[sailaway21]

Random thoughts occuring while cleaning the varnish brushes:

I hear a lot of complaints about the government, and the president in particular. The one that never rings true to me is the, "they're all the same, dem or rep". The red headed step-child to that one is, "two partys don't work, they're both the same, we need more political partys".

The latter is not prohibited by any means, John Anderson call your office, but the lack of viable third parties brings out an important point. The party has a moderating influence on the canidates, and, ultimately, the type of person who gets elected. Winning a party's nomination is a difficult and time intensive prospect. The prospective canidate must court the various factions within their party, endeavoring to alienate none, while staying true to their convictions. That process calls for maturity, diplomacy, and a very strong sense of who you are. All desirable qualities in a nominee. Contrast that with the changes we are currently seeing in France. The new president's mandate lasted less than a week, with the unexpected success of the socialist parliamentarians. France is always forming a new government, charging off in some new direction. Interesting, but not very stable. The US, on the other hand, is relatively slow to change. By the time change occurs, what might have started out as a Republican idea becomes a Democratic signed law. Bill Clinton with welfare reform comes to mind. Now that makes our government frustrating, and slower than molasses, but it also serves as a brake on some pretty hare-brained ideas. Third party canidates often have a bushel basket full of hare-brained ideas. If they all got elected, you could see some interesting coalitions forming. The seperatists would agree to ban automobiles if the greens would agree to segregate public schools. Working big ideas through the party structure tends to take the rough edges off those ideas, with the kooky ones falling by the wayside.

Now to the "they're all the same" complaint. They are demonstrably not all the same and, in fact, we are now engaged in the highlighting of their differences. Near as I can tell, there are about 8 canidates seeking each party's nomination for the '08 presidential election. Are the people who claim their "sameness" watching, questioning, or campaigning for their most desirable canidate? If they are not, they have no right to complain. Now I know that the misguided efforts at campaign finance reform have limited the individual's free speech rights in this regard, but there is still much that can be done for "your" canidate today. Or, are you going to wait until the field is winnowed down to two and pronounce them both the same, yet again?

The canidates chosen reflect the will of the people. The will of the people who are willing to get involved. It's funny how we love to carp and yet most of us do not contribute to the party of our choice, or their canidate, just like we are not contributing to the canidate of our choice in this early election season. We whine, "my vote doesn't count" or "what will my ten bucks do to help?" Well, based on the last two presidential elections, your vote and your money would probably have made a big difference, assuming a few like-minded individuals acted as well. How do you win big in an election or how do you amass a large campaign fund? One vote, or one donation, at a time.

Don't carp too much about your elected representative or the President. By the time that the 50% of the populace who bothered to vote elected them, their positions and track records were pretty well known to all who cared to know. If you are part of the 50% who did not vote, I understand that "American Idol" was much more interesting and I'll make you a deal. I won't talk to you about "American Idol", something I know nothing about, if you do not talk to me about politics and government. For those who did vote, the other 50%, and things didn't turn out much to your liking, have you considered that, perhaps, you did not get involved enough? Was your only obligation to pull a lever? Are you, perhaps, one of those people who will be around to see and criticize the final result, but were nowhere to be found while the heavy lifting was being done? I mean, it's not like we're talking about the NFL draft here, where we can all imagine ourselves being "owner for a day". This is a republican democracy and this is how we determine how our country is going to be run. If ya got a problem with the engineer and the railroad, carping in the caboose may be entertaining, but it doesn't have much effect on the train.

Do you make your own decisions in your life? Or do you let someone else do that for you, say Mom or Dad? Well, if you are not voting, or not involved with the party or canidate of your liking, any party, any canidate, then you are letting someone else make your decisions for you. Someone you may not like or respect very much. And your actions state, "whatever you guy's decide is fine with me".

And, if you think it is all pre-determined by the big boys in the parties, I'd encourage you to call up the party of your choice and volunteer. You'll find that, no they don't have nearly enough money or volunteers to get their message out and, yes they can certainly use your help. And, if you meet one of the "big boys" and ask him how he got to be a big boy, chances are he will tell you, "just like you, by volunteering and getting involved". Politics ain't just in the history books, a new chapter is being written daily, and you're either in or you're out. If you're out, you'll have to wait for the next history book to come out to find out what happened.

Those of you still with me will no doubt be relieved that the varnishing is done for the season.(g)