Our Un-Enlightenment

What happened to Sen. Joe Biden? Is he still involved in the election circus?

If he is, I haven’t heard anything from or about him in some time. Considering BIden’s tendency for verbal blunders, this probably isn’t a bad thing for his running mate, presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, but a little Biden press — whether good or bad — couldn’t hurt the Democrats’ chances right now.

I suggest that Biden go on a campaign fund-sponsored shopping spree. Maybe if he spices up his manner of dress the press will shower him with attention like they do Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. The media can’t get enough of Palin’s wardrobe, and who could blame them? It’s not like anything important is happening in the country right now.

Pictures of Palin wearing a scarf decorated with red, white and blue donkeys and the word “vote” on it have sparked the latest what-is-she-wearing-today craze.

Who gives a damn?

She made an airheaded purchase- it won’t affect the country. It may affect the votes of her supporters, but it shouldn’t because I’m sure she burned it after she realized what she had done.

Naturally, Republicans are all riled up about the Democrats eagerness to pounce on yet another opportunity to bash Palin. Get over it. If the media had photos of Biden and Obama sitting together watching “Dumbo” the GOP would construe the pictures to show the stupidity and naivety of its opponents.

When will this pettiness end?

I thought the election fueled media circus would die down a bit as the election neared. Instead, it has stayed its ignorant course and maybe has gotten worse.

In 12 days it’ll all be over, for one of these two campaigns, so we can all gather around to start bashing the newly elected president from the moment of his inauguration. At least we’ll finally find some thread of togetherness.

The election has taken over the news, the media and the news media, and it has done so for an all-too-unfortunate reason.

It’s controlling our news because, whether or not we like it, this presidential election is inherently tied to race.

As a nation, we’d like to think race wouldn’t be such a big deal, but putting positive emphasis on Sen. Barack Obama’s heritage requires emphasis — and press — on his race.

Recently, it seemed that other issues were beginning to take precedent over the color of Obama’s skin, but, thanks to the happy-go-lucky voice of conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, race was yanked from the political backseat and shoved back to its usual spot in front of our faces.

I know Obama is black. It doesn’t matter to me, though — and it shouldn’t matter to anyone else. If he gets elected, time won’t stand still, the Earth will not open up and swallow the United States and frogs will not start to fall from the sky. The color of his skin is completely irrelevant.

If our nation (or at least a majority of it) decides that he is the man to lead us, then so be it. That’s why we vote.

People shouldn’t be so touchy and sensitive regarding Obama’s race because he isn’t. Considering how easy it would be for him to play the “race card” at any given opportunity, I’m impressed that it has been brought to our attention so few times. I’d say that he has not only declined that option often, but he chooses to downplay it.

Unfortunately, race and racism are still issues in the U.S., but they are not reasonable grounds for swinging a vote or an election. Mr. Limbaugh is trying to get a rise out of his listeners, whether they agree or disagree with him, because he is intimidated as Obama’s lead in the polls slowly grows.

I can’t back down from my stance that the presidential debates are an absolute waste of time. Every debate I’ve ever seen has featured one, if not both, of the candidates tiptoeing around the moderator’s questions ever-so-eloquently — see Sen. Barack Obama.

I still don’t understand why three debates are necessary and why the vice-presidential candidates talk at all. They should be left to their deciding vote in the Senate and kept out of view otherwise.

Debates are charades. They’re purely for show and it’s painfully obvious.

Sen. John McCain was expected to pull out all the stops in a last-ditch effort to derail the Obama train. If he tried to do that in the final debate, either I missed it or he failed completely.

Hopefully McCain’s attempts at riding the publicity of Joe Plumber’s televised gripe-session with Obama was not his planned knockout punch. That would be as pitiful as McCain turning to the camera mid-debate and facetiously saying, “Hey Joe, you’re rich. Congratulations.”

What a groundbreaking strategy. Let’s focus on a real person instead of fake issues. Let’s see how Obama potentially could hurt Americans. Sounds like McCain wants to hang his campaign on the problems faced by one man.

Sorry, John, but the movie “Swing Vote” already hit the theaters — and is probably coming soon to a Blockbuster near you.

Like the Kevin Costner film, McCain’s strategy is going to crash and burn.

The 2008 presidential election is exactly three weeks from today, and Sen. Barack Obama is slightly ahead in most national polls.

The fervor that has accompanied this election since the party primary phase has been unlike that of any election I have witnessed, dating back to the Clinton-H.W. Bush-Perot contest of 1992. It seems that there isn’t a soul left in the United States who hasn’t offered his or her 2 cents under the false pretense of understanding a given national political issue.

My problem with this is the ignorance and shortsightedness of the average voter. Nevermind- scratch the “average” part. I’m addressing the ignorance of all voters in the U.S.

