Heartland

for me, here in san francisco -- the bluest of the blue. the anti-heartland. the... thumbland? here, in the thumbland, voting for gwb is inconceivable. people tell me, "i don't understand? i can't imagine voting for gwb!"

well, i did a lot of thinking about it. i can.

so, in order to learn from our mistakes and maybe to try and see the bright side and just to get it out, i'm going to write about why i think people like george w. bush.

and by people, let's be honest, i'm talking about most of america. most of america, the majority of us, wanted to keep him in office. wanted more of what he's been supplying.

if this is going to piss you off, go read something else, huh? why would you want to get pissed off?

gwb promises:

1) comprehension.
while i don't think half of what he says is true, almost all of what he says can be easily digested. "i am a man of conviction who will fight the bad guys and keep you safe." kerry can spew all he wants about finding and killing terrorists but i don't believe it any more than i believe him hunting geese. he's a lousy actor. bush stands up and says "saddam hussein is an egg sucker" and you know he means it (even if he's wrong) and -- and this is the important thing -- americans want to understand. not on a deep analytical level, but on a gut level. look at the popularity of CSI and Law and Order? they're not really about crime or law. they're about taking a bunch of complicated stuff and presenting it in an easily comprehensible package so the audience can go, "fuck yeah! take that bad guy!"

the economy for example: i have no idea about how the economy really works. is a tax break for the rich going to stimulate the economy? is 9/11 to blame for the deficit? will $1K to middle class families spur growth? fuck if i know. i liked kerry's plans because he was fighting bush and they made sense to me and because bush has oil coming out of his arse. but let's be honest, people, kerry's butt is full of ketchup and neither man really was honest with the people about the economy. probably because the economy is all guess work. bush said his bit, made it clear, and just refused to budge. kerry spouted figures that were very convincing to people who are convinced by figures. i'm pretty sure all those numbers could be just as convincing for other people with other agendas, too. america, it seems, is not convinced by figures. they're convinced by what feels comfortable. america likes junk food -- it tastes good. give us more.

2) conviction.
kerry is a flip flopper. no, not because he voted this way and that way. everyone knows that's how politics works. he's a flip flopper for asking america what they want to hear and then telling it. he's a flip flopper for believing in one thing and giving speeches about another. bush is an asshole. and he's incompetent. but he believed iraq had wmd and he didn't let anything, including facts, get in the way of that. he has strength of conviction. unfortunately for us here in the thumbland, he is convinced of lots of things that make me want to puke. i have very little idea what kerry actually believes. i just have a sense of what he thinks will get him elected.

3) safety.
i can't blame 9/11 on gwb and neither can you. 9/11 was probably in the works when clinton was in office. sure, gwb has gotten a ton of americans killed by sending them overseas to war -- but he's kept suzy homeland safe in her bed. what exactly was kerry's plan to keep us safe? he's going to find and kill terrorists. right. personally, i value liberty over security. but if you're not trying to do anything but work your job and earn your pension, what do you give a fuck about liberty? you're not muslim. you're not a hippie or a raver. let the government find out what books you bought -- who cares? as long as you're safe.

4) the good of the country.
this is a sticky one. when i was in vancouver with patrick, he brought this one up. i was giving him crap because tony blair is well up gwb's butt. he said, "tony blair is smart. tony blair knows that the usa is leading the world economically and allying yourself with the economic leader is good for the uk and his job is to make things good for the uk." whew. when you come down to it, gwb's job is to make things good for the usa. controlling oil interests in the middle east is good for the usa. it isn't pretty, maybe, but it will keep the us on top. so we're pushing around some arabs. so we're making it harder for french people to visit. who cares? sure, he's built up an enormous deficit doing it, but the average guy -- including me -- doesn't really see the effect of that. they see america in control and calling the shots.

it's all pretty awful, isn't it?

but instead of walking around in a daze and saying "he's such an idiot! how can he be president?" wouldn't it be more constructive to try and understand?

so i'm trying.

and please feel free to NOT write and post about the holes in the above arguments. i'm not running for president and the election is over, anyway. don't write and say, "kerry's not a flip-flopper! kerry had a plan! kerry would keep us safer!" because you know what?

people didn't buy it. and if people don't buy it, you're out of business.

so what do you do? should democrats try to mold some candidate that appeals to the heartland? hell no. that's what got us here. pandering. it's disgusting.

i guess i have no answers. none at all.

except, perhaps, jon stewart for president. and trying to go one week without a wedding brouhahah, a red sox series race, or a presidential election-level excitement.

bush was president last week and he's gonna be president next week. i'm just gonna try to be nice to people and make the best of it.