Perception and Politics

[Rebel Yell]

Perception and Politics
If you read this column very often, you know that there are a lot of things about politics which bother me, and one of the most worrisome is the depths politicians will stoop to get themselves elected.

If you watch the political commentary on television you soon pick up on the idea that it's not important what the candidate believes but what they appear to believe, not what they really are but what they can convince us that they are.

Because of the deception of perception this country elects a pig in a poke and sometimes the analogy fits way too well.

Politicians are one-eyed jacks; we seldom get a good look at the other side of their face. They try to be all things to all people and that is downright impossible.

You can't find the center of a lot of these people as there is no boundary they won't cross, and no toes they won't step on to get their party in power and yes I'm talking about both parties.

The recent remark by Senator Harkin about John McCain's military service said something about the fact that McCain came from a linage of admirals and had served in the military himself and that it could be a dangerous.

Now can somebody please tell me what this statement is supposed to mean? Does it mean that a man with extensive military experience is disqualified from being president in a time when the country is at war?

With all due respect Senator Harkin, your remark is downright dumb and you do disservice to your presidential candidates who both have lauded senator McCain for his military service. In fact most of the men who have served as president have done time in the military.

I do however think that I have an inkling of what this is all about.

Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton has military experience and I think the democrats are worried that it could become an issue in the general election.

Senator Harkin's remarks are a prime example of what I'm talking about, the heck with what's good for the country, the heck with trying to belittle the service of a war hero, the heck with everything accept getting his candidate elected.

I would dearly love to see our campaign process overhauled.

I think there should be a limit to the amount of money a candidate can accept and spend, that includes soft money. It's not right that a candidate can outspend the other candidate and get elected.

I think there should be a limit on the amount of money a primary candidate is allowed to spend in a state. I think they should do away with the caucus they are too easy to manipulate. Let the candidates be chosen by the vote of the people.

And after the two or three major candidates are chosen. I think they should be allowed the same amount of TV, radio and newspaper ads. I think they should be required to debate each other head to head once a week on national television, with no commentators and nobody asking them questions except each other. They should be allowed to ask the other candidate questions and the other candidate should be given a set amount of time to answer and at the end of that time their microphone would be cut off and they'd have to move on to the next question.

I know my approach is simplistic but people something needs to be done.

Why should we be forced to vote for people we don't really know?

What do you think?

Pray for our troops

God Bless America

Charlie Daniels

June 2 , 2008

[Lord Undies]

It would be a great start if unqualified statements like The recent remark by Senator Harkin about John McCain's military service said something about the fact that McCain came from a linage of admirals and had served in the military himself and that it could be a dangerous would not be reported without followup questions and answers. 

Ambiguous statements left floating unchallenged leads the news consuming public to misconstrue such statements as being common knowledge which does not need further discussion.  A lot of people do not want to appear dumb and uninformed, so they do not question the validity of such statements or seek the extended logic such statements certainly require.

Of course, this is usually by design because the American press is always biased towards the democrat/socialist/anti-American point of view.  Ambiguous statements and fragmented thoughts which enhance the negative image of Republicans in general and conservative specifically is not only a useful tool of the political left, it is usually all they have.  It is an extension of the dishonesty they must always employ. 

Knowing all of this, I still want to ask Senator Harkin for a clear explanation of the danger Senator McCain's military history poses in regard to Senator McCain serving in the Office of President of the United States.  Spell it out for me, please.