after a month-longish hiatus from my blogging adventures, i decided to come back at hurricane ike-like strength with a topic that's currently hotter than the sun's surface, and one i know next to nothing about. (can you think of a more treacherous combination?) in fact, i don't think i would consider myself at all qualified to even blog un-intelligently about it, so it's a good thing i don't make any promises. do i even have to reveal the subject?
politics. the mention of the word itself shuts something down in my brain. just typing it makes my creative juices slow. it's just something i've never really thought or cared much about. i've never worried too much about what (or who - zing!) the president is or isn't doing, and i haven't been able to name the speaker of the house or the whoever of the senate since my freshman political science class with professor jon bond (hey, i'm impressed i remembered
his name at least). i'm not proud of my apathy, and i know a lot of it stems from ignorance. after that, the only thing remotely political that i concerned myself with in college was meeting both george (sr.) and barbara bush on campus on numerous occasions. (in case you're dying to know, george is tall tall tall and barbara is fiesty. both are wonderful, kind people.)
until this year, i probably wouldn't have spent time and blog space writing about a topic that so clearly demonstrates my lack of political prowess, but with one of the most heated and historical presidential races in recent history (or ever? i don't have research to back that up), i figured it's something worth a mention. why not, even if all it does is amuse you, reader?
i grew up in a republican household. did i know what that
really meant? nope. even in a bible study
after college, one of my
friends shocked me with the question "can you be a christian and a democrat?" i honestly thought she was joking. i swiveled my head around to face the poser of the question and she was eagerly awaiting an answer. what in the world? well, i was not aware that those two things were mutually exclusive, that the republican party was the 'christian' party. seemed a bit too legalistic and judgmental to me. still does. man, i wish i could remember more about that discussion, but again, my brain must have shut down with the mention of politics. it's a disease really.
let's throw the topic of religion aside for now. growing up, my basic (and probably somewhat erroneous) understanding of political party affiliation was that the republican (conservative) party was the one generally favored by the white (maybe it wasn't just white, i don't remember) middle to upper class. as a child of two white upper middle class parents, i was raised to believe that the republican party was the 'better party' or 'our party' and that the democratic party is way too liberal, where liberal equals 'don't go there.' i never really asked why, but merely accepted that since my parents were republican, by family law i was to be one too. it's strange that i never really questioned it since i have a history of questioning most everything else. if i were to one day claim 'hmmm, i think i'll be a democrat today,' would my life change all that much? other than playful parental reprimand, i wouldn't feel much effect.
fast forward to 2008. no longer do i live in dallas, but in liberal austin, texas. most of my friends are staunch democratic obama supporters (and many are christians - oh
dear, there's that 'discrepancy' again), and i couldn't care less. it's not like i'm going to de-friend (dang it, did i really gank that term from facebook? now
that influence is a real cause for worry) someone because they are siding with a party that is different from the one with which i have traditionally (albeit loosely) identified. i don't love based on political affiliation. in fact, six months ago i took a quiz on the major debated issues, and i basically was split right down the middle of the two candidates. could i be 'turning democrat'? crossing to the 'other side'? who knows? i don't like this all or nothing mentality that tends to come with bi-partisan politics.
it's amazing to me how heated and passionate people are about what's to happen come november the fourth. i know it's a big deal - i get that - but it interests me to watch how passionately personal people can get when talking about candidate this and candidate that. i wish i had enough understanding and knowledge to join in on an intelligent political conversation. i have started to become more interested in the drama itself than the actual issues at hand. that will eventually evolve, i am certain.
i have figured out why this is so difficult. i have a handful of family members and highly respected friends that argue quite ardently for mccain; at the same time i have just as many (or more) friends that are sold on obama and have no trouble selling him to me. like many, i don't know who to believe. everything i hear seems to be extremely biased. it's frustrating to a point where i threaten to vote for nader or myself or whoever is playing on my ipod at the moment.
yesterday i stepped out on a limb of uncertainty and attempted to spark a political debate in my principles of business class. who knows, maybe i'd learn something? i had a class set of wall street journals with a feature article on - you guessed it - decision 2008. on the cover were large color photos of both mccain and obama's faces, and they looked like they were in heated debate with each other. the kids for the most part seemed really interested in the article, and while my debate
flopped didn't really pick up like i had hoped (i didn't learn anything new), i did find it interesting that some kiddos were informed enough in their teenage minds that some had gone so far as to graffiti the candidate's face that they were 'against.' i will say that we had about the same number of graffiti-ed obamas as mccains - pretty even split.
i decided today that i wanted be ignorant no more. i refuse to let my upbringing automatically make my decision. i am going to learn this stuff and make my very own decision. i brought one of the graffiti-ed (pure coincidence that it was an anti-obama edition) wall streets home with me and studied it. i studied what each candidate said about each issue. unbiased. open-minded. and what did i find?
on paper, overall obama impressed me more than mccain ("well, the wall street journal is pretty liberal, honey" was my mom's response). after my discovery, i called my mom and carefully shared this information with her because we had been discussing the topic a few hours earlier. i honestly expected a laugh or a 'that's interesting.' not so much. mom watches fox news all day long and, like many, thinks obama is the gateway to the terrorists and that he only claims to be a christian to win the election (she did have a point with his whole refusal to swear upon the bible, requesting the koran instead - what was that about?). well, my admission really scared her. i just sat there as she started rattling on about obama this and obama that. i put the phone on speaker and started doing things around the house after a while (sorry, mom). after about twenty minutes, she apologized for 'talking my arm off' (not sure what happened to the ear; apparently she goes straight for the appendages), and admitted that she panicked at the possibility of me casting my vote for the enemy (in her eyes). after some reassurance that i was basing my assessment completely on the article and that it wasn't my 'final answer,' she calmed down considerably. wow. serious stuff.
so here we are. i'm more confused than ever. i'm just going to take it day by day and try to learn as much as i possibly can before the big day. in the meantime, ross perot sounds like a safe bet.
