The Voice of Treason

Bread and circuses time — cue those crickets!

Writing by treason on Monday, 30 of October , 2006 at 8:42 am

“I’ve never canceled a subscription to a newspaper because of bad cartoons or editorials. If that were the case, I wouldn’t have any newspapers or magazines to read.”

– Richard M. Nixon

For some reason I found myself awake and alert at five this morning, so I switched on Fox & Friends and started making coffee. I got as far as washing out the pot when I decided to have tea instead. I walked over to the books in the dining room and pulled one of Hopper paintings off the shelf. I have always loved the works of Edward Hopper.

I watched that Sean Hannity special on FNC last night and at the point when Sean and Mark Levin were telling Susan Estrich and Laura Schwartz that there was something inherently wrong with what James Webb puts in his novels, T looked at me and said:

“So what’s next? Book burning?”

Some on the Right really need to review Conservative principles and look at how they’re perceived by people who don’t appreciate being told that if they read a Webb novel they might just be a pervert. It’s the same issue I have with some Liberals. I don’t want to be regulated to the point where I can’t buy high fat, high calorie snacks if I want them, or say what I’m thinking. The extremes of both sides are…well, virtually the same. Intolerant, rigid, and nuts. Um, explain to me again how these two groups are all that different from radical Islamists?

I am with the Right on the existence of good and evil. But part of the fun is being exposed to both and choosing which one you prefer.

When someone like Hannity starts sounding like he thinks smut shouldn’t be available I get tense. There are people who appreciate a crucifix in urine and believe it has artistic value. There are probably even more people who think Edward Hopper was a hack. If you start restricting the arts, the day will come when someone will decide that Hopper paintings are dangerous and unhealthy because they tend to be “depressing.” We don’t want people depressed. We want them to look at happy pictures. Hopper must be removed from the museums. We must protect the children, the bipolar, the laid-off, and the lonely.

It’s why the Right is determined to keep guns. You come after my peanut butter cups and Hopper, and I’ll greet you at the door with an ultramodern, Guigiaro style Beretta .22 Neo. Keepa you hands offa my trans fats an’ books, capeesh?

But all seriousness aside, I’m starting to see why Conservatives are fine with Democrats taking Congress. I’m actually completely relaxed going into this election. I know exactly what to expect here: paper ballot confusion, long lines, frustration, voter fraud, “lost” ballots, and slooooow results. Same-o, same-o. But part of me is curious about what might happen if the Democrats win both the House and Senate. Some say they’ll keep a low profile because they won’t want to spoil their chances for 2008. Ah, so you’ll be like the Republicans who decided it was better to hold onto power than to do anything with the power they had, eh? Hmmm. So that’s what you call change?

It’s like that scene in Field of Dreams, when the young Archie Graham challenges the pitcher: “Let’s see that fastball.” I want to see that fastball. You say you’ll do something different, so let’s see it. Cuz if you expect people to vote for you for a “change” and you don’t deliver…well, I’m just saying that this could be interesting to watch.

Because that’s all I’ve heard. I haven’t heard specifics - just “whatever he’s for, we’re against.” The day after the Wilson/Madrid debate, T was having a cigarette on the patio and said, “If that’s as good as candidates get then even I could run for office.”

It’s funny, but I was thinking the same thing. I know I couldn’t run myself - I suspect I’d have a Marie Antoinette moment when the mic was turned on and the world would object to my “Let them eat MoonPies!” statement.

“You should sit down and read the voter guide that came in the Sunday paper. Check out some of these people who are running. Look at their resumes. Look at what they’re saying. And you think Halloween is scary?”

Now T is the least biased, least prejudiced, and least partisan person I know. Frankly, because he just doesn’t care enough to give a crap. He suddenly perked up.

“Do me a favor. Get that guide and cover up the candidates. Don’t let me see what they’re running for or who they are. I don’t want to see names, party, photos, background - anything. I just want to read their answers to the questions. Will you do that?”

“In a heartbeat.”

I recommend this to anyone who has such a guide. This was fascinating to watch. He had a whole system of evaluating statements and awarding points for the quality of each answer. He didn’t compare candidates’ answers, either. He based it all on how each answered the questions.

I watched him read Bill Richardson’s response to a particular question and hoped he’d have the same one I did when I read it. He did.

“WHAT??? What kind of answer is that? That’s not even an answer!”

The question was: “Would you support or oppose a state law to ban cockfighting in New Mexico?”

The answer was: “I intend to address this issue during the next legislative session.”

What? Oh, Bill, that’s just so weasely! What’s your position? How do you feel about your state being the only one besides Louisiana to allow cockfighting? Shame on you for such a lame response. And for the one about getting “junk food out of schools.” Oh, don’t get me started.

Ah, but there were others. It’s funny how T ended up “voting” on these candidates, but it was even more amusing to look at the responses and really see all the code words and, worse, the total lack of information. I’m sorry to say that it was the Democrats who were more often guilty of avoiding answering the questions with specifics.

Our Democrat friend Tim, who was at the hockey game last Friday, is still struggling with his decision.

“You saw the debate, right?”

“Don’t pick on our candidate for being an idiot. It’s not like you guys haven’t elected people who can’t speak.”

“I don’t think I’ve ever seen a debate where a candidate has stood there and nothing has come out. I was waiting for cricket sounds. I mean, usually they say too much or say something wrong. I’ve never seen one say nothing for such an agonizingly long time. I told T if someone on Wilson’s side doesn’t use that clip as an ad, I’ll be pissed off. They should insert the cricket sounds or have a timer ticking off seconds at the bottom of the screen while we wait for Patsy to finally say something. Just incredible.”

“How do you think I feel? I agree with at least a third of what Heather stands for, but I don’t even know what my candidate believes. I know what I’ll get if I vote for Heather, but I don’t have a clue what Patsy thinks.”

“And that makes two of you.”

The next day I saw the ad and screamed: “She did it! She did it! Oh, thank God, she did it!” All it is is the clip directly from the debate. The candidates in their own words…or lack thereof. No timer, no crickets chirping. But deadly effective.

It’s the best ad of the season, it’s true, it’s real, and it’s probably just too damned late to make a difference.

Category: Uncategorized

• Add this post to
• Del.icio.us -
• Digg -
• Reddit

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.