It’s not that everyone ignores issues or is incapable of fully understanding them; I’m sure there are millions who have a firm grasp of economic concepts and the hassles of military spending. The discrepancy is found in the materialistic nature of our society. I’m not suggesting that we wallow in negative headlines, but a failing economy should not lead us to pass up a stellar film featuring two of Hollywood’s best actors for a talking dog.

There’s no avoiding the truth. We — Americans — can’t see past our noses. How the hell can we claim ourselves as qualified to tell others how to vote?

The following quote is taken from the link above. It shows the pure bias that individuals necessarily possess and carry with them to the polls:

Can you explain your meaning in how you (Obama) would “Share the wealth” fairly?

I understand that there are many in need and that the US is doing much to help- in some cases, too much, thus enabling others to make poor choices. You scare me when I hear you say that you believe in sharing the wealth. What happened to the “work ethic ” that has helped this country prosper?

Do you mean that someone who gets up early and works two jobs (therefore earning a higher salary) should share what his earnings with someone who sleeps in, calls in sick and gets fired?

Do you mean that a student who applies himself diligently during his schooling, studies late into the night and gives up much of his free time to do this, who then gets a higher paying job than the student who “goofs off”, should then have to share his hard earned salary with the other despite the poor choices he made?

Are you concerned that this would diminish the desire of students to work hard, once they learn that it doesn’t matter- others will be made to share their wealth with them?

While this may seem to be an easily acceptable generalization to many people, it’s equally as easy for others to realize that a lack of work ethic is not the reason many families fall on hard times. To the latter group, “sharing the wealth” may not be such an outlandish proposition.

This kind of scenario directly addresses the nature of the democratic beast we call our country.

The downside to democracy is that one group always loses. A highly divided nation — say, one divided by 6 percent in national polls — exacerbates the loss for the losing group, which is unfortunate when the country is question is home to about 302 million people.

I think people need to realize that, no matter which candidate is elected, the next president is going to be an American working for Americans. He will address the economy the efficiently as is possible. It’s a given that some of us will hurt as a result of either candidate’s policy, but that’s how compromise works. National elections have always been a huge, democratic forum for compromise, and this year will be no exception.

Tighten your belts, shut your mouths and vote the way you want, but don’t threaten to leave the country if the “other guy” gets voted into the Oval Office.

Sean Hannity has renewed his contract with the lovable gang from FoxNews. His new deal, according to the New York Times, will keep him on the air through the 2012 presidential election.

Honestly, this news will allow me to sleep better at night. The oft-complained about liberal media bias needs an anti-compromise conservative heavyweight to counterbalance the commentary of most of the nation’s news journalists.

We knew Bill O’Reilly wasn’t going anywhere, but we needed a little more reassurance. Rush Limbaugh is a tired act, Neal Boortz wishes he was Limbaugh and it’s impossible to take a grown man who voluntarily wears gaudy bow ties seriously — excuse me for saying so, Tucker Carlson.

FoxNews has obviously renewed Hannity’s contract to preserve their conservative “shock jock” reputation that holds audiences’ attentions because you never know what kind of unwavering stupidity men like Hannity and O’Reilly will spout next.

The print media may be biased, but little good comes from employing neo-conservatives who live to shout down people who disagree with them. At least with print conversations can be both started and maintained without a guarantee of interruption and mocking.

Politics might be the most frustrating topic I have ever tried to cover. For so many suit-and-tie clones to simultaneously spew lies and contort their words to take meanings they’ve never had before makes me want to vomit.

The more “informed” I become, the less I want to vote. It is a perfectly inversely proportional equation.

These days a withering Sen. John McCain seems to be resorting to Grand Ol’ Party political strategy — let’s smear the other guy until he can’t breathe, talk, defend himself or focus on anything relevant. McCain’s attempts at reiventing himself remind me of an aging celebrity who, rather than humbly fading into the twilight of her career, continues to reinvent herself.

That’s right, Madonna, has yet another album where she has redone her image and so on and so forth. It’s tired, it’s old and it’s embarrassing.

Guess how she’s “reinvented” herself this time? She’s wearing bustiers, short shorts and has “put a slightly different spin on familiar tunes,” according to the USA Today.

Sound familiar? The Republican Party delves deeper into partisan politics and insults every day as he realizes his momentum has slowed and his campaign’s tide is beginning to go out.

Thursday’s vice presidential debates revealed little we don’t already know about the potential presidential second bananas.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin doesn’t have a full understanding of this campaign, and her accent makes me cringe. Her opponent, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, contradicted hisprevious stance in certain finance-related Senate votes, but tried to twist the current situation to appear to be Sen. John McCain’s fault.

What we have here is a case of who-gives-a-damn.

I don’t know how Palin got to where she is, but someone was smoking something. As for Biden, he sounds more like former democratic candidate John Kerry — exactly what they don’t need.

Given these events, I’m not surprised that America (and Yahoo.com) decided that Hannah Montana’s fake tan was as groundbreaking as the debates.