I've been tellin ppl for a while now..this isn't JUST a 2-party system, there are other parties to vote for. But, nobody will. Why is that? Are the two that are in there just the only ones rich enough to plaster themselves all over the tv and radio? Does nobody know theres other parties? Hell, we even have a communist party, a nazi party, and a green party. Fuck voting Dem/Rep..lets try something NEW!!
I agree with MrBlack totally. This is the reason this year I Am voting 3rd party. Nader is probably the best 3rd out there right now. This is a sad fact but it is the truth. Nader is our most likely. We do have the Communist party or US, or the Green Party, The Reform part. ANything to get a 3rd party the required 5% of voting that they need to gain government funding for the next election. Vote someone other than Bush/Kerry. Those two are both lumps on a log
We need a political section......
-
homer pimpson
Re: We need a political section......
Most of our early wars were fought here on our own land (well, it wasn't ours to begin with, but thats beside the point). We didn't start goin out and fighting on other peoples land until (relatively) lately. The past century is filled with wars we started or had an interest in the outcome of. We've put so many leaders into power, and then taken them back out again, it's very much a government conspiracy to control as many other governments as we can.
Actually, the US has been attacking other nations since the beginning as well. The only land we purchased instead of took by force was the Louisiana territory, and even that was a shady ripoff. Face it, the US has always been, and will always be, good at killing people.
You think it's a government conspiracy, but there is a lot to do with protecting our best interests. The world is not unified, and there are people out there that want to kill you. If it wasn't the Nazi's, it's the Al-queda, and so on. The US does the smart thing by being the most powerful nation in the world and only tolerating friendly governments. Think about this: What do you think the world would be like if the Russian government hadn't collapsed?
Another thing I don't whole-heartedly agree with is we are not a free-thinking people. I don't understand. In this country today there are thousands if not millions of independant press papers, millions of political activists, no limits on literature and film, and the list goes on. People are free to do what they want, and spread their way of thinking to others. Of course, that doesn't mean there aren't dumb people that don't care out there, but anyone willing to do the research can discover other political groups. Just because the democrats and republicans happen to be the only ones that air ads and are involved in the national press doesn't mean they are brainwashing you to vote for them. You want to see more options? Show your support through funding and helping them spread their message. The only reason you don't hear about other parties is because no one cares about them. If they were popular they'd get advertising and press time.
Now, let me let you in on a little secret: it doesn't matter who you vote for. Electoral collage picks the president. And it doesn't matter who gets elected. They can't do anything except press the nuke button without approval from congress.
Actually, the US has been attacking other nations since the beginning as well. The only land we purchased instead of took by force was the Louisiana territory, and even that was a shady ripoff. Face it, the US has always been, and will always be, good at killing people.
You think it's a government conspiracy, but there is a lot to do with protecting our best interests. The world is not unified, and there are people out there that want to kill you. If it wasn't the Nazi's, it's the Al-queda, and so on. The US does the smart thing by being the most powerful nation in the world and only tolerating friendly governments. Think about this: What do you think the world would be like if the Russian government hadn't collapsed?
Another thing I don't whole-heartedly agree with is we are not a free-thinking people. I don't understand. In this country today there are thousands if not millions of independant press papers, millions of political activists, no limits on literature and film, and the list goes on. People are free to do what they want, and spread their way of thinking to others. Of course, that doesn't mean there aren't dumb people that don't care out there, but anyone willing to do the research can discover other political groups. Just because the democrats and republicans happen to be the only ones that air ads and are involved in the national press doesn't mean they are brainwashing you to vote for them. You want to see more options? Show your support through funding and helping them spread their message. The only reason you don't hear about other parties is because no one cares about them. If they were popular they'd get advertising and press time.
Now, let me let you in on a little secret: it doesn't matter who you vote for. Electoral collage picks the president. And it doesn't matter who gets elected. They can't do anything except press the nuke button without approval from congress.
