Late-Night Television

I was watching Bill Maher's show Real Time on HBO last night as I was lying in bed, and thought there were a few things worth mentioning. While I generally feel that Maher is not very acceptable of the few conservative guests he has on the show, I was shocked by what occurred last night. His first guess was former senator Allen Simpson of Wyoming, a Republican with liberal social views. Maher was very polite to start the interview, and continued the effort throughout. However, Simpson constantly tried to attack Maher for his cynical humor, and even accused Maher of gay-bashing at one point. I am not sure where this aggression came from, or perhaps he was trying to be the conservative version of Jon Stewart on Crossfire, but either way, I was left questioning his integrity. He incorrectly accused Maher of gay-bashing while leaders of his own party are trying to push an amendment against gay-marriage. It just wasn't what you would expect to see from a supposedly diplomatic politician, but the more interesting part of the show followed this tirade.
Maher followed this interview with his three-guest panel, among whom was Andrew Sullivan, the popular conservative blogger. Andrew Sullivan made several good points, namely bringing to light the conflagration of morals and faith in this election, instead pointing out that the two parties merely have different morals, and that the Republicans' are more faith-based, an aspect I would argue against in the political realm. If we continue to move towards faith-based politics, there will be no true separation of church and state, which is certainly a mistake in a "democratic" nation.

This is the end...

Well, the election mayhem is finally over. Earlier this week Kerry conceded the election and Bush gave his acceptance speech. I think the scariest thing about the post-election happenings for me is that Bush's administration has repeatedly used the word "mandate" to describe this election. I'm afraid that in his second term, Bush will strive to cater more to the tastes of his conservative Christian base, whose values do not necessarily represent those of the people who gave him their votes. In nationwide exit polls, almost two-thirds of voters supported some kind of legalized gay marriage or civil union, which shows that these conservative values are not necessarily supported by the majority vote that Bush earned. I feel as though this election represented again a situation in which too many citizens were choosing "between the lesser of two evils."
Instead of seeing this as part of a greater problem in America, Bush's predicted push towards the right in his second term could further polarize the nation, creating an even worse political environment than we already have. Another issue I have with this election is that the media and the Republican party have billed this victory as one that was built on morality, indicating that Republican voters voted based on morality and Democrats did not. I take offense to this because I happen to feel that religion and morality should not be so easily confused, as I happen to feel that I have a strong set of morals but a minimal influence of faith. I cannot understand how these religious ideals that voters expressed at the polls can be even considered morality, as they are exclusive of large groups of people (gays most predominantly), and in a sense more violent than the Democratic ideals (voting for aggressive foreign policy rather than diplomatic). This is something that would indicate again a greater problem in America, which is that the media can very easily control which side of an issue we see, as even the majority of democrats have conceded that this "push for morality" is what has given the Republicans such an edge. I would argue that it is more the difference in religious influence on the sphere of politics and the difference in lifestyle that have separated so clearly the two parties in our country, and this is something we must work to fix now, before our country is torn apart by this ever-expanding political divide.

Election Night Woes

And so election night went exactly as I feared it would... I watched as CNN just teased me, keeping Kerry close enough to conceivably win throughout the night, never giving him any real edge. The most frustrating part of last night, however, was the fact that I would not have really been much happier had Kerry won. It is a travesty when such a great percentage of the people are not supportive of either candidate, but vote for one because they dislike the other even more. I also found it very disappointing that such a great number of people are so misinformed on the issues of the election. I was watching last night in a fairly divided room, with 5 Kerry supporters (including myself...) and 4 Bush supporters. While we were all just trying to have a good time on election night, we happened to slip into political discussion on several occasions. I was asking one Bush supporter why he favored Bush, and his response was that it came down to him feeling safer when he goes to sleep at night with Bush in office than he would were Kerry in office. This statement just rings of ignorance, as anyone who really paid attention this election would know the terrorists aren't really going to decide whether or not to attack us based on who is president. Regardless of how much you are willing to spend on security, there will always be a way to inflict severe damage on your country (take Israel for example). It was this great sense of ignorance and indifference about the election that really bothered me, even more than Bush being elected for another four years, and I think it is indicative of much greater problems in America.

