Thursday, January 24, 2008
If you're not familiar with a tactic known as "push polling", there's a great explanation of it on Wikipedia (Push Polls). The quick 'n' dirty definition is that "push polling" = telling people you're conducting a poll about their political views and candidates they might support in order to trash a candidate you don't like, often using misinformation (ie. lying). Hence, John McCain's "illegitimate (non-existent) black baby" helped derail his campaign back in 2000. Similarly, rumors went around not long ago about Barack Obama supposedly being a member in a Muslim, Black Nationalist religious group (the Nation of Islam, perhaps?) Of course, this is no more true than the slander leveled against John McCain (and, interestingly, adds a touch of religious bigotry along with its racism). When people vote with such "information" in mind, both the candidates and the democratic process get screwed.
Of course, no candidate benefiting from the lies spread about their job competitors can admit having a hand in the deed. That level of stupidity and duplicity are (I hope) more than the American electorate would stand for. But how can we stop this from happening? How can we protect citizens from such dishonest hacks?
It's very simple; we, the electorate, choose to quit listening to them.
You see, the First Amendment is a sword with only a single edge. Yes, you have the right to free speech (though even that doesn't protect outright lying, especially for political gain), but you don't have the "right" to be heard. Being capable of speech alone doesn't make you worth taking seriously. If we as a culture insist on ignoring so many people with great ideas, then I say it's high time we ignore the deceitful idiots conning their values into our minds too.
But, but, what if they don't lie? What if they use true statements to influence our vote, huh? Shouldn't we at least give them a listen, just in case?
First of all, the fact that they're pretending to be pollsters when they're not automatically means they're untrustworthy. Secondly, true or false, they exploit prejudice, pettiness, and the gossip-hungry passions, none of which are good standards for voting decisions. Thirdly, if you can be swayed by last-minute gossip, then you're neglecting your responsibility as an American citizen and should exempt yourself from the voting booth. Finally, if they have anything of value to say that actually is true, then I guarantee you can find out about it from a much more reliable source on your own time.
But, but, without the latest candibrity/celebritate news, how will I know who to vote for!?
You look at their voting record, you visit their website, and you listen to them in debates. Just make sure to turn off the television IMMEDIATELY after the debates too, because pundits are there to entertain your emotions and skew your thinking just as much as the fake pollsters are. DON'T DEPEND ON PUNDITS TO THINK FOR YOU. They're not even that good at it anyway. Consider your own life, your values, the lives of your fellow-citizens, the poor and the rich, the Earth's environmental fate, our international agenda, commerce and trade, providing job security, health care coverage, etc. THINK about these things for yourself, consider what the various candidates would do concerning these issues, then vote for the one who most closely matches your values *according to their voting record and their plans for the future*.
And keep in mind, democracy only starts in the voting booth; it doesn't end there. Electing someone to public office doesn't give them a free pass to do whatever they like. Keeping active in politics *beyond* voting is, in my opinion, the sign of a thoughtful and mature adult. Politics affects all our lives; we need to keep tabs on it, no matter who's in charge.
Below are a few links to assist you (and me) this primary season. If you know of any better resources on these candidates, please let me know.
THE DEBATES:
Democratic Presidential Debates on Wikipedia (lists all the debates, including transcripts and sometimes video clips)
Republican Presidential Debates on Wikipedia (ditto to above)
REMAINING CANDIDATES:
Hillary Clinton:
Voting Record: VoteSmart and Votes Database - Key Votes
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: Hillary Clinton's Campaign Site
John Edwards:
Voting Record: VoteSmart and Votes Database - Full Record (The site claims he hasn't voted in any "key votes," so here's the full list; have fun browsing!)
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: John Edwards' Campaign Site
Rudy Giuliani:
Voting Record: (none)
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: Rudy Giuliani's Campaign Site
Mike Huckabee:
Voting Record: (none)
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: Mike Huckabee's Campaign Site
Dennis Kucinich:
Voting Record: VoteSmart and Votes Database - Key Votes
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: Dennis Kucinich's Campaign Site
John McCain:
Voting Record: VoteSmart and Votes Database - Key Votes
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: John McCain's Campaign Site
Barack Obama:
Voting Record: VoteSmart and Votes Database - Key Votes
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: Barack Obama's Campaign Site
Ron Paul:
Voting Record: VoteSmart and Votes Database - Key Votes
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: Ron Paul's Campaign Site
Mitt Romney:
Voting Record: (none)
Issue Statements: The Presidential Field: Check out "On the Issues" and Speeches & Public Statements
Website: Mitt Romney's Campaign Site
ISSUE QUIZZES:
(to see with whom your sympathies lie, whether you knew it or not, *winkity*)
Washington Post "Choose Your Candidate" Quiz
"Select Smart" Presidential Candidate Selector
WQAD Select A Candidate Quiz
"Fear of serious injury alone cannot justify oppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis
BigThink - A website dedicated to hosting videos of people, both experts and common folk, who think they have provocative ideas. It's a fun site to browse.
Civil Libertarians Warn of 'Patriot Act Lite' - "Civil libertarians are worried that a little-known anti-terrorism bill now making its way through the U.S. Congress with virtually no debate could be planting the seeds of another USA Patriot Act, which was hurriedly enacted into law after the al Qaeda attacks of Sep. 11, 2001."
Keeping tabs on the "Thought Crime Bill" - Since the mainstream media hasn't picked up this story *at all*, various internet sites are picking up the journalistic slack. Here you can find updates on this VERY important and dangerous legislation known as "HR 1955: The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act."
Lincoln's Crackdown - Why Lincoln's (VERY reluctant) decision to suspend habeas corpus and try citizens in a military court does NOT justify those actions today.
IN OPPOSITION to H.R. 1955 and S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - A petition you can sign if all this bothers you.
Free Rice - By combining education with feeding starving people, this site has become a staple of my Internet diet. I encourage anyone and everyone to visit and play this delightful, brilliant, important game.
online
.gif)
.gif)