The value of differing ideas

<p>     In light of the election and the staggaring loss of the republicans a lot of people on the left are spiking the flootball and saying that the republicans are going to go away and never come back.  I understand the giddy victory feeling, honestly I do.  I mean because of the election, we wont have a Supreme Court that will overturn Roe vs Wade, and Obamacare will not be repealed and a bunch of other awesome things that help our society are going to happen or keep happeneing.  But because these   good things happened, and any innumeral amount of bad things now will not happen, is not reason or cause to wish the entire republican party away.  Why on earth would I say this, I am sure you are asking.  I mean, didn't these guys say that pregnancies from rape were gods plan?  and that If there was a 'legitinate rape' women could magically not get pregnant, and that 47 percent of the country were hopeless slackers that couldnt or wouldnt take responsiblility for their lives?  How could you not want that to go away.  </p></p>
   <p>    Well, yes they did say all those things, and probably worse.  I want the Republicans to stay around because if there is one thing that any party, or government needs, critically, and absulutely needs, to effectivelly govern, it is a strong and reasoned opposition.  Right now the Republicans are neither strong nor reasoned, and as far as reasoned is concerned, have not been for some time.  The republicans need to get the 'crazy' out of thier ranks, they need to stop hating and blaming the electorate for what they perceive as moral failings, and they need to embrace differing opinions opn what conservatism means so that they can atrract a brader range of supporters.  </p></p>
<p>      It is then that they can present a saner opposition to the democratic government and bring well reasoned and sensical conservative ideas to the table that more people can get behind.  The country can only benefit.  When one party is in control and not effectively opposed there tends to develop and echo chamber where only one line of thinking, and one set of ideas is found to be acceptable and all others are marginalized.  This doesnt do anyone any good.   Ina country as diverse as ours, all ideas must be present in government, all right protected and all peoples cared for.  An Echo-chamber government, whether Democratic or Republican, is notoriously bad at this.  The Democrats are strengthened by a strong, reasonable Republican Party.  The reverse is also true.  </p></p>
<p>     Differing ideas, when sane, can provide us with a more complete, and more representative government.  The more people a government represents the more effective it will be.  Ther eis no group in this country that is not deserving of representation in government, not even the one percent.  The government needs to work for ALL people and to do that, it needs the Republican party.  But to be relevant, the Republican Party needs to get the insanity out of its veins and embrace the wider nation so that it can provide a more reasoned opposition and offer better representation to the people.  </p></p>
<p>    Just because our ideals won the day on election day we musnt trick ourselves into thinking that there are no other worthwhile ideals out there.  Just because our ideas are a majority doesnt mean that other ideas, different ideas, have no value.  All are welcome at the table of government, and all values, all ideas, all ideals have merit and are worth hearing.  We must never want for there to be no opposition because it is only through opposition that we become stronger.  Rather we should wish that our opponents be strong, but beatable.</p></p>

Why process matters

     Every time I turn on the news I see a story about negative attack ads  and how this is possibly the most negative election ever.  Worse than that though, Every time I turn on the news I see a story that has a biased perspective, a story that sides with one side of current political discourse, and worse still, these stories actively disparage the opposing side.  these attack ads, even the political press in this  country tend to tear down the 'other side' rather than simply report news. I hear a lot of people ask why it is that the discourse in this country has fallen to such a level. 
     It is not just America either.  Look for example at the European Union.  The EU was awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize this week.  Upon hearing of this, news agencies all over the world responded with snark.  While it is true that the EU is having some trouble because limitations in its governing structure are creating problems and making it difficult to adapt to a rapidly changing world, but the same can be said for any government.  Keep in mind that the EU is only 60 or so years old. 

