Full of Disgust.
Greetings loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader is really in the mood to blog today. Blogging here. Blogging on the Poet Laureate's site. Writing comments on the lovely Annika's site. Just write, write, write...
Well, today was Election Day. And your Maximum Leader exercised his franchise and voted. This experience (going to vote) prompted a number of thoughts. I figured I would share them.
First... Your Maximum Leader promises that when the MWO comes he will dispatch the execution squads to drag out and shoot any media personality who uses the word "disenfranchise" incorrectly. To "disenfranchise" a person means you are taking away the right to vote of a person who was granted the right to vote after some interval when they were not allowed to vote. For example, literacy tests in the Jim Crow south disenfranchised freed slaves after the passage of the Fifteenth Amendment. When you take away the vote from someone who was historically granted the privlege of voting you are "disfranchising" them. Even the fricking Webster's dictionary (one of the lamest excuses for a dictionary extant) gets it right. If you look up "disenfranchise" is gives the definition "To disfranchise." So, short of passing an amendment to the Constitution raising the voting age to, lets say 21 (which hypothetically would take away the right to vote from those aged 18-20), no one in America is being "disenfranchised." Thus, your Maximum Leader asks rhetorically, if even the lamest dictionary gets it right WHY CAN'T PEOPLE USE THE RIGHT DAMNED WORD!!!! Just another sign of the dumbing down of American society.
Second... Your Maximum Leader, who resides in the wonderful and historic Commonwealth of Virginia (come visit us and stimulate our economy!), where we believe in voting every year. Yes, our Commonwealth-wide elections are held in odd numbered years (to provide a counterbalance to federal elections held in even numbered years). Your Maximum Leader declares this to be a good thing. But, something that is not good is the silly "Virginia is for lovers" ad slogan that has gone on for years and years. I'm not really sure what it means. Lovers? Platonic lovers. Adulterers? Familial lovers? Animal lovers? History lovers? It is too ambiguous for your Maximum Leader's TJ traits. (Your Maximum Leader's Myers-Briggs personality type is INTJ.)
Third... When your Maximum Leader entered the voting booth, he believed that the MWO was established and in full swing. This caused him to become shocked (shocked!). Why you may ask yourself? Why indeed... Every office on the ballot (State Senator, State Delegate, Sherriff, Commissioner of Revenue, Clerk of the Court, and County Supervisor) was being contested by a single person. Every person on the ballot unopposed. And to make it even more interesting, every candidate was known to your Maximum Leader personally or by their positions on various issues. And to make it EVEN MORE interesting, every one of the candidates held (for the most part) positions on local issues with which your Maximum Leader fully agreed. Now surely your asking yourself "Self, why would this cause my Maximum Leader to be shocked? And he really shouldn't call me Shirley." Allow me to tell you...
I didn't have any choices. That is not what voting in the United States is all about. Now don't get me wrong. I am very happy (estatic in fact) to be represented locally by people who ideologically are not far from me. But I am sad that they didn't have to compete for their jobs. In this case, I will blame local Democrats. They didn't even field a challenger. I don't believe any office of public trust in this country should be uncontested. I don't care if the incumbent is much beloved and nearly impossible to defeat. It is just wrong. I know some local Democratic leaders and I plan on telling them that I am very sad that they couldn't even be bothered to get someone to put their name on the ballot. Now I know that my State Senator and Delegate were very unlikely to be defeated. But come on, the Democrates can't even get someone to fill out the paperwork, get some friends to sign the petition, and then sit on his bum until election day? They didn't have to spend lots of money trying to defeat the incumbents. But they could have made some personal apperances somewhere and given interviews to the local papers. It is just sad. (What's worse is that the incumbents had more of a challenge getting the party nomination than they did in the general election.)
And, honestly, Republicans are no better. They didn't contest a number of seats state-wide. They should have. I can't believe that there wasn't someone who would volunteer to run just to give the other person some competition. But hey! When the MWO comes your Maximum Leader promises that every seat in the huge parliament (#2) will have at least two people running in every election.