Re: We need a political section......
Actually, the US has been attacking other nations since the beginning as well. The only land we purchased instead of took by force was the Louisiana territory, and even that was a shady ripoff. Face it, the US has always been, and will always be, good at killing people.
You think it's a government conspiracy, but there is a lot to do with protecting our best interests. The world is not unified, and there are people out there that want to kill you. If it wasn't the Nazi's, it's the Al-queda, and so on. The US does the smart thing by being the most powerful nation in the world and only tolerating friendly governments. Think about this: What do you think the world would be like if the Russian government hadn't collapsed?
The smart thing isn't always force. Yes, the US did a real good job at building up the empire and military early on. But now that the world is pretty much claimed, all there is left is to fight over it, or move on to other planets/moons.
However, that takes more resources than we could possibly manage on our own, so we end up spreading our will over our neighbors, then over anyone who has what we want (oil in the mid-east). We will stock-pile everything we have of our own natural resources, and use everyone elses.
But I'm rambling on about nothing. You may be right about people out there who want to kill us. But, you gotta look at it from outside the US. Why do they wanna kill us? Yes, the muslim's say that all infedels must die, but there are so many muslims living in the US, and I don't see them killing off all us infedels.
The one's I see killing us, in the mid-east, are the ones that we have been bombing for decades. Same with al-Queda. If we hadn't been bombing them for the past 30+ years, they might not have been so mad at us to fly a couple planes into a couple towers -- intersting side note about that, one of the Columbine students had written out a plan to do just that, before they went on that massacre...Was funny watching a clip of the reporter saying that then saying how much fantasy that was.
I get sidetracked alot..my apologies.
Just about every country in the mid-east has had good reason to want us dead. We are constantly meddling in their political or economic affairs. Time and time again, we have stepped in, either formally, or secretly (and later declassified), and changed things around, forcibly for the most part. We put Saddam into power, then let him stay there thru the 80s, even when talk of his tortures were spreading, we left him in power. We may have finally taken him out this time, seemingly for the good, but I'm sure the real reason was because he stopped taking orders from the US. Clinton left him alone, because he was more concerned with our own problems, which have been let go for far too long. At least, that's how it looks, but of course, we were still bombing their cities on a daily basis.
Damnit. I completely lost my train of thought when the phone rang. So, I'm done tryin to get it back.
Another thing I don't whole-heartedly agree with is we are not a free-thinking people. I don't understand. In this country today there are thousands if not millions of independant press papers, millions of political activists, no limits on literature and film, and the list goes on. People are free to do what they want, and spread their way of thinking to others. Of course, that doesn't mean there aren't dumb people that don't care out there, but anyone willing to do the research can discover other political groups. Just because the democrats and republicans happen to be the only ones that air ads and are involved in the national press doesn't mean they are brainwashing you to vote for them. You want to see more options? Show your support through funding and helping them spread their message. The only reason you don't hear about other parties is because no one cares about them. If they were popular they'd get advertising and press time.
The vast majority of our country has become, basically, mindless autonomotons that follow everything their televisions tell them. Of course, we do have those elite few who actually care enough to try to make changes. But when it's only a small percentage, very little change actually gets done. Now, Bush showed us that if we could properly rally the masses, things could actually be accomplished. He managed to do it, using 9/11 as the motivating factor. However, he was praying on the fear his administration was feeding everyone through the media. He was quick to jump on that. It was smart, I'll give him that.
The thing is, nobody is willing to do their research. I say nobody, speaking of the rather large group of middle class American's who are working 50+ hours a week to make their minimum payments, while at the same time, racking up more bills eating out at McDonalds or Burger King because they don't have the time to cook a decent meal while they are sitting down in front of their huge, expensive televisions and watching McDonalds or Burger King commercials telling them to eat more, because now their food is only 7grams of fat. Yes, I know that was a run-on sentence, but I don't care.