     The European Union is important and significant because it represents a victory.  Before I explain, let me clarify.  The EU encompasses an entire region of the world.  Nearly an entire hemisphere.  I think when we talk of the European union we tend to think of it as mainly a few large countries working together rather than a massive conglomerate of nearly every European, and eastern European country both large and small, united together under a common currency and governance structure.   Now also realize that the area of the world covered by the EU has known near constant war for all of recorded history.  Yes, in one part of the EU, or another, people have been killing one another for all of time.  That is of course, until the formation of the European Union. 
     The EU has largely ended war and human misery in a part of the world that had been at war since humans had been able to keep track of such things.  The Nobel Committee recognizes this, and sadly it seems that we do not.  Why is this?  We seem to have a distaste for all things policy and procedure in government.  It seems we would rather disparage, tear down, belittle and ridicule the intricacies of government rather than celebrate successes.   I think we do this because we need conflict.  Conflict has been part of human society since we have been able to form societies.  There are different tribes with different cultures and different religions with different definitions of what 'good is' all competing for limited land and resources.  Conflict is inevitable and naturally constant. 
     Democracy, policy, and procedure, rules.  These are things that we have developed to deal with these conflicts, they are tools we have developed  to resolve our differences without killing each other.   Yes, the process is slow, awkward arduous, complicated, bulky and difficult.  When viewed through the lense of history though the result is sublime and beautiful.  So we  but what is the alternative?  I think the answer is war.  I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that either we have people killing each other in streets or we have attack ads.  Conflict is a part of our lives.  So much a part of our lives that we have developed a kind of distaste for how we resolve conflicts in a nonviolent manner. 

Conflict is such a part of us not because humans, in our hearts, are primitives, but because we are predators. Though we have learned to grow our food instead of kill it, we still have predatory instincts, and these instincts express themselves through conflict. As we have evolved and developed a more civilized discourse, so to has our conflict evolved. We have moved from warring tribes, to warring nations, to peaceful nations. Our conflicts has evolved from bloody combat to political vitriol and expresses itself in political adds, social conversation and even internet discussions.

While conflict is inevitable and maybe even necessary we must be careful not to revel in it. At the center of our modern, civilized 'political pundit' age conflict lies a distaste for the procedural, slow-motion bloodless method conflict resolution that we call modern government. Take a look at Congressman Ryans comments on Syria from the VP debate. It was clear that he wanted boots on the ground over sanctions. A lot of people feel the same way on nearly any conflict. blood over talk. We can;t give in to this feeling. Yes, we must tolerate conflict, it is a need we have, but we must defer to the procedural. We must allow for the slow, lumbering resolutions of democracy because they are better than violence and bloodshed. We must also, always remember that there is no bubble that exists in which all conflicts are resolved without differences, and there is no universe that exists in which there are no differences.

We are all different, we all think different and we will all always want different solutions to our shared problems. This will never change, but what we must always do is resort to nonviolent ways to resolve our conflicts, no matter how badly we want to kill the other guy, and feeling that way is natural, we must talk it out. And was we grow, we must do what the European Union has done, we must bring others to our table, We must seek out those nations and peoples among us who still resolve their conflicts with blood and violence and show them that there is a better way. Yes it is slower, and yes it is sometimes awkward, and yes sometimes after months of talk no one gets what they want but if no one dies and suffers, it is still better. This is the burden of civilization, we must lead others to be civilized. If all life is sacred than efforts to preserve life must be undertaken.

