Thursday, September 30, 2004

A Country To Be Proud Of

I have been watching the debate tonight. Anyone who reads my comments on anyone else's sight knows who I'm voting for. But even though I had decided to not to discuss politics on this blog (I have another blog for that), I want to offer my ringing endorsement (for whatever it's worth) of President Bush.

But what this post is actually about is the debate. In an abstract sense, I was extremely pleased with both of the candidates. I think they were both dignified and I think they both did our country extremely proud. The Bush/Gore debates were ludicrous by comparison.

And I was proud of the country after the Florida debacle last time. I know it wasn't the general consensus, but I thought we were an example to the world of how to avoid a military coup when elections don't go as planned.

Anyway, I just wanted to say that I'm proud of our political system. It will never be perfect, but by God, it's the best one the world has ever had.

Thank you, and may God continue to bless this great land.

10 comments:

Phil Latio said...

You must not have been watching the debate I was watching tonight! Kerry mopped up the floor with Bush! Our sitting president came off as a REAL IDIOT tonight! And to think I was actually considering voting for that bozo! Hah!

http://reluctantuppie.blogspot.com

Zelda said...

Dear Reluctant whatever.

Nya Nyanie foo foo. You're gonna lose, You're gonna lose. Kerry wants to let the U.N. bitch us around and Americans aren't gonna go for it. (Pretend I'm sing-songing that last sentence in as childish a voice as possible.)

Angie - Kerry has long since ceased to make me feel anything. I actually thought the debate was dignified. I Never, Ever want him as President, but abstractly, I thought the tone was respectable.

Gooch said...

I sometimes wonder what in the world these debates are for. This isn't any offense to you, Zelda, but I think I am safe in assuming that you went into the debate leaning heavily towards Bush and came out leaning heavily towards Bush, and there would have been very little Kerry could have said that would have swayed you the other way. And the exact opposite I'm sure could be said of my more liberal Blogville friends.

It always seems to me like these debates only serve to reinforce opinions as opposed to changing them.

Zelda said...

Gooch - I think the debates are pretty much useless. I don't take offense and you are absolutely right. I never had any intention of voting for Kerry and I would never try to say otherwise. The debates are really for people who, for whatever reason, haven't been paying attention so far. I doubt they're paying much attention now, but I think the spirit of a debate is a good thing. I think it is over-managed as is everything in politics nowdays, but it does save the candidates from cheap shots.

I thought it was funny to hear the Dems try to play up W's debating skills, just in case Kerry lost it. Most Dems have very little respect for Ws debating style and the sight of them holding their noses to say that he was a good debator was amusing.

But I like politics. I genuinely enjoy it. Sure, I get a little cranky if I think my issues are being ignored, but I think we have an amazing political process - the best in the world.

Zelda said...

Phil - "And to think I was actually considering voting for that bozo!" Riiiiiight....Let me guess, you're also a life long conservative who has always voted Republican except for this ONE time. yeah.....riiiiiight!

Zelda said...

Elephantitis of the head. Somehow, I don't think that is what is handlers had in mind.

tinyhands said...

For those of you that live in Texas, where GWB is expected to easily take the state, I wonder if you'd consider voting for a 3rd party candidate instead. Many would argue that a 3rd party vote is a wasted vote. I'll argue that in Texas, a vote for either major party is also wasted. (The same is probably true in MA, but I haven't looked at the polls.) If you live in a "battleground" state where votes for your candidate are critical, by all means vote your conscience.

The major parties start with the assumption that people will vote for them. Many 3rd parties don't make that assumption, discouraging some candidates with valid viewpoints from even running. If 3rd party candidates get any votes, it's encouragement for them to try again. I don't necessarily agree with the viewpoints of 3rd party candidates, but I want to send a message to them to keep trying to make a change. I'd like to let them know that I'm willing to vote for them if my state ever becomes a "battleground" for their ideas (assuming of course I agree with the idea).

Zelda said...

You make a great point. 3rd parties would be a benefit to the country, as they are less obligated to big money and could be streamlined to fit the general consensus on issues. In other words, you wouldn't have to pinch your nose quite as hard in the voting booth. In this election though, while we are at war, I don't want to send the message that there is something wrong with our country. If there is to be a winner, I want him to win outright, with as much unity as possible. Talk to me about 3rd party candidates when Iraq and Afghanistan settle down.

Anonymous said...

What is your politics blog? We'd be interested in taking a look.

Thanks

Zelda said...

I unpublished it since this one was more fun, but I'll write in it from time to time when the pressure gets too high. Last time I posted in it was right after Nick Berg was beheaded.

The dilemma for me is that I genuinely like all the bloggers I've met here and I consider them friends. I really dislike discussing politics with friends unless we agree. I never feel as if I can get in my best shot in because I really don't want to upset them.

I also can't resist arguing when politics is being discussed and I get sidetracked easily enough as it is.

It's odd, but that's the way I feel. If I change my mind, I'll let you know.