McCain, Clinton and Obama: Politics or Reality TV?

It seems that the centrists of both major parties are suffering from lack of commitment to any political doctrine including their own. The once culturally liberal John McCain is now pandering to the religious right, and even praising the mean-spirited and treacherous Carl Rove for his intellect. (Arianna Huffington, Huffington Post) On 2-16-08 "Liberal" Barack Obama was publicly reprimanded by "Conservative" McCain for waffling on his earlier promise to use public funding and work within the spending limits that this choice would impose. McCain then threatened to continue using privately donated campaign funds himself (www.comcast.net). Hillary Clinton, in spite of her disturbing tendency to publicly defend the interests of women and children (groups viewed as property and sub-humans by the extreme religious right), is all too willing to imprison Americans for some of their private behaviors. Barack Obama seems to believe that being a nice and friendly enough guy qualifies him to be president. Members of his campaign staff have made vague statements about the "decriminalization" of marijuana, and Senator Obama himself doesn't talk about it at all. (www.stopthedrugwar.org)

Liberals and conservatives do have different priorities in the area of moralistic interventions, but both groups seem to be enthusiastic about telling Americans how to live their lives. Both groups are ready to waste huge amounts of borrowed money on government projects, although they argue about whether the "War on Terror," along with health care and education (for Iraqis) is more important than the "War on Drugs" and healthcare and education (for Americans), as well as numerous other issues, mostly having to do with what we should be scared of this year. Both parties seem to think that they are obligated to save the world, regardless of the cost. All of the centrist candidates seem to be willing to change their platform as many times as they feel they need to. Hillary Clinton's main criticism of Barack Obama, in essence that he's just not tough or streetwise enough for DC (I grew up there, it's a rough town), is valid. This brings me to my next point. Hillary is an "old school G" if there ever was one. By far the tougher (and the smarter) of the Clintons, she's ready for those mean streets. She sees through the ruses employed by her enemies, and there is reason to believe that things tend to turn out badly for those who cross her. She could kick Rudy Giuliani's butt any day, and in fact already has in the political and public arena. Therefore, I believe that her early support for the Iraq war was in fact motivated by political expediency and little else. She's changed her story now, but I doubt she ever really believed in the invasion of Iraq. It's hard to tell exactly what she believes in, and even her continuing and notorious "liberalism" has more to do with the sentiments of her New York constituents than anything else. How many of us bought the original sales pitch for the Iraq war? And how many people really thought it would be over quickly and easily? Some of our best military minds predicted a long, messy, complicated and expensive occupation from the very beginning. There are many more criticisms I could make with regard to Hillary Clinton, but the terms "gullible," "unsophisticated," "slow-witted," and "inarticulate" would not appear anywhere within them. The word "opportunistic" would appear several times. Winning at all costs seems to be the only consistent value for all of these candidates. The candidates also seem to be in near-total denial about how close we are to eco-catastrophe, economic collapse, global famine and world war, and the need to make some serious and painful choices if we are to avoid these things.

We are told meanwhile, (sometimes by politicians, more often by the media) that we should be scared of female breasts, especially those with exposed nipples, but that we should worship ridiculously tall and unnaturally beautiful women in high heels and lacy bras. We are also told to be afraid of Mexicans, gay men and women, tobacco, trans-fats, video games, My Space, rock lyrics, "gangsta rap," and unprotected sex (see Nanny State, by David Harsanyi). We are told to fear the teaching of effective contraception and STD prevention techniques to teenagers, and even to adults in third-world countries. The religious right, when unable to win elections outright, uses its considerable political and economic clout to bully candidates and the media into at least partially supporting their theocratic agenda. The corporate media will often fight back, with public calls for tolerance and open-mindedness, and programming that shows women, gays, blacks and Hispanics, and sometimes even drug addicts to be decent people (as most are). The gay men are slim and good-looking, the straight men are gentle and sensitive or lovably, clownishly macho. The straight women have nice breasts but are well-versed in mainstream feminist theory; the lesbians are witty and intelligent. The middle-class among the racial and ethnic minorities are conservative and successful, the whites are liberal, and their hip-hop ghetto and trailer-park counterparts are zany and fun-loving, even (especially) when they're high. Dysfunctional lower middle-class couples with too many kids go crazy if they have to go more than two days without having sex, or in the alternative, simply accept the fact of their nonexistent sex lives with shrugs and occasional sarcastic comments. Rich girls have their way with hunky maintenance men, and everyone is happy, especially the advertisers. The reason for this is simple; bigotry is bad for business. The "minorities" and those who accept their presence, collectively form a majority in the market, and spend money just like everyone else. Our presidential candidates fit right into this wonderful imaginary world.

