Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Democracy

Political ideology panders to the imagination very much like pundits persuade the intellectually meek and corruptible. I imagine the efforts of a candidate. He or she boldly delivers unabashed honesty and everyone recognizes it as such. My vote is clear and crisp. It is a mountainous lake in the summer and I dive into its refreshing body to immerse myself in certainty. The waters and my choice are clear. People stand up and voice their political outrage frighteningly loud, only here they are heard. Their chorus reverberates in my chest and gives me resolution.



But this is not our reality in America. It is the true ideology of democracy: the governmental process we long for and will never have.

The truth is that my vote is no longer based on the most qualified or inspirational, but the most laudably deplorable. This vote is no longer about who has the best policy or rhetoric, endorsement or campaign, but has developed into who has the most egregious affronts. Senator John McCain has insinuatingly or directly accused Senator Barrack Obama of being a terrorist, socialist, and novice more frequently than eliciting his own presidential qualifications. Even after bombastic displays of absolute ignorant hatred from his supporters, even after his campaign fell afoul with its own aforementioned disseminations, even after his campaign declared a new tactic to avoid further entanglement with such negativism, Mr. McCain continues his recklessly slanderous and divisive campaigning. Perhaps this is the point of no return. Whatever the truth may be, it is not coming from Mr. McCain's mouth.

I no longer will vote for Obama because of qualifications, but because of the verbal assaults on humanity committed by the McCain campaign. If you doubt he will follow the status quo, then listen to how he speaks about his adversary. Even after death threats of an abhorrent nature, Mr. McCain refuses to halt his and his running mate's volatile logorrhea.

I'm voting for Obama because I unfathomably disapprove of McCain.Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Indepence that 'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness' are 'inalienable rights'. But, like happiness, democracy is never a destination that is reached. It is a process of traveling that we must embrace in order to better understand ourselves and realize our wildest political, ideological panderings.

And the Truth Set Me Free

"I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said: such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is he is not a Muslim; he's a Christian, has always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, "What if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country?" The answer's "No, that's not America." Is there something wrong with some 7-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion he's Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

"I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery. And she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards -- Purple Heart, Bronze Star; showed that he died in Iraq; gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross. It didn't have a Star of David. It had a crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Kahn, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he could go serve his country, and he gave his life."

~General Colin Powell

Galvanize the Pen

Typological organization helps the mind to make sense of the world around it. With it, we are able to assert that 'all rats are rodents, but not all rodents are rats'. This is an important capability, but has been inappropriately defined by political spinning and rhetoric for too long. It is, essential, a linguistic tactic to persuade how you perceive the government.

'All democrats are liberal and all republicans are conservative' are typological labels commonly held to be true. In news, interviews, debates, and various forums, democrats and republicans proudly boast their titles because they believe in their position fervently (or that it will at least bring them more capital in behaving as such). But this relationship between the party and the title is unique for several reasons.

As mentioned, one can redoubtably claim liberal or conservative ties in association with respects to political affiliations. However, a party member can use that very label as a prejoritive against an opposing member in a disagreement with pugnacious disdain. Popularly, the best response is no response. The two pundits/politicians/reporters/citizens/etc. continue on with the argument, inflamed and without addressing the rather bizarre semantic switch. It is not the turning of a label on the labeled, but the history and definitions behind that makes this grotesquely unique.

The word 'conservative' comes from Latin's conservātīvus, the root of which is conservāre, meaning 'to conserve; to save'. This word is akin to servīre , 'to serve' or servus, 'slave'. It is defined as 'tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions'. Denotatively, 'conservative' views are held to maintain current traditions.

The word 'liberal' comes from Old French, meaning 'befitting the free men, noble, generous'. In English today, liberal is defined as 'favorable to progress or reform', or 'given freely or abundantly'.

Comparing the etymological information of these labels can be perplexing; for Americans asserting that freedom is the most important characteristic of our nation, one would think the choice of labels is unquestionably clear. Even the current administration used 'liberal' in reassuring the American public that we are 'liberators' in Iraq and viewed as such. This conundrum furthers when considering the party names themselves.

The party name 'democrat' comes from 'democracy', the very type of government Americans believe they live under, believe the fight and die for. However, they do not. Americans live under a republic, the root of the party name 'republican'. A democratic nation is defined as having a 'government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system'. Americans live under a republic. A republic nation is defined as a 'state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them'.

To recap: democrats are 'befitting the free men' and have taken the name of the type of government Americans naively convince themselves they live under; republicans are 'disposed to current views' and have taken the name of the true current government of the United States. Another government using the title 'republic' is 'The People's Republic of China', a nation vehemently demonized by the Republican Party as being 'communist'. To quickly digress, communism's disagreeability comes from concerns of the government's high involvement in the financial institutions, such as using taxpayers' money to invest in failing and prominent banks.

The reason why America is divided does not lay within our current political dilemmas, but in the very language used. The American responsibility today is to galvanize the pen as mightier by taking control of the language used against the masses. All democrats and republicans may be liberals and conservatives, respectively. But not all liberals and conservatives are respectively linked.


The true war is not abroad. It is and has been here, and it is for your mind.

A Political Forecast

It isn’t difficult for an individual with moderate faculties to describe the weather. A myriad of adjectives lay at our disposal to describe our stratospheric happenings. Almost with vivid clarity, we can close our eyes and imagine the colorless or articulate paint recreating the world inside. So why is it so difficult to describe the political climate? It’s not much different.