When history becomes story

<p>     I am watching a documentary on Cleopatra.  Specifically on how an international group of archaeologists have rediscovered her royal islands in Egypt's harbor after being submerged there for over two thousand years.  It is one of the most significant historical discoveries of all time.  What makes Cleopatra and her story, rather her history so interesting to me is because it could easily be fiction.  Just perusing the highlights it sounds like its made up.  For example, female Pharaoh seduces Julius Caesar, when he gets assassinated she seduces Marc Antony and fights against the might of Octavius and all of Rome.  When her forces are defeated in the biggest and bloodiest sea battle in history, both her and Marc Antony commit suicide.  Her by Egyptian tradition of Asp  bite.  </p></p>
 <p>    Just glancing at it it sounds like its made up doesn't it?  But it isn't.  I bring this up because her story is so intricate, so interesting and so involved, and frankly, so often told that we tend to forget that it's actually history, and not just some story made up by Hollywood.  Those amazing things actually happened, Cleopatra, Julius Caesar and Mark Antony actually existed, I can go to Egypt and see things that they saw, touch things that they touched, I can connect with them even after two thousand years.</p></p> 
  <p>   I want to compare Cleopatra to another figure, Jesus Christ.  Also from about two thousand years in the past, and whose story has also been made into countless movies.  Unlike Cleopatra however, Jesus never existed.  I know that that's big talk but hear me out.  There is not one part of Jesus's story that can be verified historically.     None of the authors quoted as providing proof of his existence are contemporary to the time of christ.   I am aware that most historians consider the existence of Jesus a settled< fact, but I'm not sure that that opinion is based on evidence.  It is based more on a deferral to a vocal community that on any evidence dug up out of the earth.  </p></p>
     <p>I often hear that there is just as much historical evidence of Jesus as there is anyone else.  That isnt true.  I can slap on scuba gear and I can touch things that Cleopatra touched.  I can see the room where she seduced and made love to Julius Caesar and then Mark Antony.  I can see the wreckage of the great battle between her forces and Rome.  I can walk where she walked (well swim where she walked).  Her entire life is documented.  We have images of her that were made while she was alive.  There is contemporaneous evidence of her existence.  </p></p>
   <p>  Where was jesus born?  A manger in Bethlehem?  What manger?    What happened in the thirty plus years after his birth but before his death?  I would think that a historical figure who was rumored to be a god, THE god, would leave more of a trace.  Look again at Cleopatra, all Egyptian Pharaohs were also considered to be re-incarnations of the gods, In her case it was Isis.   As living embodiments of the divine, every move they made and every word they said was meticulously documented.  You would think that the coming of the Christian messiah would be similarly documented.  I mean as far as the christian religion goes, there is no more significant event.  This was their god come to earth was it not?  There were witnesses to the birth, why then did not those witnesses stay with Jesus and document his life?  Like I said, this was God wasn't it?  Why is there such a dearth of information on the life of God?  He is born, disappears for thirty plus years and then dies.  While other human made gods from the same era can't take a dump without someone chiseling it into stone for antiquity.   </p></p>
     <p>I find it ironic that we often forget to realize that larger than life people like Cleopatra and Julius Caesar were real, and the events surrounding their lives actually happened.  The story has been told so often and become so familiar that it becomes just that, a story, not history.  While on the other had, the story of Jesus, has, due to its status as religion, become history.  The deference we give to the myth of jesus has enabled it to assume a place in history despite a near total lack of evidence.  I cannot go and touch the things that jesus touched in the way I can with Cleopatra.  There is no contemporaneous evidence for Jesus.  There are no documents that mention him from the time he was supposed to live.  For someone supposed to be god, the most important figure of a religion, this is damning is it not?  </p></p>
     <p>We pay to much attention to myth, and not enough to historical fact.  Cleopatra was real, and the events surrounding her death changed the way the entire world worked.  the circumstances that resulted from her defeat and death changed the course of history and effect us to this day.  Even despite all that most people dismiss Cleopatra as a figure in a story and fail to realize how significant her life really was.  </p></p>
   <p>  Jesus on the other hand, left no meaningful mark on history, and no evidence of his life exists outside of the bible, and the bible is not a historical document.  Yet his existence is held as an undisputed fact.  Why is this?  It is simply because religion demands deference and acceptance, and we give it for no reason at all.  The story of Cleopatra, to me, is so interesting, and so compelling because it is also history, because it actually happened.  the story of Jesus would be similarly compelling to me if it actually happened, but it did not.  I'm not telling people to not believe in Jesus, just that they know that they are in fact 'believing' in him, not accepting his existence as fact.  There is a big difference between the two.  

