As I’ve said before, I have not been paying attention to, well, much of anything really of late. For whatever reason, I decided to take my head out of my butt for a little while yesterday and somehow ended up spending most of the day watching YouTube videos of interviews with various combinations of Bill O’Reilly, Stephen Colbert, David Letterman, Madonna, Hannity and Colmes, Richard Dawkins, Michael Moore, Ann Coulter and Al Franken, among others. Needless to say, by the end of the day I felt that I was far better off when not paying any attention to political matters. Of course, I then began to wonder why I should care what any one of those people has to say about anything, especially since, in retrospect, the majority of them talk more about each other than about any specific political issue.
No doubt, more than a few of my readers are wondering, “Is YouTube really the best you could do for political information?” To which I humbly reply, “At the time, yes, it was.” Which brings me to another point. Back in college I sometimes had to read certain things that I might not otherwise have had occasion to read, and I was confused and slightly alarmed by more than one indication that blogs were considered a legitimate source of news. On one occasion there was an implication that self regulation within the blogging community holds blog writers to a higher degree of journalistic integrity than the (obviously liberal biased) mainstream media. Does that sound plausible to anyone else? Because I have a blog, and I say whatever the heck I want. Occasionally I will go to the trouble of checking facts first. On a really good day, I might even proofread before posting. They probably were not talking about me though, because I am not actually a part of the so-called “blogosphere.” Firstly, because I think that word incapacitatingly silly and want nothing to do with it. Secondly, on a more technical note, my blog contains zero links to anyone else’s, and as far as I know, no one links to mine. (I do not have anything against people linking here, I am merely not aware of anyone who does.) Thusly, my blog is a completely independent entity. I also do not know or care who Cory Doctorow is, despite the fact that I see the name rather frequently in my internet travels. Ultimately, I do not take myself or any other blogger seriously as a writer, and do not understand why any one else would, especially an actual published journalist.
Anyway, I would like to comment on some of the videos I watched, however, having already declared that I do not care what they think, it seems hypocritical at this point to assume that anyone would care what I think about them.
To switch gears then, I was on the freeway last week (which is rare for me these days) where I twice saw the bumper sticker “CoeXisT,” Where the “C” is a Muslim crescent, the “X” is a Star of David, and “T” is a cross. U2 made a dramatic spectacle with this during their last tour. It did not bother me so much then but seeing it on these cars (perhaps in combination with other stickers, because in both cases it was only one of many) rubbed me the wrong way. I looked it up this morning to see if the idea originated with U2 or not and found that Bono is the spokesperson for a clothing line that (not unlike “Not Of This World”) either uses t-shirts to spread a message or uses the message to sell t-shirts. I am not really sure which. I started to read an interview with the guys who started the thing, but it made me a little sick and I had to stop. The problem I have with this, and with the idea of “religious tolerance” in general – and let’s throw in “Separation of Church and State” just for fun – is that to me they seem to be really saying that your religion, or at least specific details of your religion, are not that important, so why fight about it?
A parallel example: some people are concerned with protecting the environment while other people want to be able to produce and/or consume goods as inexpensively and efficiently as possible. These are both reasonable goals, can’t these two groups coexist and everybody gets what they want? Well, no. As it turns out, these two goals are, on a practical level, mutually exclusive.
As a side note, I find it ironic that “tolerance” is being presented as the highest virtue of the day when the word actually refers to (in the medical sense) the degree to which you can endure something that is harmful to you. “I have a high tolerance for that poison because it has just as much right to be in my body as my own blood.”
I noticed recently that one of my friends had something unusual under “Political Views” in his Facebook profile. I say “unusual” because back when I was filling out my profile, there was a menu with about five choices in the range from “Very Liberal” to “Very Conservative,” plus “Other,” which I was forced to pick because mine was not listed. I am just as turned off by one side’s arrogance as by the other side’s ignorance. And finding myself both ignorant and arrogant, I am caught in the middle and there is no political label for me. Apparently you can now write in your own answer. Actually, that was probably the best choice for me because, in reality, I try to avoid openly stating my political affiliation. But I suppose I can tell you what I don’t believe.
A few years back there was a proposition on the ballot that would somehow effect the way elections work. All five political parties in California (did you even know there were five political parties in California?) opposed it. So I voted “Yes.” F*** ’em. In college, I gave a speech (some might say a sermon) where I went item by item through the official Republican Party platform and explained how each one went against applicable Biblical principles. My point was to criticize Christians for blindly voting Republican, but I never once even suggested that there were any better options to vote for. (I don’t believe that there were any other Christians in the class anyway.)
So what are my political views? It so happens that I am a registered Republican, but it actually has nothing to do with either my political or my religious beliefs. As you may or may not know, you are required to re-register to vote every time you move. In 2002, a friend and I were leaving the grocery store when we were accosted by a fellow who claimed that whoever he was working for would make a donation to a certain charity for every Republican voter he registered that day. I am really not sure if this was A) true or B) legal, but I had recently returned from Arizona and needed a good re-registering anyway, and my friend was not registered at all, so we both did it. I figured that at the least, I would have the satisfaction of voting against Bush in the 2004 primary. Incidentally, Bush ran unopposed in the primary, so when the day came around, I had to write in a candidate. I really did not know many Republican politicians, but while I was living in Arizona, I had once heard a radio interview with one of their Senators, who had impressed me as a guy who knew what he was talking about. Therefore, I wrote in John McCain. Funny old world isn’t it?