Depending on where you live, the weather of former presidents is quite describable. Those having lived through the Clinton era on the West Coast might describe the political weather as having been sunny, for the most part, interrupted only by light showers. The Midwest most likely thought of it as a constant downpour, regardless of robust economic growth, record low unemployment rates, and unprecedented peace meetings. Undoubtedly, according to polls, President Bush is a volatile, albeit imbecilic storm. Hurricane Katrina was more than just the severe mishandlings of the Bush Administration, but also an outrageously felt metaphor for said administration: disastrous, incomprehensible, and leaving damage that will take years to repair.

The American people are juxtaposed faced with a choice between Senator Obama, an inspirational orator with words like a morning fog, and Senator McCain, a stifling and humid windstorm. A morning fog is pleasant in its calm stillness, but unsettles the nerves with opacity. With fog, one can never be sure if what will follow will be a glorious sunny day or bleak darkness. Dangers in harbored by fog are constant in their mysteriousness. A humid windstorm is predictably unbearable and misleading in its direction. It is triggered by perpetual fronts of hot air, hot air that promulgates lies so outrageous and “enhanced truths” so unfathomable, people sweat the possibility of its continuation for a potential eight years.

Senator Obama once inspired me. He opined from the heart and unwaveringly delivered to the people unabashed foresight and a reassurance that politicians still listen. However, he later proved that he was, in fact, a politician: He changed his policy on offshore drilling and has yet to deliver a rebuttal to outlandish McCain ads with the same former fervor. Some say that he is merely playing the game, but who says he has to? He can be the first in decades to define it! If he wants to be the harbinger of change, then he must live it without doubt and refuse to kowtow to those who fear it.

John McCain once inspired me as well. I was awestruck by the combination of his status as a former P.O.W. and his candidly pleasant demeanor. I enjoyed how he verbally stood against the G.O.P. on several issues, including stem cell research, torture, and offshore drilling. Most of that has changed, camouflaging him deeper into the party; he no longer is demanding the cessation of Guantanamo Bay and extraordinary renditions, and he hails offshore drilling as every families’ economic salvation. And why wouldn’t he? He could accurately describe to you the color of the pocket lint of monstrous oil conglomerates. It only takes a brisk walk through the streets of Puerto Vallarta to push you into an air conditioned building with a soft seat and a cold drink, and I find listening to Senator McCain and Governor Palin the same: exhausting.

The question remains: What will the weather be like? That depends. Which do you prefer? Personally, I want another choice. I want the two-party system to offer more than just rain or sun, humidity or dryness, heat or chill. I want snow, where each flake is unique and I can choose between more than just two disagreeable iconic figures. Until then, I am forced to endure uncertainty and lethargy. In doing so, I must chose uncertainty, for I’d rather not know my suffering than willingly subject myself to it.

Blame Eugene Levy

Today started stressfully. After crashing a party at the Benson Hotel last night, drinking free booze, and dancing with strangers in a banquet room, a palpable hangover swirled in my head and stomach like a whale. It left a terrible aftertaste. However, it wasn't nearly as bad as the one left by the news that I'd have to pay for the airfare to Thailand before being reimbursed. Prices range from $1500 to $2900. After finding that out, I wasn't sure whether it was D.A.D.S. (day after drinking shits) or the stress that was causing my diarrhea.

Probably both.

It was at breakfast that I discovered a rewarding and effectively therapeutic remedy. Other gimmicky solutions exist (fiber, yoga, John Wayne movies), but this one does what the others don't: It irrationally projects your problems onto a completely uninvolved celebrity. I find the perfectly unnecessary personification of my life's transgressions to be Eugene Levy.

Consider this: Is it easier to approach unfortunate dealings with supreme equanimity or to just say, 'Hey! You know, Eugene Levy has made more shit that a misdiagnosed, lactose intolerant baby! Why should I suffer?' I shouldn't. Neither should you. He "starred in" not only the fourth (an egregious offense alone), but the fifth, FIFTH!, American Pie installments. You didn't. This is nothing short of whoring out artistic integrity, a 'selling the soul for Alf pogs,' if you will. It's not your fault the landlord is evicting you, it should be his! Are you convinced yet? I'm telling you, it works.

Did your lover sleep with the Lakers or the entire cast of Rent? Eugene Levy was in Cheaper by the Dozen 2. Lose your house and all your material possessions in a fire? He was in Dumb and Dumberer. Unexpectedly run out of mustard? Bringing Down the House. Bankruptcy? The Man. Cancer? Richie Rich's Christmas List. Not even Macauly Culkin put down the ring and crawled out from the darkness for that one! Levy's talent is paltry and his filmography is bountiful, a tremendously tragic combination. He deserves all the malice we can summit.

That is why I suggest you email him whenever you suffer, no matter the amount. Let him now how much you loathe him for stubbing your toe. Tell him mom being in the hospital is in direct correlation to New York Minute with the Olsen twins. After all, you didn't direct The Martin Short Show. He did. You weren't on SCTV. He was. Retribution won't manifest itself, so start manifesting it yourself.

I already have.

Other acceptable recipients of your misplaced abhorrence are, but are not limited to: Martin Short, Rick Moranis, Eddie Murphy, Dan Akroyd, Martin Lawrence, Steve Martin, and Queen Latifa. If you have any other ideas, please leave them in the comments below.

Eugene Levy's Offical Fansite email: mifbob@hotmail.com.

Eugene Levy's Filmography: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0506405/