With the little amount of time everyone has to do their normal everyday things, they are left even less time for things like political research. So, they expect the media to tell us. Of course, television media is only interested in ratings. They may say that, as a news source, they are neutral and unbiased, but when your a television program, and you have commercials, you have sponsors who pay for your anchor man in his spiffy new suit, or the local weatherman and his wacky antics. As long as the all-mighty dollar runs that station, there will be some influence in what you hear. It may be subtle and take a long time to see, or you might see it right out.
Paper news was much more unbiased, and was always right there for any story. Because, as a paper, you can cover everything that happened, within, of course, a limited about of paper-space. TV news is only limited to 30 or 60 minute segments, and not even that with commercials, so alot is left out, not covered, or ignored. Also, since there is always competition, even in news broadcasting, each news hour on each channel has to out do the other by running some lame-ass cover story to attract the audience.
Just the other day, one of my local news shows were leading their 9pm hour with a story about skin care for the summer. Not too bad of a cover story, but then the a few days later, they led their show with a local American Idol segment. Now, I can see how the skin care is important news..I'd like to know a little more about how the sun could be adversely affecting my skin and its newfound ability to burn and develop cancer. But, if I wanted to know about local musicians, I'd listen to the radio station as they covered local music. Or, I'd watch American Idol if I was even remotely interested in hearing about someone trying to get a break in the industry.
And then, when I finally do get some real news..it's mostly about murders, rapes, wars...killing...killing..blood..it's all there is ever on the news (MOSTLY, there are a few humanitarian segments, just to break the monotony and get ppl to turn it back on). How about giving some news about our relations with Europe going down the can because of our President. Or, how China is tightening their restrictions on internet connectivity to their citizens. but, instead, all I ever hear about is the war in Iraq, the war on terror, or how someone might be lurking somewhere ready to kill innocent people in my local grocery store.
Now, I'm not saying I'm not one of these mindless autonomotons, because I do watch alot of tv in the evenings. I just won't watch the news anymore, because that's all I ever see. I don't listen to anything I hear from the tv or radio. I don't believe half the stuff I see on the internet. If anything catches my interest at all, I'll stop, listen and then go look for supporting information. Which alot of American's don't do because they don't seem to have the time, what with all that tv watching they do.
Now, let me let you in on a little secret: it doesn't matter who you vote for. Electoral collage picks the president. And it doesn't matter who gets elected. They can't do anything except press the nuke button without approval from congress.
And that's not much of a secret, that's stuff they teach in high school. And I thought it was bullshit back then too. Of course, that's the only way Bush coulda made it into office. But, I've been writing for almost an hour, and I'm really getting tired of it. Plus I wanna spend some more time with my son now, so I'm off.
You think it's a government conspiracy, but there is a lot to do with protecting our best interests. The world is not unified, and there are people out there that want to kill you. If it wasn't the Nazi's, it's the Al-queda, and so on. The US does the smart thing by being the most powerful nation in the world and only tolerating friendly governments. Think about this: What do you think the world would be like if the Russian government hadn't collapsed?
The smart thing isn't always force. Yes, the US did a real good job at building up the empire and military early on. But now that the world is pretty much claimed, all there is left is to fight over it, or move on to other planets/moons.
However, that takes more resources than we could possibly manage on our own, so we end up spreading our will over our neighbors, then over anyone who has what we want (oil in the mid-east). We will stock-pile everything we have of our own natural resources, and use everyone elses.
But I'm rambling on about nothing. You may be right about people out there who want to kill us. But, you gotta look at it from outside the US. Why do they wanna kill us? Yes, the muslim's say that all infedels must die, but there are so many muslims living in the US, and I don't see them killing off all us infedels.
The one's I see killing us, in the mid-east, are the ones that we have been bombing for decades. Same with al-Queda. If we hadn't been bombing them for the past 30+ years, they might not have been so mad at us to fly a couple planes into a couple towers -- intersting side note about that, one of the Columbine students had written out a plan to do just that, before they went on that massacre...Was funny watching a clip of the reporter saying that then saying how much fantasy that was.