darkest before the dark

     I apologize in advance as this entry will be more personal than the past few.  Anyone who knows me knows that a lot of the promise of life has drained away lately.  When we were kids we were taught that to be an honest, hard working, good person was enough.  That with a littel elbow grease and a good heart anything is possible, the world opens up,  I don't think I believe that. 
     I'm an honest person, I'm a hardworking person, a good person.  It doesn't matter.  No amount of honesty, goodness, or work ethic cant help when things just go wrong, and dont ever stop going wrong.  When you cant swim against the tide anymore, and you cant see in the darkness, nothing can help you.  None of your friends, or family or anyone you or they know can fix whats wrong.  What good is goodness?  What good is honesty?  These things that we are make a difference do nothing.  The world eats you up and all the goodness honesty and hard work wont ever stop the chewing. 

The post-truth post

When I was a kid I had heroes. I'm pretty sure every kid had heroes. Some kids idolized firefighters or police men or astronauts or what have you. Not me though, my heroes came in comic books that I got at the 7-11 for seventy-five cents. I remember on countless occasions looking under the carpets and couches, digging between the cushions looking for enough quarters to go and buy an issue, just one issue. I remember the excitement, the barely-contained excitement as the guy behind the counter slipped my prize into the brown paper bag and handed it to me. -of course i didn't want a receipt, I'm six.- I carried it home, walking fast, but not running, didn't want to trip and fall and maybe rip the comic- and then rushing into the bedroom and finding a good spot on the floor to inspect my new treasure.

This was the moment, as I slid it out of the brown paper bag, laid it on the floor and began. First I would stare at the cover, sometimes it was Captain America, sometimes it was Spider Man, sometimes Superman, each one engaged in a struggle of life and death, good and evil, victory or loss. I experienced this with them, through them. I opened those books, and Inside I found good and evil, justice, right, wrong, sorrow, loss, and hope. As a Young kid, a young geeky kid, who wore his brothers clothes because we didn't have much, and wore really thick glasses, and apparently read comics, I got picked on. I get stomped on a pretty regular basis as a kid. And when I rushed back from the 7-eleven, into my room, laid a new comic on the floor and opened it up I was going into a world where my heroes existed, and my bullies didn't.

I read these stories over and over and over again, pouring over every panel, soaking in the words, the pictures, colors. In these stories, any hardship could be overcome, you could always come out on top no matter how bad the odds. In these books, even the worst people could be redeemed, and the good people were never corrupted. What better place for heroes to come from than comic books?

We get older, and as we do so, we require more, or maybe less of our heroes. Perhaps, more or less is a poor way to think about it, I suppose it is best to say that as we get older, we require different things from our heroes. As I left elementary school and moved into the middle grades the heroes became different. No longer did the kids around me idolize the generic archetypes of 'firefighters' 'police officers' and 'super heroes.' Real people began to take the place of the heroes of earlier childhood.
The people though, weren't too real.

They were sports stars mostly, larger than life athletes like Micheal Jordan, Scottie pippin, troy aikman and jerry rice. The batman and superman shirts were replaced unceremoniously with football and basketball jerseys. My heroes changed as as well, but instead of turning to television i turned again to books. I found heroes in the pages of works by tolkien, brooks an others. There was a new morality in these heroes and the words they inhabited were complex and brilliant. Often you get made fun of as a kid for not liking the things that other people like, but while im sure that jerry rice could win a lot of football games, my heroes could wield the power of the gods and change the fate of worlds. They were just more interesting. real or not.

As we progress into the teen and adult years, heroes tend to disappear. Replaced by a stronger confidence in our own identity, greater definition of self. I suppose when we get old enough, we no longer need place other people, or character on a pedestal and rely on them to what is 'good' or enviable or worth praise. Maybe having a hero just becomes less important.

While having reached the age of no heroes long ago, there is something I really do miss about my youth, my heroes. What I miss is the core concept of heroes themselves, That they will always do good, that no matter how bad, and how dark, and how dire the world gets, heroes will always save it, it's what they do, its all they do.

