American versus American, Putting it into Perspective

American versus American, Putting it into Perspective
By Andy Alt / Political Dimensions

Oct 1, 2008 – Some people seem to think that because Republican candidates say they are pro-life, that means they are actually pro-life. Earlier tonight on CBS, I heard Sarah Palin say that she’s pro-life, but believes it should be up to the states to decide. That’s fine, but why not just say that about every single issue? If I were a politician, I would completely see that position as politically expedient: Pass the buck on a controversial issue to avoid any backlash by potential supporters. The Supreme Court decided on Roe versus Wade on January 22, 1973. Has there been a serious attempt to overturn it since then? Abortion is used simply as a wedge issue against Democrats. When women have the majority in Congress and Washington, let abortion rights be discussed seriously and honestly at that time.

Where is the pro-life stance regarding civilian casualties in a war? Even if the argument is made that Democrats also voted for the Iraq War, it doesn’t change the fact that exceptions to the pro-life stance are being made right now in Iraq, and all over the world. How many civilian lives have been lost? The so-called “Liberal” media doesn’t report it very often. That is quite a contradiction for me. When I think of the term Liberal I associate it with anti-war. A top priority for anti-war folks is to quote casualty statistics, especially civilian casualties, to prove their case against a war. When referring to the media as Liberal, are we talking about Hollywood, or the news media? Frankly I don’t believe the media is Liberal, but biased toward whatever government is in place at the time. Historically speaking, the media has on occasion been threatened and harassed by the government. When that happens, the outcome is that the truth is the first casualty, the second casualty is freedom of the press, and ultimately a democracy can lose its health. I won’t even blame reporters, because I have enough sense to know if an agent of the United States government called me to kill a story or threatened me or my family with “consequences”, I wouldn’t have enough courage to push the issue.

On this site, I’ve been a little hard on politicians, sometimes in jest, and sometimes in earnestness. I’ve recently realized, however, that many voters can match the lies and nastiness of what politicians and candidates sling back and forth. For a while I felt that Americans don’t like to see so many negative attack ads, and that eventually, campaigns must realize that nasty attacks and lies will turn people off. I was wrong — apparently politicians know their potential constituency rather well and are definitely not out-of-touch with the “average” American. Particularly in blogs on the Internet, I see mud-slinging and propaganda that would make a politician blush. Campaigning politicians know what they’re doing when they hurl insults around, and they realize that their potential supporters can be just as nasty. Ethics, morals, and “Christian” values essentially get dumped into a toilet. Until Americans say no to demoralization and propaganda spread while campaigning, politicians will continue to rightly use the same tactics as voters.

As for corruption, I can spew jokes and insults about corrupt politicians, but at the same time realize that it’s human nature for people in power to fall into corruption. I like to be honest with myself and say that I truly wonder how I would handle power if it ever came to me. I can only hope that my moral fiber would hold out, but one can never realistically say until he or she has walked a mile in another’s moccasins. I truly don’t believe that politicians go into office solely due to lusting after ambition or power, furthermore, I believe that of the ones who have been involved in scandals were good kids before they achieved their influence.

I don’t like writing about politics anymore. It brings out the worst in me.