I get sidetracked alot..my apologies.
Just about every country in the mid-east has had good reason to want us dead. We are constantly meddling in their political or economic affairs. Time and time again, we have stepped in, either formally, or secretly (and later declassified), and changed things around, forcibly for the most part. We put Saddam into power, then let him stay there thru the 80s, even when talk of his tortures were spreading, we left him in power. We may have finally taken him out this time, seemingly for the good, but I'm sure the real reason was because he stopped taking orders from the US. Clinton left him alone, because he was more concerned with our own problems, which have been let go for far too long. At least, that's how it looks, but of course, we were still bombing their cities on a daily basis.
Damnit. I completely lost my train of thought when the phone rang. So, I'm done tryin to get it back.
Another thing I don't whole-heartedly agree with is we are not a free-thinking people. I don't understand. In this country today there are thousands if not millions of independant press papers, millions of political activists, no limits on literature and film, and the list goes on. People are free to do what they want, and spread their way of thinking to others. Of course, that doesn't mean there aren't dumb people that don't care out there, but anyone willing to do the research can discover other political groups. Just because the democrats and republicans happen to be the only ones that air ads and are involved in the national press doesn't mean they are brainwashing you to vote for them. You want to see more options? Show your support through funding and helping them spread their message. The only reason you don't hear about other parties is because no one cares about them. If they were popular they'd get advertising and press time.
The vast majority of our country has become, basically, mindless autonomotons that follow everything their televisions tell them. Of course, we do have those elite few who actually care enough to try to make changes. But when it's only a small percentage, very little change actually gets done. Now, Bush showed us that if we could properly rally the masses, things could actually be accomplished. He managed to do it, using 9/11 as the motivating factor. However, he was praying on the fear his administration was feeding everyone through the media. He was quick to jump on that. It was smart, I'll give him that.
The thing is, nobody is willing to do their research. I say nobody, speaking of the rather large group of middle class American's who are working 50+ hours a week to make their minimum payments, while at the same time, racking up more bills eating out at McDonalds or Burger King because they don't have the time to cook a decent meal while they are sitting down in front of their huge, expensive televisions and watching McDonalds or Burger King commercials telling them to eat more, because now their food is only 7grams of fat. Yes, I know that was a run-on sentence, but I don't care.
With the little amount of time everyone has to do their normal everyday things, they are left even less time for things like political research. So, they expect the media to tell us. Of course, television media is only interested in ratings. They may say that, as a news source, they are neutral and unbiased, but when your a television program, and you have commercials, you have sponsors who pay for your anchor man in his spiffy new suit, or the local weatherman and his wacky antics. As long as the all-mighty dollar runs that station, there will be some influence in what you hear. It may be subtle and take a long time to see, or you might see it right out.
Paper news was much more unbiased, and was always right there for any story. Because, as a paper, you can cover everything that happened, within, of course, a limited about of paper-space. TV news is only limited to 30 or 60 minute segments, and not even that with commercials, so alot is left out, not covered, or ignored. Also, since there is always competition, even in news broadcasting, each news hour on each channel has to out do the other by running some lame-ass cover story to attract the audience.
Just the other day, one of my local news shows were leading their 9pm hour with a story about skin care for the summer. Not too bad of a cover story, but then the a few days later, they led their show with a local American Idol segment. Now, I can see how the skin care is important news..I'd like to know a little more about how the sun could be adversely affecting my skin and its newfound ability to burn and develop cancer. But, if I wanted to know about local musicians, I'd listen to the radio station as they covered local music. Or, I'd watch American Idol if I was even remotely interested in hearing about someone trying to get a break in the industry.