I was watching cnn last night, they were talking about Mitt Romney, and the phrase 'post-truth era of politics' kept coming up. That stuck out to me; 'post truth'. The fact that they were talking about Mitt Romney's near innumerable lies wasn't the issue that bugged me, it was that rather than be outraged that a former united states governor, and current presidential candidate was was blatantly lying to the American people nearly every time he opens his mouth, the media has pre-pakaged it into a sound bite. 'post-truth era of politics' Rather than DEMAND our politicians be truthful with the electorate, we make up a phrase that is easily digestible by the public. Rather than say Mitt Romney is a liar, we say 'we live in an era of post-truth politics'. That, to me, is bullshit.

The people we elect, and the people we nominate, are lifted up by us onto our shoulders so that they can lead us. We make them beacons to guide us through an increasingly dark world. We make them our heroes. We make them people to be looked up to, people to be followed, and in exchange for this it is there duty to not lead us astray, to not lie to us, to always be there for us no matter how dark the night gets. Mitt Romney has proven himself unworthy of this, he does not act in the best interest of the American people, he is not there for us, and we should not be there for him.

The media has similarly failed us. Journalists have a responsibility to the american people to be guardians of the truth, heroes in their own way, and rather than live up to this responsibility and expose the lies they have merely pre packaged them into sugar-coated bits. It is true that as we get older we no longer look for heroes in our lives, but I dont think that means we don't need them. I no longer need Superman in my life, I'm not six, but what I do need is a president that will tell the truth, a media that won't tolerate lies, elected officials that will be there for the people no matter how bad the world gets. I need a congress that will not stop fighting for me no matter what because I;m the underdog.

If our candidates can't be our heroes, if they can't do these things, then maybe we should find some who can. Similarly, if our media is subservient to corruption and refuses to expose blatant dishonesty because its bad entertainment then maybe we should all stop watching. Society depends on honest politicians and vigilant media, and since we have neither of those at the moment, we need to be our own heroes and hold people accountable.

what we have built

     I am 36 years old. I am not thirty six years old. The two statements are contradictory, but its how we all look at ourselves. In those quiet moments, at night, away from everything, alone, I am thirty six years old. Though small by comparison to some, the number is nonetheless crushing.

     Not in size itself but by what accompanies it, the thoughts, like meteorites, like sucker punches to the gut, hit me. What, in my thirty six years, have I actually done? What accomplishments do I have that make those thirty six years worth something? What inside me is there to answer the claim that those thirty six years have been a fruitless waste?

     In the daylight, in the sun, the sound, the heat of everything, distracted by the joyful burden of living, I am not thirty six years old. I am young, and the exploits of my younger self are not so far away. There is possibility, there is chance. In these times 36 is a number, an abstract thing that is not a part of me. It is some shadowy far away concept that doesnt mean anything,

      I appreciate these moments of glorious ignorance because they grant me freedom, optimism. But they also grant complacency. Laziness. Maybe I need that thirty six, maybe I need to own that I am ineffective and an underachiever.
      Or maybe the answer is something else entirely. I am not a man of great or moving accomplishments. I have not and probably will not ever change the world. I accept that, I own it. But I have come to realize that this does not mean that I have accomplished nothing. I, like everyone else, live simultaneously in two worlds. My immediate world full of my family, my friends, my work, my hobbies. the things I can instantly touch and the things that instantly touch me.

      I also live in the real world, made up of other people, my country, other countries, the people on tv, the politicians I elect and the ones I don't elect and the rules they make for me. Most of the time, for most people, these worlds are entirely separate. Most people never see beyond their own world to form a connection between the two.

     This is fine, It's tough to do that, especially in times like these when our personal lives are so hard. But to my point, if I look inward, I see not a swath of failure, not a dearth of accomplishment, but a series of personal victories. An achievement doesn't have to be relevant to they entire world to be an achievement.

     There is beauty and victory in the ordinary just as much as there is in the extraordinary. I have overcome fears, I have overcome adversity, I have risen above my own limitations, and these are victories just the same as any other. Just because none of this is particularly noteworthy does not make it without worth. This is something important for everyone to realize.

