• Patty Murray; a fiscal conservative?

    So, now I’m supposed to believe Senator Patty Murray, according to her campaign ads, is a fiscal conservative?

    Are you kidding me?

    Are Washington state voters really this leftist ideological or simply politically malleable? Are voters going to buy her Washington state face, so they can send her Washington D.C. face back to the senate again?

    Or will we finally come to our senses and send folks back who will stem the bleeding, not increase the size of the wound?

    I guess we’ll see next Tuesday.

  • Molest campaign signs; step on the flag.

    I heard a radio host last week talking about some guy who’s been riding his motorcycle around the greater Seattle area in the middle of the night slashing political signs with a box cutter. What kind of person does this?

    One who holds republican democracy in contempt.

    Think about what a person like this is willing to do. They obviously have no compunction subverting the American election process. This devious tack is effective in that, some folks find out about candidates first, sometimes only, through these signs.

    The thing is, when the public is continually barraged by negative political ads, it’s no wonder such ancillary activities occur. I’m not talking about ads portraying the legitimate record of a candidate, which may indeed be negative. I’m talking about outright lies some tell about each other.

    If a candidate or their supporters are willing to lie to defeat an opponent, then is it a stretch to imagine someone would damage or abscond with a campaign sign? Not really.

    I could no more steal or vandalize a political sign with which I disagree, than I could place an American flag on the ground and step on it. To me, the two acts are one in the same.

  • Don’t be fooled by political ads. You’re smarter than that.

    What is in our political DNA that makes some voters so susceptible to the mere words politicians speak and so forgiving of their actions? Now, certainly politicians differ, and there are good, honorable politicians—well, probably. However, they seem too few and far between.

    The fluctuation in polls reflects this susceptibility. Too often, between one poll showing a certain candidate ahead, to the next poll showing that candidate falling behind, the only differentiation in the interim are the words they, their representatives, or their opponents have spoken in speeches and in political ads for and against. Simple words and images, and somehow a significant number of the electorate will change their positions, thus demonstrating a brittle commitment to their candidate, initiative, or whatever.

    A month or so ago I heard a blurb from a speech President Obama made to students, which was admittedly good, and inspiring. He admonished them to work hard and pursue their educational and life dreams—on their own terms. Great stuff, indeed. However, he speaks these words, while at the same time advocating for policies that work towards reducing these students ability to do things, “on their own terms.” For example, he now forces them to go to the government for student loans.

    These politician’s words and actions affect voters in two ways: One, is the contradiction between what the politician promises, compared with what they deliver, once in office. Two, is when voters let their guy off the hook for inappropriate, or even illegal, behavior simply because it is their guy, when they would eviscerate the other guy for the very same behavior.

    More voters should try what libertarians strive for, and demonstrate, intellectual honesty and political consistency. Hold all office holders to their promises and to honorable behavior, at least while they’re representing us.