And then, when I finally do get some real news..it's mostly about murders, rapes, wars...killing...killing..blood..it's all there is ever on the news (MOSTLY, there are a few humanitarian segments, just to break the monotony and get ppl to turn it back on). How about giving some news about our relations with Europe going down the can because of our President. Or, how China is tightening their restrictions on internet connectivity to their citizens. but, instead, all I ever hear about is the war in Iraq, the war on terror, or how someone might be lurking somewhere ready to kill innocent people in my local grocery store.
Now, I'm not saying I'm not one of these mindless autonomotons, because I do watch alot of tv in the evenings. I just won't watch the news anymore, because that's all I ever see. I don't listen to anything I hear from the tv or radio. I don't believe half the stuff I see on the internet. If anything catches my interest at all, I'll stop, listen and then go look for supporting information. Which alot of American's don't do because they don't seem to have the time, what with all that tv watching they do.
Now, let me let you in on a little secret: it doesn't matter who you vote for. Electoral collage picks the president. And it doesn't matter who gets elected. They can't do anything except press the nuke button without approval from congress.
And that's not much of a secret, that's stuff they teach in high school. And I thought it was bullshit back then too. Of course, that's the only way Bush coulda made it into office. But, I've been writing for almost an hour, and I'm really getting tired of it. Plus I wanna spend some more time with my son now, so I'm off.
-
Khaled
Re: We need a political section......
I don't mean to contradict, but for a discussion like this, the facts are critical.
The first hostile act al Qaeda commited against the U.S. was the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, in June of '96. Before then, we didn't know they existed, or what they wanted. Before then, they did not exist, as far as we knew. We let that attack go because Saudi Arabia said they'd track the killers down themselves. Thanks, Saudi. Anyway, al Qaeda attacked two embassies in east Africa, killing hundreds in the summer of '98. We responded by attacking two of their camps--one in the Sudan, and one in Afganistan. If you recall, there was an enormous outcry against Clinton for "warmongering" and "waging his dog" and all kinds of asinine shit. Anyway, that strike was the first attack against al Qaeda we ever made, and was totally ineffective. They struck us first.
In fact, we helped to train the fellows who founded al Qaeda, because they where fighting the Soviets in Afganistan. That's the same reason we kept Hussein in power (but do recall we didn't put him there). We did a lot of crazy shit during the cold war--we viewed the world as black and white--us and the commies. Well, its a bit more complicated now, and our allies in the Arab world have turned against us.
As for the bombing of Iraq--we have not been bombing their cities for years. There were two no-fly zones set up in northern and southern Iraq to protect the Kurds and Shi'ites from air attack if they wanted to revolt, which they did, and were crushed. We kept the zones in place, but in about '97 Hussein started shooting at our planes. The patrols fired back. Dozens of radar installations, SAM and AAA batteries were destroyed, but the Brits and Americans never targeted anything that didn't shoot at them first. I know several of the pilots that flew it, and they're not ogres. It was considered a crappy assignment, and everyone flying it got hazard pay.
Little aside--the electoral college didn't appoint Bush to office, the Supreme Court did. Thats never happened before in our history. The majority of the justices on the Supreme Court were appointed by the first Bush. Go figure that one out. Checks and balances my ass.
Muslims in America don't cry jihad because they're as assimilated as everyone else here. Go live in an Arab country. I was living in Israel when they attacked the world trade centre, and I tell you, the Arabs were cheering in the streets, setting off fireworks, firing into the air with assault rifles, and dancing on rooftops. The Israeli Arabs are supposed to be moderates. I wonder what things looked like in Saudi or Yemen.
As for being free-thinking (or not), there is an undeniably anti-intellectual bent in America, and its growing. When I ask people why they voted for Ahnald Schwarschenwaglarguagluag for governor, the answers range from "I don't know" to "I think he can change things. Davis sucked." Right. Ok.