      There is another thing to consider. Not a single one of my achievements, not a singe one of my victories, not a single step in all of my thirty six years could have been done without help. Of course when I say that I mean help from my family, my amazing wife and my amazing parents, my brother, my friends. All of whom have supported me, lended hands to help me up when I was down, and supported me when I was up, provided advice and lended courage when I was walking into the unknown. So of course I mean them, but I also mean everyone else.

      I mean everyone whose jobs make my life possible, whose work enables my work, whose taxes enable the government to help me when I need it, whose voting elects officials who make rules that create an economy that I can thrive in. I did not get here without them, all of them. We are intertwined, all of us.

     There are people like me, who might not ever be a millionaire, or president, or astronaut space cowboy with a jet pack, and there are people like mitt romney who are rich and influential and can do or be anything they want. My accomplishment may be nothing compared to his, but the one thing we have in common is that both of our accomplishments, everything he and I have ever done could not have been done without other people.

     Mitt Romney does not believe this, he would like to think of himself, and others like him, as islands of achievement. He would like you to believe that the foundations of his success were built from the sweat of his brow, and that because of that he and other like him should pay less taxes. He wants you to think that asking him to pay a little more is somehow a punishment for his success, a punishment for working hard.

     Mitt Romney is not an island but rather a flower on a vine. He couldn't have grown to what he is without the rest of us. He wouldn't have his empire without us. While this idea seems offensive to him and others like him, its true.

      Take for example the roman empire, without the labor of the common man the Roman empire would not have thrived and grown. Likewise, without the government providing tax breaks to businesses, the Romney Empire would not have thrived, without the internet, roads and bridges and an incredibly strong and tireless workforce, no business in this country would have thrived and no titans of industry could be created.

      When we ask Mitt Romney and others like him to pay three percent more in taxes, we are not punishing his success, we are asking him to pay his fair share, we are asking him to give back to the people that made his success possible. We are asking him to give back to the government whose policies and laws made it possible for his business to grow and succeed making Mitt millions.

     The government will then use that money to to make it possible for people like me to take risks and seek success like Mitt Romney has found. the government will also use that money to support me and take care of me if my risks end badly. This is what America is built on, we are all interconnected, we are all in this together. We all live in the same world, and we have all built that world together.

      We are responsible to our fellow man because we owe him for our victories, and we owe him our helping hands when he is defeated. This is the core of our country. After all, is this not printed on the statue of liberty: "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to be free". We take care of people in this country, we all do, and at some point, we have all been cared for by it. We are connected, and asking people like mitt romney to make that connection three percent stronger is not a punishment for success, it is a patriotic request, a reaffirmation of what this country was built on.

the teeth

     The world  has teeth.  I realize that now, I understand.  I didn't know as a kid, I'm sure most kids don't.  You don't see the teeth as a kid, things protect you as a kid.  You're far away as a kid.  That's the way it should be.  But you get older, you go places, you plant roots, you make connections to people and places.  Then the biting starts.
     The first bite is loss.  For me it was my grandmothers.  I lost both of them within a year.  Like pieces of meat ripped off a bone they were just gone, only it wasnt like that.  I watched them fade away.  The teeth chewed slowly.  They like to do that when they can.  make you watch.  make you feel it.  Let you know that you aren't far away from them anymore. 
     You also realize, as I have, that the bites never stop.  The gnashing maw is tireless, ceaseless and hungry.  Ever so hungry, and it has tasted blood.

