Shot In The Dark
My previous post was well-thought out, regarding the current attitude towards the HBO movie “Game Change”, a film detailing the rise in popularity of the former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. I started to give people an in-depth look as to why many conservatives are so angry over the debut of this film, but then I realized the sad reality of it. She was a bimbo of the anti-intellectual party of the century, that even her own party treats her like Leather-face. She’s a threat to herself and everyone’s credibility around her, and they’ve done everything feasibly possible to distance themselves from her over the past 3 years. That’s why when this film premiered, her previous staff threw a gigantic fit over her portrayal. That’s also why FOX news, and a plethora of other conservative media outlets created the largest tantrum in ages over this movie. Perhaps it was politically timed. Maybe not. Regardless, the truth was that “Hollywood liberals” didn’t have to add any movie magic to make Palin look like the unprepared candidate that she was. This isn’t an incident that could be brushed under the rug. These are realities that we laughed at 3 years ago, and many people for the GOP sat with their faces buried into their palms. This film only further forces the truth that, no matter which idiot the GOP decides to shove in front of us next as the “front-runner” in the race to beat President Obama, they are grasping at straws. These candidates belong to the same anti-intellectual party. They are such horrible choices (minus Ron Paul), that just by showing up places and wasting each other’s time at debates they make the president’s return campaign a flaming success. So now, when I hear about republicans angry over this movie’s impact on the GOP race, I have to snicker just a bit at the thought that THIS film of all things could damage them anymore than they already have.
I don’t think that Sarah Palin is a BAD person. In fact, this film goes out of its way to depict her in a positive light offstage. I just think of her as everyone else should: “severely unprepared for national politics”. That’s why I have to tell the conservative media to “stop crying” for one minute. Steve Schmidt, one of the main players in the McCain/Palin campaign and one of the main characters of the movie described the flick as “incredibly accurate”, and stated that some scenes were taken nearly verbatim from the events themselves. If they want to argue, they can argue with the guy that was there. I’d trust his word a hell of a lot sooner than ANYTHING FOX news says.
However, that was a post that never came to be. I have to say, I like it much more in summarized form. After reading Schimdt’s reaction to the movie itself, I can say it was a significantly better rebuttal than half the drone research I did attempting to debunk the mysteries of why it was considered inaccurate. As it turns out, it wasn’t inaccurate. They’re just whiny children who don’t want to seem as if they didn’t know what they were doing at one time. Because, that’s difficult to discern from their 11 candidates this year who have tried for the front-runner position.
Last night, I was using Ventrilo (a voice over IP program) with some of my gaming clan members, and someone jokingly brought up the idea that we need to see a candidate run from the Latino community. They argued that seeing as how our country has been moving progressively forward over the past decade, that it would seem only fair if all ethnicities who viewed their candidacy as highly unlikely because of their cultural background, should step forward for recognition. With this point, we jested for a minute about some of the ethnically based stereotypes of a so-called “Mexican” president. While funny and moronic at first, my guild-mates quickly turned their attention to a serious thought.
“You could run Jake”, one of them stated as I burst out in hysterical laughter. The others commented in concurrence, but remained comical with the idea. It seemed as if, though they all inherently realized my list of undesirable traits as a political figure, they would still stick their neck out for my sense of nonexistent credentials. This means a lot, that my leadership abilities as limited as they are, are still generally regarded as suitable to my clan members. While not the largest audience in the world, how many other people can say that they hold even a remote influence somewhere? While I would never vote for myself as a presidential candidate, I can think of a disgusting list of reasons why the rest of our country wouldn’t either. Some of these are better than others, but even if I ever did make it to the ballot I wouldn’t get far, as I’m half of the things that this country is frightened by:
1) I’m an atheist. This alone, is more than enough to scare most people who affiliate themselves with a religious denomination away from me. Even though I’ve been told by hundreds of people that I have one of the most unbiased viewpoints when it comes to debate, and I don’t grant special considerations for atheists considering many of them are as unintellectual as anyone else on the planet, I would never be voted for because of this. This country has naturally been conditioned to fear those who are “godless”, because of an ancient nostalgia from the days of Marxist Communism. The majority of these people have never read the Communist Manifesto, nor do they have any clue that atheism and Communism don’t ACTUALLY have direct connections to one another, but for better or worse they treat them equally as hostile. I would have a better chance on the ballot if I told the country I’m the leader of a Luciferian cult, because at least then they would think I believe in “something”.
2) I don’t associate with either party. Even though we already have a moderate party called “The Democrats”, there are many who are still even too liberal for my taste. I am one of the few people who recognizes that the founding fathers never wanted this ridiculous bi-partisan government race we have now, and both parties contradict their moral, and ethical tenets so often it isn’t funny. Hyper-liberalism is just as dangerous as Ultra-conservatism, and the sooner people understand that the better off we’ll be. Associating too much with one party or the other does grant people a foot in the door, however it also leaves you open to the whims of your party at any time. You don’t have a choice anymore, and they let you know that fast. If you fail to comply with the party’s wishes, you’re slowly forced into the limelight of more complaisant candidates who will receive not only the adoration of every single delegate who thinks they’re more extreme than you, but the complete confidence of anyone who thinks that so long as they throw a few dollars on the pile that their will shall be done. Parties are for people who are looking to stop thinking for themselves, and because of this reason I would never be supported by either side. I would never cater to the sensitivity of the democratic party, and I wouldn’t be caught dead encouraging the idiocy of the Republican party. They’re both the most dangerous thing to America’s free-thought idealism, next to combining church and state.
3) I know my history. There is nothing that political opponents hate worse than someone who has done their homework. They like it when their supporters, constituents, and sheep are exactly as they were the day they shoved a pretty flag in front of them and hugged it: Stupid. However, our country seems to have no issue with this. So long as every time a political candidate jumps on stage, they say the phrases “best country in the world”, “Leaders of the free world”, “most powerful”, and “God bless America”, they’ll automatically receive a million happy faces that haven’t the slightest clue that they’ve received the authoritarian figure’s “okie doke”. For a long time, political figures were obligated to produce a positive image that was constructed from their accomplishments from the past, as well as their leadership experience in the Military, state government, or their lifelong intellectually based career. Now, all you need to be a good choice is radical ideals, (some worse than others) a face that is suitable for camera, and the ability to relate to “the real people” in America, as if it were some ascribed status that you were born into. If there is anything a political figure doesn’t want any person pointing out, it’s how much unlike our most notable individuals in our country’s history they are. If there’s one thing most politicians pining away for that Commander-in-Chief office hate, it’s an opponent who has read the things they haven’t: The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence. Not to mention volumes upon volumes of text denoting the fuck-ups and infractions made by political predecessors. Because if people started reading about that, then they might want to fix things. They might want people to know something they “shouldn’t”, and they might actually attempt to increase the population’s standard of living.
Now you undoubtedly understand, why I could never be president. I would anger every politician at the same time, and do it with clinical efficiency. There would be millions spent on slanderous advertisements, stories conjured about a past I never had, and affiliations with people I’ve never even talked to. It would be a campaign of contingency just to ensure that the youth never heard a word I said, let alone anyone else who decided to wake the fuck up. I’d have no chance, because they’d make it their first priority to turn me into the villain they want me to be.
President Obama, and multiple other political figureheads might sound nice when they discuss how much change they want, but I think I’d prefer it if my leader was willing to not settle for anything less than the buck when they have to do their fucking job.