« unexpected | Main | cookies for breakfast »

i do not heart parties

"finding consolation and guidance" ... "a post-election sense of woe" ... "outcome of election leads to emptiness and disillusionment" ... "victory should not be conceded before facts are all in" ...

uh-kay. it's now been well over a week since election day here in the states, and letters to the editor are still pouring into my local newspaper. politics is the god of choice around here; i hear that people were crying and depressed over kerry's election loss. has the whole world gone mad, or just my town? we were a lone blue county in a sea of red last tuesday... i never knew such overwhelming political passion existed anywhere in my state, and i've lived in ohio all my life.

a disclaimer: i am not a republican. nor am i a democrat. truth be told, i couldn't have cared less about who was voted in as commander-in-chief; not for lack of interest, but for lack of conviction. i trust both bush and kerry about as far as i can throw them. i almost flipped a coin to help determine my first chad-punch, but decided it would be too distracting to my fellow voters. in the end, america votes, democracy is acheived, the world keeps spinning.

at what point did our nation accept that two political ideologies were enough? at what point did our nation accept that two political ideologies were to be mortal enemies?

on the one hand, i suppose having a distinct party is nice: you know what it is that you're getting into [for better or for worse]. in this respect, any rogue "independent" candidates may be viewed as suspect: much like churches with names like "free universal evangelic liberated discretionary fellowship". this roughly translates to "we don't report to nobody!" -- the independence aspect definitely holds promise, but what ultimately goes down at the end of the day is really anyone's guess.

on the other hand, subscribing to a particular party is bothersome to me. i don't like the thought of being pigeon-holed into a particular belief [or belief system]. i am not so naive as to think that one party holds the panacea to the nation's troubles in its platform. in this respect, those ol' "independent" candidates look rather appealing: free thinkers, unafraid to go against the grain, not tied to a traditional thought process... or perhaps more importantly, not tied to any certain campaign fund.

so much for me and my "i don't talk politics" stand. i'm just so tired of the extremism... have we as a nation lost our minds?

i think i'm going to start telling people i'm a republicrat.

Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 at 07:36PM by Registered Commentermdog | Comments4 Comments

Reader Comments (4)

Republicrats '08!

Nov 13, 2004 at 10:35PM | Unregistered Commenterhappyhearn
love it!
Nov 13, 2004 at 10:47PM | Registered Commentermdog
where did this "I [heart] ____" come from, anyway? I have to admit, I find it highly annoying...

Nov 19, 2004 at 07:46AM | Unregistered Commenterrachel

Why is it that the "I [heart]_____" stickers, etc., always proclaim their love for things like bassett hounds, jet skis, garage sales, and other less than heart-worthy objects? I never see "I [heart]my wife and kids" or "I [heart]the needy children in Malawi".
Nov 20, 2004 at 06:04PM | Unregistered Commenterhappyhearn

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>