During the 2004 election, there were smear campaigns galore--the election became less about who would do a good job for the country and more about whose PR team was more efficient. Needless to say, as an American I was less than enthused about the candidates I was being forced to choose between:
A) a jingoistic, excuse-mongering incumbent with a deceptive War Cabinet and a pithy vendetta against Sadaam Hussein,
B) a smarmy, equivocal, rest-on-his-laurels politician whose resemblance to a Bassett Hound no less than foreshadowed his non-charismatic stance on important issues; or
C) The Ruiner of Close Elections, Mr. Nader himself.
(NOTE: I'm disregarding the lower profile candidates, because in bipartisan politics it seems almost ludicrous to regard them as worth having a shot at the Presidency.)

On top of that, stupid celebrities were wasting their breaths trying to get more people to vote. I saw commercials featuring Jennifer Aniston, the epitome of modern feminism, who urged me to take a stand as an unmarried woman and vote. P. Diddy threatened to murder me if I didn't make my way to an election booth, as he has ways of knowing who didn't show up.

One thing that struck me about the celebrities' ploys to appeal to the masses was a common saying, which was slightly altered but bore the same message:

"It doesn't matter who you vote for--just get out there and vote."

I'm sure that seemed innocent enough in all its electorally-minded zeal to most people, but to me (who tries to read subversion in almost everything), it struck some fascinating thought: Does it really matter who I vote for?

I'm convinced that (light conspiracy theory alert) there's something central at the hub of American politics and has been since the formation of such ideologies as neoconservatism (which I hear from many theorists are the centralization). There's so much debate as to what exactly neoconservatism dwells on (James Bryce wrote about the concept in Modern Democracies in 1921, and the notion has been argued about ever since). It's one of those things that extreme leftists are permitted to write about so the status quo takes their ranting for granted, and later the more "rational" (but probably right-affiliated) documentarians provide "solid evidence" refuting the existence of such a breed.

I'm not sure what the breeding grounds for neoconservative ideals are, but the more I learn of the associations and similarities between our presidential candidates, the more I'm convinced that American bipartisan politics is a cleverly-crafted, quasi-ideological demagoguery by whoever's running things around here, neocons or otherwise. It seems we're so caught up with the divisions of Red and Blue (which, if we really look at, are highly superficial) that we ignore the fact that both colors stem from the same spectrum.

If environment plays such a large role in the shaping of people (and it does), can it be possible for men to attend the same (or similar) institutions of higher learning, to have served in the same administrations under varying leadership, to reputedly belong to the same societies (e.g. Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg Group, Freemasons--I'm not going into the theories behind these groups, though), to share similar religious/spiritual beliefs and yet be so radically different in thought? If we really looked at the underpinnings beneath the major candidates we're expected to choose from, would we find that they're really so different after all?

So, does it really matter who we vote for?

This is how I'm supposed to feel about myself in the public forum, aren't I?

I've always felt this sense that "foreigners hate me by default" ever since George W. declared his war on terrorism. It becomes painfully obvious to me every time I read a forum in which a European interjects in an otherwise relatively playful manner of confrontation by pointing out how "stupid" Americans are. I became even more aware of this throughout my support of the FIFA World Cup (no, I'm not a bandwagoneer--I've loved football/soccer for a long time and was prevented from playing it because my parents felt that my time was better spent in other activities). I've heard and read sentiments about the USA's participation in the event. People found a way to make comments about football snide and hurtful--these weren't just cheap shots against opposing teams.
I became upset by words that shouldn't have hurt me.

I was born and raised in this country. I generally do love this place, although at this point we are sorely wanting for improvement in many aspects. We always have and always will. I hate that I can't have pride in my country without being labeled as a "jingoistic Bush-supporter" by someone who doesn't have the remotest idea of how my life works, what my political motivations are, or the fact that I may be human just like them.

I love the world. I love to travel and experience new cultures. But I hate that the world--including many of our own citizens--is now viewing anti-American sentiment as fashionable, when many of them have never even met an American, much less gotten to know one. It frustrates me to no end that I have to feel ashamed of my nationality when I travel abroad for fear of being labeled as a "typical American."