For politicians, this kind of behavior isn't new or unusual, in fact many Americans have come to expect it. A mailing I received from a left-liberal fundraising group a number of years ago used the term "dempublicans," and right-wing blowhard Mark Savage uses the term "republicrats" in his talk-radio rantings. Democrats pander to the wealthy and powerful consistently, and Republicans continuously increase the size and cost of government, as well as its legal authority to invade and regulate the private lives of Americans. The only regulations that centrist Republicans really seem to oppose are those that might reduce their profit margins, and the only spending they consistently cry about is money that goes to women, children, the poor, and the sick. The less powerful sectors of society are the easiest people to kick while they're down, and the cowardly power-brokers take advantage of this opportunity every chance they get. The relevance of the democratic and republican parties to their nominal ideologies and power bases is so small, and the bipartisan consensus to practice kleptocracy and "nannyism" is so strong, that I think the term "conservaliberals" would best describe our latest crop of political jellyfish.

The lack of alternatives to this farce is astounding. Although I still continue to disagree with Ron Paul and his supporters on many issues, I feel that he has remained true to his principles, and therefore he has met the usual fate of ideologically consistent candidates. He is also guilty by association, of association with the Republican Party. The Libertarian Party, in its own quest for ideological purity, seems to be content with winning occasional municipal and state-level elections, and running protest candidates in the general elections; they will be nominating a presidential candidate here in Denver sometime in late May, and most Americans won't even know his or her name until election day. I've been a member of the Libertarian Party in the past, and may become one again, but these people need to start getting real about things if they are ever going to be anything more than a marginal party, associated in people's minds with the antisocial among the wealthy, the alienated among the middle class, and the countercultural individualists among the poor. "Kill the rules and let the market sort it out," is not a practical policy in a nation where, like it or not, centralism, statism, and various state/corporate monopolies have planted themselves like malignant and metastasized tumors next to vital organs of society and culture. Governments and other authoritarian structures (such as corporations) are here to stay, and perhaps the best we can do is work diligently to reduce their body counts.

As with pro football teams, pro wrestlers, and American Idol contestants, people feel passionately about their candidates. As with these entertainers, politicians are obligated to meet the marketing needs of their sponsors. Every minority group, business, charity, and group of political activists is a 'special interest group.' Every individual's interests are special. True political clout in fact comes from money, and the less privileged among the American people would do well to take advantage of that fact. What we buy, who we are willing to work for, and the wages we will willingly accept count more on a day-today basis than any number of votes. The electoral process is our biggest reality show/sitcom/soap-opera, and Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain are our main dysfunctional family. The networks have decided, with help from the home audience, that we will be watching these characters for the next season, perhaps with Mike Huckabee playing the annoying hillbilly in the rundown house across the street (be sure to close the curtains when it's time for "intimacy!") Switch the set to the "TV-Land" (nostalgia) channel if you still want to watch Mitt Romney. (The Daily Show did a little bit about Romney that placed him next to Ward and June Cleaver, where he belongs).

My suggestions are to switch the set to "Book TV," for a little bit and then turn the f'ing TV off! Actually read some of the books they talk about on Book TV, and then maybe write a book yourself. Have sex (or argue) with your own spouse, cook your own dinner, and then get to know people, maybe your neighbors, maybe your co-workers, or if need be, your fellow prisoners or fellow mental patients. (I must admit here that I've fallen way behind on this "to do list" myself). You may find that although you have disagreements with some people on specific issues, nearly everyone is as disgruntled as you are. If you're unhappy with your wages or salary, join a union (or organize one) and go on strike if necessary; if you don't feel like doing any of that, quit complaining. If a corporation seems to be doing something right, buy stock in it. Quit shopping at your local mega-store. Stop watching and reading Rupert Murdoch's stuff except for The Simpsons. If you think your taxes are too high, bring this same economic pressure to bear on your elected officials and their party, via their sponsors; do not wait for the next election. Do all of these things with your friends and neighbors (except for sex, maybe; not everyone is bisexual and promiscuous); we can all take it to the market, and if all else fails, take it to the streets, while we still have the constitutional right to do so. Finally, if you insist on watching "Reality TV," watch American Idol or one of the other talent shows, at least your vote will matter there.

Disclaimers:

I really hope I'm wrong about a lot of this stuff, please try to convince me that I am.

I have nothing against Victoria's Secret, their models, their advertising, and their fine products, in fact the opposite is true.

REFERENCES:

http://www6.comcast.net/news/articles/politics/2007/12/27/McCain/

Nanny State:
How Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders,
Priggish Moralists, and Other Boneheaded
Bureaucrats Are Turning America into
A Nation of Children,
David Harsanyi, 2007
Broadway Books, a Division of Random House
NY, NY

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/sunday-roundup_b_86995.html

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle_blog/2008/feb/01/nevermind_barack_obama_wants_to_

Recommended Viewing:

Idiocracy
Maya Rudolph, Luke Wilson,
Directed by Mike Judge, 2006