Free press is controlled by half a dozen interests, and commercials be damned--when Ted Turner or Rupert Murdoch want to share their opinions, they do it via what they choose to report, when, and how they present it. This trend of amalgamation is spreading. Michael Powell, Bush-appointed FCC chairman made it legal for a company or person to own a televisions station AND a newspaper AND a radio station in the same town. We have about five news sources in America. Are you going to Iraq to see whats actually happening? No? Then take your pick of predigested opinions the media giants are giving you.
The first hostile act al Qaeda commited against the U.S. was the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, in June of '96. Before then, we didn't know they existed, or what they wanted. Before then, they did not exist, as far as we knew. We let that attack go because Saudi Arabia said they'd track the killers down themselves. Thanks, Saudi. Anyway, al Qaeda attacked two embassies in east Africa, killing hundreds in the summer of '98. We responded by attacking two of their camps--one in the Sudan, and one in Afganistan. If you recall, there was an enormous outcry against Clinton for "warmongering" and "waging his dog" and all kinds of asinine shit. Anyway, that strike was the first attack against al Qaeda we ever made, and was totally ineffective. They struck us first.
In fact, we helped to train the fellows who founded al Qaeda, because they where fighting the Soviets in Afganistan. That's the same reason we kept Hussein in power (but do recall we didn't put him there). We did a lot of crazy shit during the cold war--we viewed the world as black and white--us and the commies. Well, its a bit more complicated now, and our allies in the Arab world have turned against us.
As for the bombing of Iraq--we have not been bombing their cities for years. There were two no-fly zones set up in northern and southern Iraq to protect the Kurds and Shi'ites from air attack if they wanted to revolt, which they did, and were crushed. We kept the zones in place, but in about '97 Hussein started shooting at our planes. The patrols fired back. Dozens of radar installations, SAM and AAA batteries were destroyed, but the Brits and Americans never targeted anything that didn't shoot at them first. I know several of the pilots that flew it, and they're not ogres. It was considered a crappy assignment, and everyone flying it got hazard pay.
Little aside--the electoral college didn't appoint Bush to office, the Supreme Court did. Thats never happened before in our history. The majority of the justices on the Supreme Court were appointed by the first Bush. Go figure that one out. Checks and balances my ass.
Muslims in America don't cry jihad because they're as assimilated as everyone else here. Go live in an Arab country. I was living in Israel when they attacked the world trade centre, and I tell you, the Arabs were cheering in the streets, setting off fireworks, firing into the air with assault rifles, and dancing on rooftops. The Israeli Arabs are supposed to be moderates. I wonder what things looked like in Saudi or Yemen.
As for being free-thinking (or not), there is an undeniably anti-intellectual bent in America, and its growing. When I ask people why they voted for Ahnald Schwarschenwaglarguagluag for governor, the answers range from "I don't know" to "I think he can change things. Davis sucked." Right. Ok.
Free press is controlled by half a dozen interests, and commercials be damned--when Ted Turner or Rupert Murdoch want to share their opinions, they do it via what they choose to report, when, and how they present it. This trend of amalgamation is spreading. Michael Powell, Bush-appointed FCC chairman made it legal for a company or person to own a televisions station AND a newspaper AND a radio station in the same town. We have about five news sources in America. Are you going to Iraq to see whats actually happening? No? Then take your pick of predigested opinions the media giants are giving you.
Re: We need a political section......
Now, let me let you in on a little secret: it doesn't matter who you vote for. Electoral collage picks the president. And it doesn't matter who gets elected. They can't do anything except press the nuke button without approval from congress.
There's only been like seven faithless electors since the early 1900s, and none of these had an outcome on the election. The people make the votes, the electoral college puts those votes down. They don't have to follow, but they almost always do. Until the day where a faithless elector changes the outcome of an election, the point you're trying to make is really moot.
The part about it doesn't matter who gets elected is very true, though.