That is all your Maximum Leader can blog today my minons. His fingers are getting sore...
Carry on.
Well, today was Election Day. And your Maximum Leader exercised his franchise and voted. This experience (going to vote) prompted a number of thoughts. I figured I would share them.
First... Your Maximum Leader promises that when the MWO comes he will dispatch the execution squads to drag out and shoot any media personality who uses the word "disenfranchise" incorrectly. To "disenfranchise" a person means you are taking away the right to vote of a person who was granted the right to vote after some interval when they were not allowed to vote. For example, literacy tests in the Jim Crow south disenfranchised freed slaves after the passage of the Fifteenth Amendment. When you take away the vote from someone who was historically granted the privlege of voting you are "disfranchising" them. Even the fricking Webster's dictionary (one of the lamest excuses for a dictionary extant) gets it right. If you look up "disenfranchise" is gives the definition "To disfranchise." So, short of passing an amendment to the Constitution raising the voting age to, lets say 21 (which hypothetically would take away the right to vote from those aged 18-20), no one in America is being "disenfranchised." Thus, your Maximum Leader asks rhetorically, if even the lamest dictionary gets it right WHY CAN'T PEOPLE USE THE RIGHT DAMNED WORD!!!! Just another sign of the dumbing down of American society.
Second... Your Maximum Leader, who resides in the wonderful and historic Commonwealth of Virginia (come visit us and stimulate our economy!), where we believe in voting every year. Yes, our Commonwealth-wide elections are held in odd numbered years (to provide a counterbalance to federal elections held in even numbered years). Your Maximum Leader declares this to be a good thing. But, something that is not good is the silly "Virginia is for lovers" ad slogan that has gone on for years and years. I'm not really sure what it means. Lovers? Platonic lovers. Adulterers? Familial lovers? Animal lovers? History lovers? It is too ambiguous for your Maximum Leader's TJ traits. (Your Maximum Leader's Myers-Briggs personality type is INTJ.)
Third... When your Maximum Leader entered the voting booth, he believed that the MWO was established and in full swing. This caused him to become shocked (shocked!). Why you may ask yourself? Why indeed... Every office on the ballot (State Senator, State Delegate, Sherriff, Commissioner of Revenue, Clerk of the Court, and County Supervisor) was being contested by a single person. Every person on the ballot unopposed. And to make it even more interesting, every candidate was known to your Maximum Leader personally or by their positions on various issues. And to make it EVEN MORE interesting, every one of the candidates held (for the most part) positions on local issues with which your Maximum Leader fully agreed. Now surely your asking yourself "Self, why would this cause my Maximum Leader to be shocked? And he really shouldn't call me Shirley." Allow me to tell you...
I didn't have any choices. That is not what voting in the United States is all about. Now don't get me wrong. I am very happy (estatic in fact) to be represented locally by people who ideologically are not far from me. But I am sad that they didn't have to compete for their jobs. In this case, I will blame local Democrats. They didn't even field a challenger. I don't believe any office of public trust in this country should be uncontested. I don't care if the incumbent is much beloved and nearly impossible to defeat. It is just wrong. I know some local Democratic leaders and I plan on telling them that I am very sad that they couldn't even be bothered to get someone to put their name on the ballot. Now I know that my State Senator and Delegate were very unlikely to be defeated. But come on, the Democrates can't even get someone to fill out the paperwork, get some friends to sign the petition, and then sit on his bum until election day? They didn't have to spend lots of money trying to defeat the incumbents. But they could have made some personal apperances somewhere and given interviews to the local papers. It is just sad. (What's worse is that the incumbents had more of a challenge getting the party nomination than they did in the general election.)
And, honestly, Republicans are no better. They didn't contest a number of seats state-wide. They should have. I can't believe that there wasn't someone who would volunteer to run just to give the other person some competition. But hey! When the MWO comes your Maximum Leader promises that every seat in the huge parliament (#2) will have at least two people running in every election.
That is all your Maximum Leader can blog today my minons. His fingers are getting sore...
Carry on.
posted by The Maximum Leader at 11/05/2003 02:34:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home