Perhaps you will lose your job like i did
      bite
perhaps you will lose your health coverage like i did
      bite
Perhaps cannot find another job liked i cant
      bite
perhaps, after countless fruitless interviews, you will begin to watch those you love around you slowly lose their faith in you
      bite
perhaps, due to errors, both human and built into the system designed to keep people out the teeth, there wont be any help from the government for you.  perhaps you'll be all on your own.  staring down the maw alone.
      bite
perhaps you will get sick, or injure yourself like i did
      bite
perhaps it wont heal like mine won't, and you'll be faced with tough choices like I am
      bite
do you pay the electricity bill or go to the doctor
      bite
do you get medicine or pay the rent
      bite

     The teeth have tasted of me, drank of my blood, and demand ever more.  I am so close, I feel the hot breath of the maw, I hear the teeth as they scrape and grind, waiting  to consume me. The bites never stop.  The more they clamp down the harder it is to break free.  Soon it will be impossible.  Perhaps the worst is that as they sink in, as you feel them dig ever deeper into you, you realize, with abject horror that as a child, it wasnt that you couldn't see the teeth, they were always there, it was just that your parents had taken your place.  They were getting the bites for you all those years, as their parents had done for them.  They never stop, and they are always hungry. 

     There are people, a fortunate few, who never experience the teeth.  They never gaze into the maw or feel the bites.  They never hang precariously on the edge, gnsashing biting teeth below, the tattered, ripped threads of stability thay they cling to wrapped so tightly around their hands that it cuts in, blood drips down, teeth chomp, awaiting the fall.  They've never clung by these tattered threads to the one last dream or hope that keeps them going, hoping and praying that they dont fall. 

     I will begrudge no one for their successes but it remains that these people have never been in a place without hope, without options, without choice.  They have never been in a place of teeth only.  Therefore I deem these people, fortunate as they are, unqualified to determine the fate of people who feel the teeth, the people being chewewd on, the people who are hurting. 

     These fortunate sons and daughters seek our votes, our elected offices.  Their wealth and influence has kept them far away from the teeth, of course they have experienced loss, but thats only a small part of it and it touches everyone.  But the chewing, the constant biting, the bledding, they know nothing of it.  They talk of the problems, poverty, a broken healthcare system, an ineffectual government, but they dont understand.  How could they? they've never felt it.  You think a ridiulously wealthy former governor has been close to the teeth?  You think he's ever had to decide between going to the doctor or paying his bills?  Hardly.  So how is he qualified to make decisions about the people that have? 

     There exists a net, a system put in place by presidents past that is designed to keep people out of the teeth.  To give them money when they do not have jobs, to help them find work, and see doctors and help us when we get old.  The fortunate few who seek to run this country dislike this net, this system we built to help people.  They say they have better ideas, a better way, a stronger net.  But their ideas really only amount to feeding the teeth.  Worse still, their ideas would just add more teeth.

    I suppose the difference lies in what we think the purpose of government is.  I feel that fundamentally, government has a responsibility to do for people what they cannot do for themselves.  That includes speaking for those that do not have a voice, protecting the rights of all citizens, including minority groups, and providing, at least on some level, when people cannot provide for themselves. 

    The fortunmate few feel that this job is too big for government, and these responsibilites should be stripped away from it, and the job of helping the needy should be left to the people.  The people, while great and good im sure, have only thier interests in mind.  They are busy workign hard to keep themselves out of the teeth, and probably do not have the extra resources needed to keep their brothers and sisters out of the teeth.  Government has to do it because people can't. 

     We can, in this election, put people in power who will stengthen the net, and work to put more distance between us and the teeth.  They want to heal the bleeding and strengthen the threads we we cling to, the threads that tie us to our dreams.  Or, we can put people in power who will work to remove the net, who will only add more teeth.  Who will use their wealth and influcene to increase their wealth and influence.  Thats not going to help anyone except them. 

     I dont want a world where no one gets bitten, and honestly I dont think we can ever have a world like that.  I want a government that can help people when they get bitten, and that will work to make sure the bites stop eventually.  This is an achievable vision and right now everyone can make it happen.  because whether we like to admit it or not we live in a world where anyone, even the fortunate few, can get bitten, and bitten, and bitten, and bitten, through no fault of their own, and end up in the teeth.  bleeding and clinging to that last tattered thread of hope. 

    Now theres a net, barely, but its weak.  The fortunate few want to take it away.  But what we really need to do is make it stronger.  The teeth have been fed enough. 

