply a matter of personal opinion, we likely wouldn't have political parties.  If you ever watch certain political discussions, many times you'll only hear them discussing the possibilities of certain individuals, because they know they're the only ones likely to flop either way.  The majority are just sheep, on both sides, and whichever side has the majority is, fortunately or not, usually the one that's going to make the decision.  All of this shady legislation of Bush's that went through is fair enough evidence of that.

[Prox]

Well, there are congressmen who vote with the flow, I can't argue with that. However, there are a lot of congressmen who question or go against party lines and who still get reelected. The people either don't care or are supportive, and the party either doesn't care, is supportive, or just can't do anything about it. Then, of course, there are those who let the lobbyists make their decisions for them, who are the ones that really need to be ousted from office.

[Prox]

So, the United States' first Muslim congressman (Keith Ellison, D-Min.) was sworn in recently, and opted to place his hand on a Qur'an rather than a Bible during the ceremony. Naturally, this sparked all sorts of responses from the stoneheaded, who began claiming that Ellison would now wage jihad war on the US and try to convert it to Islam. Talk about religious intolerance! Like almost every Muslim, Ellison isn't an "Islamofascist", but I think it's safe to say that wanting to keep non-christians out of office and wanting to make congressmen swear on the text of a religion they don't necessarily believe in is fascist enough to cover for him.

[FyberOptic]

I thought I later read that it wasn't required to swear in on a bible of any sort for that position, and that it was all made up to make him look bad.  That they actually swore in on some thing related to their job instead or something.

[Prox]

It isn't required to use the bible, but most do because they don't want to make people mad. Incidentally, Ellison used a Qur'an owned by Thomas Jefferson, who advocated the complete separation of religion and government. Irony!

[Bluejay]

The act in and of itself is pretty arcane at this point anyway.  Most people aren't so devote in thier believes that they wouldn't or couldn't break any vow made upon any religeous tome.

[FyberOptic]

Yeah it's true, hypocrisy is alive and kickin' in this day and age.  Though that's just from the religious standpoint I guess, and is mostly symbolic.  There is still a legal binding when one swears on a bible which is what takes precedence over any other meaning these days.  A lot of these people should just not make a stink about what book they use and accept it for what it legally means, since I'm sure a lot of the other politicians swearing in on it think just as little of it as he does.

[FyberOptic]

In a CNN interview, Cheney said the administration is committed to its plan to send more troops to secure Baghdad, even if Congress opposes the plan.  Here's a link to that story.

I have to say, I don't know if I'm entirely opposed to sending more troops.  In one sense, it might help fortify who we have there, and in a way, lessen those that keep getting killed.  At the same time, I thought we were supposed to be lessening our troops so we can eventually get the heck out of there, not adding more.  We need to be training their people better so that they can get on the stick.

Anyway, the debate of troops or no troops isn't even why I'm posting it.  It's the simple fact that, despite congress generally being representative of the peoples' opinion, the administration has decided that what we think doesn't matter, and they'll do it anyway.  -_-

[Prox]

Who knows what'll work in the long run over there. The Iraq Study Group report wasn't quite the silver bullet everyone was hoping for, and those people were pretty dang smart people.

I have an idea! They could monitor everybody! With every single household wiretapped, this administration would finally know the thoughts of the general public... and then continue ignoring them.

Also, Cheney was invited on some TV show to talk about himself, and he said he was "defiant". What the hell does he have left to be defiant about? Man, It's going to be a long two years.

[FyberOptic]

Ohio election workers convicted of rigging ’04 presidential recount.  And this is just the only one they've ever actually found.

[FyberOptic]

Apparently Cheney got 5 draft deferments, until he was too old to be drafted anymore.  And yet Kerry, who actually served, gets more grief over such things.  Not to mention Clinton.

[Prox]

Yeah, i heard about that a long time ago. Before my mom's boss retired, I used to hear him call him "five-deferment cheney".

[FyberOptic]

Like him or hate him, but Olbermann basically knocks out all 4 of Bush's terrorist plot claims from his state of the union address.  You'll need to use IE to launch the video.