There's only been like seven faithless electors since the early 1900s, and none of these had an outcome on the election. The people make the votes, the electoral college puts those votes down. They don't have to follow, but they almost always do. Until the day where a faithless elector changes the outcome of an election, the point you're trying to make is really moot.
The part about it doesn't matter who gets elected is very true, though.
Re: We need a political section......
I know nothing about politics - which is my bad, I know. But frankly I feel this way: how would my single vote make a difference one way or the other? But then I know that others think the same way, so along with my single vote there's millions of others who go without voting. My main deal is that I feel a number of the civil rights given to us in the constitution are being violated daily, and to tell the truth I highly doubt that this will change regardless of who gets voted into office. Politicians lie, cheat, kill and steal. It's in their nature, their training, and it won't change.
As far as our dealings with other countries and their wars, I feel that the U.S. has become a global bully that sticks it's nose in where it doesn't belong, and definitely is not wanted. But on the other spectrum, I go along with a common thought: there might be no practical use for a large parking lot in the Middle East, but what could it hurt? ;)
As far as our dealings with other countries and their wars, I feel that the U.S. has become a global bully that sticks it's nose in where it doesn't belong, and definitely is not wanted. But on the other spectrum, I go along with a common thought: there might be no practical use for a large parking lot in the Middle East, but what could it hurt? ;)
Re: We need a political section......
I never really follow along with whats going on. The last time I did, was in high school's US History class, where the teacher made us keep up with current events and editorial comics in order to be more active in class..really, I hated it.
I haven't really liked being in America since I came back, and the longer I'm here, the more I see, the more I don't wanna be here. Sad thing is, I'm stuck..shitty wages, poor health system, huge inflations. Can't afford to live, let alone put away money to move.
I know other countries are probably like this, but its not just the shitty living that gets me. It's the ignorance of the people around me. In this country, the majority of people don't make up their own minds..we've discussed that..they have them made up for them. Or, they keep old, out-dated opinions that are obviously wrong, mis-informed or just plain ignorant.
But, I also live in the middle of redneck central. Rednecks are the worst about it, but they have some of the funniest comedians..They aren't very open to the future. I was once watching Discovery channel, one of those shows about how the Earth might be populated by strange creatures in a few millenia. Was extremely interesting, but the resident redneck couldn't see why it would be worth watching at all, it wasn't important to today's living. He said we should watch something else (football) because we'd be dead by that time, and shouldn't worry about the future.
Now, I took offense to that. The future may not be as important to us, now..but it is important to those that come after us. Our children, their children, and so on.
I look around and see all the things our parents did to the planet and wish they had a little more sense. I try to do my part to make things better for my son, but there is only so much one person can do...
Damn, I just realized I was rambling off on a tangent.
Time to get back to work.
I haven't really liked being in America since I came back, and the longer I'm here, the more I see, the more I don't wanna be here. Sad thing is, I'm stuck..shitty wages, poor health system, huge inflations. Can't afford to live, let alone put away money to move.
I know other countries are probably like this, but its not just the shitty living that gets me. It's the ignorance of the people around me. In this country, the majority of people don't make up their own minds..we've discussed that..they have them made up for them. Or, they keep old, out-dated opinions that are obviously wrong, mis-informed or just plain ignorant.
But, I also live in the middle of redneck central. Rednecks are the worst about it, but they have some of the funniest comedians..They aren't very open to the future. I was once watching Discovery channel, one of those shows about how the Earth might be populated by strange creatures in a few millenia. Was extremely interesting, but the resident redneck couldn't see why it would be worth watching at all, it wasn't important to today's living. He said we should watch something else (football) because we'd be dead by that time, and shouldn't worry about the future.
Now, I took offense to that. The future may not be as important to us, now..but it is important to those that come after us. Our children, their children, and so on.
I look around and see all the things our parents did to the planet and wish they had a little more sense. I try to do my part to make things better for my son, but there is only so much one person can do...
Damn, I just realized I was rambling off on a tangent.
Time to get back to work.