Tuesday, November 02, 2010

Tuesday Tunes, vol 62 - In the Hall of the Mountain King

Today's Tuesday Tunes are brought to you by Jack because I ain't got Jack for Tuesday Tunes today.  I figured that I could ramble on for a few paragraphs then throw you a tune or two.  How's that?

Trouble is, what should I ramble on about?  I s'pose I could start with the election because today is election day.  I'm also counting down the minutes until Indecision 2010 (with Jon Stewart and Steve Colbert, who else?)  Can't wait for that.  It's my favorite part of election day.  I could also tell you about my voting strategies and ways in the which I simplify politics.

I've simplified democrats and republicans and the differences that lie therein, so I won't repeat that.  How about I simplify politics in general this time?  It'll knock your socks off, so pull up those socks and hang tight!

Politics are about money.  (P=M)

Gasp!  I know!  It's such a surprise to you, I can sense it through the innerwires.

Politicians are responsible for spending money.  They decide what funds go where, so ultimately, politics are just about cash.  You might argue that there are some political issues that have nothing to do with cash, like law making and military defense, but ultimately those two require -- and are about -- cash.  If they establish a law,  how will that law be enforced?  We all know an unenforced law isn't worth piddly, and in order to enforce a law, lawmakers must pay enforcers to do the enforcing.  (Aside: Did you see that?  I used some form of "enforce" four times in one little sentence.)  It's a no-brainer to see that defense is about money as well, no explanation needed there.  It's a hot topic, one that's got that nasty word "funding" fueling it's fire.  I guess you could argue that certain equal rights issues are not about money, but I would challenge that as well.  Equal rights means equal cash.

So there you go, politics are about money. (P=M)  If politics are about money, and politics are a pain in everyone's hiney, let's get rid of the cash.  We could live on flowers, free love and Maui Wowie.


Now, I'll move on to the complicated simplicity of casting my votes:
inc(out) + if(Sen)wi(Spouse) - J/n

(If incumbent, vote out + if Senator, write in Spouse - all judges)

Would you care for an explanation?


If Incumbent, Vote Out inc(out):
This means that if the candidate is already in office, I will vote for the opposing politician.  Why do I do this?  Because politicians become toxically out-of-touch and deviously entitled after they have been in office a while.  Just my opinion of course.  I honestly believe the whole bipartisan situation could be diluted a bit by term limits.  (Notice I said diluted, not illuminated.) If a senator is only in office, say two terms max (12 years), and a congressman 3 terms (6 years), then you can bet they'll think twice about what types of laws they pass.  If a senator knows before-hand that they must go out into the real world -- the one in which you and I live, where we must create and sell goods and services to survive -- you can bet Annie's-Bottom-Ass-Dollar that they'll vote differently.  Now they spend most of their lifetimes making rules, then living off the senatorial fat of it's entitled retirement.  Senators and congressmen don't necessarily have to live by the rules once they are retired and finished with their supposed public service.  They don't need to earn a living selling a good or service.


If Senator, Write in Spouse if(Sen)wi(Spouse):
Every time a senator position shows up, I write in my beloved Spouse.  I do this because Utah is totally lame.  If a republican is up for election, the race is a snooze.  The republican always win.  Yawn.  It doesn't matter what the guy stands for, or what he intends to do, the republican always wins.  Take the Mike Lee race for example.  Everyone knows that Mike Lee is going to win.  He could be the right guy for the job for all I know, but the concept of total republican versus total democrat bugs me.  What about Oral Snatch?  He should be an exception, correct?  Nope.  Gonna write in The Spouse when he comes up too.  That guy has been in office a hundred years.  Get him out.

Minus all Judges (-J/n):
This one is the easiest.  If you're a judge, then I vote no.  Nothing personal, that's just how I roll.  You might think this unthoughtful, irresponsible, or flippant, but think about it... when was the last time you had a judge in your area voted against?  Never.  Since when was being an elected judge a life-long calling?  I'm just here to add a little balance -- however small it might be.

To sum it all up, I have one final thought.  And I'm going to write it three times so that you'll read it three times and think about it three times:

What politicians do is (almost) never undone.
What politicians do is (almost) never undone.
What politicians do is (almost) never undone.

I have kids with futures.  You prolly do too.  I want politicians to show extreme care and caution for what they do, because what they do is (almost) never undone.

(Okay, I lied.  That was four times.)  

Now how 'bout a tune?
Peer Gynt Suite #1, Op. 46 - In The Hall Of The Mountain King - Edvard Grieg

Give it a listen (make sure you up the volume.)  Sounds all politicky right?  I know, right!  Now excuse me while I turn on the tube and wait for Indecision 2010.

-

4 comments:

Jessica said...

Three cheers for Grieg!

Three cheers for Indecision 2010!

Clint said...

Did you know that senators and congress people can trade on inside information? Let's say senator H. (no subliminal suggestion there ;)) is a member of a defense appropriations committee and that same committee is discussing whether contractor B is qualified to be awarded a $3 Billion contract. If the hot wind of the committee is blowing in favor of awarding the contract, senator B can buy contractor B's stock BEFORE that decision is made public. Not a bad gig. Time to clean house / senate.

Clint said...

I mean't senator H can buy contractor B's stock. Here are a few links for anyone interested.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-14/it-isn-t-insider-trading-when-congressmen-do-it-commentary-by-ann-woolner.html

http://www.pennumbra.com/issues/pdfs/158-5/Jerke.pdf

Blackdog said...

I vote out everyone. Just seems like the right thing to do.