Speaking of which, when is any foreigner going to accurately describe a "typical American"? There are 300 million of us to date. We're mothers, sons, daughters, fathers just like them. We work day-to-day to make a living, just like them. We cry about relationships, just like them. We want to be better people, and we want a better world, just like them. But there are so many of us that it's impossible to pin down one commonality except for the fact that we're American. It's as if they have total disregard for the fact that the nature of this country is fettered with a racial and cultural heterology that can't be erased, and that people of their very culture helped to shape the demographics. Dare I reiterate that there are 300 million of us?

Everyone blames me for electing George W. Bush. Whether I voted for him or not, I am not the sole cause of his being elected into office; regardless, I'm made to feel that way every time a foreigner looks down their noses at me. I used to just believe that this hatred was politically fueled, but I'm terribly mistaken. Even if I rationally discuss my political views (which I can do without slandering my country) and even bring up the general argument that George W.'s approval rate is an all-time low (including the entire presidency), they find ways to attack my way of life otherwise:

1. "You must be a Southern bible thumper." Foreigners are quick to generalize that Americans are hyper-religious; ironically, a few of those nations have sanctioned religions whereas the United States has none (e.g. the Church of England, the Church of Sweden). Further, many foreign countries have people with notably strong beliefs; for example, France and Italy are both supremely Catholic, but we don't attack their abritrary degrees of exercising their faith. So why do Americans (regardless of whether I agree with their fervor or not--I'm not religious but was raised Christian) face skepticism? Because they're American.

2. "You're fat and lazy." I am neither fat nor lazy. I lead a very active life. I'll admit that I did get trapped in fast food for a while while writing a thesis, but my life doesn't revolve around it. Again, because we're Americans and there are more of us, we get pinpointed--and with cheap shots, nonetheless. People I know may not exercise on a daily basis, and they may not be a size double zero, but we're constantly busy. Besides, many other countries have certainly embraced McDonald's wholeheartedly--but of course, our forceful influence is to blame and not their willingness to adopt the Golden Arches.
(NOTE: If I use the argument that all Americans are not fat and lazy, someone tells me, "Americans work too much and are too obsessed with looking good." )

3. "Americans don't care about anyone else but themselves." Well, we've kind of been forced into that corner. We're not allowed to share in the affairs of other countries without facing provocation just because of our nationality, so we have to make do with what we have and keep to ourselves. We've been put into a bad position where, if we did try to help, people would just perceive us as engaging in manhandling (see number four). More people I've talked to than not are either perfectly willing to experience culture outside of the US (and have and do on a regular basis, myself included), or have trepidation about traveling abroad because of how they fear being perceived. We're accused of being bullies, but we're being bullied into keeping to ourselves.

4. "The US is always sticking its nose in other people's business." Our government may be, but Americans on the whole (well, at least the region where I'm from) keep out of other people's business. On a less serious note, we're chastised for "celebrity worship," for wanting to know everything about our famed A-list stars, while people across the pond are allowed to have The Sun and OK!, and Hello! and celebrities like Jordan and Jodie Marsh.

I can't help but think that people worldwide hate us just because it's in fashion and not for any legitimate reason anymore. We're being held accountable for sins that a lot of us didn't sanction, and the world is crying for us to pony up and make amends, but no one wants to give us the chance. We are a flawed country, but each of us, all 300 million of us, are red-blooded humans who deserve as much criticism as foreigners are willing to give themselves. Jesus is attributed with saying, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." In that case, it seems there are a lot of spotless people, and nations, on earth.

So if I have to remain a world's outcast for being tainted amongst a world of perfection, I'll be the Pearl to my country's Hester Prynne and take a scarlet O for the team. To corrupt a saying by Martin Luther, "America is a whore, but she is my mother."

President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin made headlines after he kissed a young child--on the stomach, of all places.



CNN quotes Putin:
"People came up and I began talking to them, among them this little boy. He seemed to me very independent, sure of himself and at the same time defenseless so to speak, an innocent boy and a very nice little boy."

"I tell you honestly, I just wanted to touch him like a kitten and that desire of mine ended in that act."

Is this the Russian equivalent of a neocon having vanilla sex with his wife while imagining a hot buggery session with the lawn boy?


Putin kissed boy 'like a kitten' (CNN International)

Although Shirley really needs no introduction, I'll start by saying she is a prominent member of Westboro Baptist Church, which proudly sponsors the website godhatesfags.com. By the time this video is done, you'll feel as warm and fuzzy about her as I do.

Shirley on the Big Story, Fox News with Julie Banderas:



Sadly, what Shirley doesn't realize is that people like her are the true doom of America. And I applaud Julie for tearing her a new asshole.