Why Kerry Will Win

John Kerry will win tomorrow's presidential election. Until last week, I was entirely convinced otherwise, but recent events have changed my mind. The Red Sox, of John Kerry's home state Massachusetts, won the World Series for the first time since 1918. And more importantly, the Packers beat the Redskins in Washington yesterday. For those of you who do not follow sports very closely, the result of the last Redskins home game before the election has successfully predicted the result of the election ever since FDR won for the second time (1936). When the Redskins win, the incumbent party wins, and when they lose the challengers take over the White House.
But more seriously, I feel John Kerry will win the election mostly because I really want him to. I am not a big believer in superstition, so no, the Red Sox and Redskins will not determine the result of the election. But I do feel like the country has had such a strong reaction to Bush's actions in office that it will be extremely hard for him to win the election. According to the site I gave a link to a few weeks ago, www.electoral-vote.com, Kerry should get 298 electoral votes to Bush's 231 tomorrow. The polls listed on the site are split almost exactly evenly, with Fox News, the Pew poll, and the Greenberg poll giving a slight edge to Kerry, and Newsweek, CNN, CBS, and ABC giving a slight edge to Bush. In 2000, almost every poll gave the advantage to Bush, but Gore went on to win the popular vote anyway. So perhaps the polls aren't a better indicator than the Redskins and Red Sox after all. So while there is no way to really know which candidate will come out on top until tomorrow (or perhaps a couple months from now if it goes to the courts again), my instinct tells me that Kerry will win, and so that's my final prediction.

The Red Sox are Amazing

The Red Sox slayed the mighty Yankees. Not only did they do so in Game 7 of the playoffs, they did it after being down 3-0. This is an event for the ages. If you ask my grandchildren who won this series, they will tell you. How does this relate to the election? Not at all. But it's worth mentioning, because I would be willing to bet that this victory for the Red Sox is more memorable in 80 years than who won this presidential election. If John Kerry is to lose, he will quickly be shuffled into the pool of less than memorable losers, such as Dukakis, Dole, and Gore. His political career will be over. If George W. Bush loses, his political career will also end, and he will likely live out the rest of his life in relative obscurity, much like his father. So with so much riding on the vote in a couple weeks, maybe the real drama is in the election after all. But I still vote for the Red Sox beating the Yankees.

Religion in Politics

The American government has long prided itself on the separation of church and state, but the truth of the matter is that religion has remained an important part of politics throughout our history. It was a big deal when John F. Kennedy became the first Catholic president, in each election the religion of the candidates is always examined by the media, and in the current administration we have witnessed a president who is not afraid to bring passages of the Bible into his public campaign addresses. President Clinton once caused controversy when quoting Jewish prayer in a speech. While the influence of religion on politics is undeniable, in an ideal scenario religion would not enter directly into the realm of politics.
While the good aspects of religion cannot be ignored, religion has been too frequently used to justify irrational, inhumane acts. Instead of allowing politicians to use religion as a crutch, we as citizens should make them justify their logic and prove to us that they are working in our best interests. It is not democratic for an elected official to make decisions based on their individual religious convictions rather than the public interest, and it should not be tolerated in a nation that defines itself by its democratic nature.

Cheney's Attack on Kerry

In this morning's New York Times I read another interesting article about Cheney campaigning through the use of fear. Cheney has again begun making ominous statements about what could happen to our country if we elect Kerry to president, invoking images of terrorists running around in America's biggest cities with nuclear weaponry. Not only should he be chided for this eggregious and unfounded attack on his opponents, but for the sheer absurdity of his claim. There is no evidence of any terrorist organization possessing nuclear weapons, or of any reason why this would be a more likely scenario should America choose Kerry over Bush this November. These shameless attacks need to be stopped, and should be met with disgust by the American people. It baffles me that this could possibly be an effective campaigning tool, or that Bush/Cheney could be ahead in the poll when they are using such underhanded tactics to gain votes. To read more about Cheney's remarks, go to http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/politics/campaign/20cheney.html?oref=login

Tonight's Presidential Debate

So I've made the decision not to watch tonight's presidential debate. While some of you claim that as an informed citizen, it is my duty to watch the most direct contact the two presidential candidates will have this campaign season, as it gives the most accurate representation of their platforms and characters alike. However, the truth is that the first two debates solidified my original thought on the modern version of the presidential debate. Since the candidates never seem to be forced into directly responding to the questions, what the viewers of the debate receive is more like a fragmented version of the candidates' generic campaign speeches. For this reason, I've decided to skip the debate tonight in order to go see Team America: World Police. I'm hoping that the movie will give slightly more critical political insight than the debate can offer.