Ted Nugent. Not hyperbolic at all

To our species.  He was boarn rich,Ted Nugent: 'Obama Represents Everything Bad About Humanity': via HuffPost

    Yes, I know stupid people will say stupid things but glaringly ridiculous tripe, even when spewed by c-list red neck ignorant cave men like ted nugent, needs to be debunked.  So i'll start at the top.  Obama represents all that is bad about humanity?  Fucking really Ted Nugent?  If there was some award given out by the League of Mothefucking Evil for the 'person or persons whom best embodies all that is bad about humanity' you would nominate Barack Obama?  
      In your backwoods, Budweiser, Skoal and Deer Musk infused brain, the president of the united states is a better embodiment of all that is bad with humanity than, say, Joseph Kony, or perhaps Mummar Ghadafi or even Benjamin Nantanyahu?  This Hyperbolic bullshit does NOTHING to advance the political debate in this country, and honestly its a debate we need to fucking have. 
     Things are seriously messed up in our country, and wee need to have honest, informed discussions so that we can begin to fix things.  The first and perhaps most import step is to eliminate the bad ideas from our discourse.  This is is a bad idea.  Completely off the chain incindiary drivel like this needs to be called out as idiocy before america can move on and have what approaches a real conversation about political parties and ideas in this country.
       Barack obama is not the living embodiment of evil.  He is not awarded a prize every year by a cabal of supervillians for being a better representative of all that is bad about humanity that their resureected hitler clone that the have working as a wal mar greeter.  Do you realize how utterly and completely stupid these thigs are to say?  And Nugent believes them?  Its absurd, completel fucking absurd.

    It gets better.  Not only does Nugent apparetnyl believe that Lex Luthor, The Red Skull, the Board of Directers at Enron, Bernie Madoff and Satan get together annually to decide who the representative for the human race is, they also seem to believe that the Justice League get together and Decide annually who represents all that is good in humanity.  The winner of that award according to Nugent?  Mitt Fucking Romney.

    Yes, Mitt Romney better embodies all that is good in humanity, much more so that people like, abe lincon, freer of the slaves, or thomas jefferson, father of the constitution.  No, those people while their contributions to humanity were both varies permanent and substantial, they pale in comparison to mitt's impressive list of contributions to humanity

For starters he was born rich, so he didnt have to do any of that silly self-making that other people have to do.  Its tiresome and makes you sweat.  Can;t have that, its unsightly. 
Secondly, he's destroyed countless companies and laid off thousands of american workers by offering their jobs to countries that can do them at a fraction of the cost in facilities that offer none of the expensive worker protections found in america.  So not only can the work get done for operational costs that are pennis on the dollar vs us costs the corkers have added perks like possible hand or limb loss, death from exhaustion, daily exposure to carcinogens and more. 

     Yes, Mitt Romney represents all that is good in this world, with his incessant kowtowing to whichever audience he happens to be adressing, his confusing stance-switching and position reversing, his shallow devaluation for human life and his willingness to rush off to yet another war in the middle east make him the obvious choice really.

     There are things I dislike about both candidates, and I have said as much.  But things like this need to be stopped.  They detract importance from a serious fact-based discussuion that needs to happen all across americal on all income and solcial levels.  When Ted Nugents opens his idiot maw and the stupidity drools out, and we, as a nation, pay attention to it, it makes us look bad.  All of us, you, me Ted, that guy that washes the dee sperm off Ted's hunting gloves, all of it.  It makes Americal look like a ship of fools and we cant afford that when the worlds needs our leadership.''

     There are tough problems to solve, and we need to come up with the solutions together, we can only do that by cutting off the voices and ideas that do us no good.  Ideas and voices like this.  "Obama represents everything thats bad about humanity" isnt an idea, it isnt a solution to any problem we already have.  Its just an insult, its just an incindiary statement, those things dont help.  If Ted Nugent was a patriot, if Ted Nugent cared about his county, he wouldnt be using his 'status' to offer the people insults, hed be using it to offer us solutions.  Or at least better words that the he has already used.