Politics?

[Mr. Gillette]

It's been fascinating to me, with the last 2 Tuesdays being bombarded in the media with shots of Hilary, Barack, McCain, Mitt, etc...we've been strangely and blissfully silent here in the Barbershop on that.

Thank you! I'm weary enough hearing about it every day on the news and all Sunday morning on Meet the Press, etc., but it seems like someone would have brought it up in any barbershop I've patronized...

My only thought-- Hilary is applauded this week for showing honest emotion and feeling. I wonder how things would have been if she had demonstrated such honest feeling on camera with Bill, immediately following the Monica Lewinsky affair? While she is not my personal leading candidate, I do feel that she's in a bad spot as a woman...either too tough and abrasive on the one hand, or too soft on the other.

For this reason, I've chosen to (1) never be a woman (2) I shall not seek, nor accept any party's nomination for President.

[Dr. Mike]

I've participated in other discussions that veered into the political realm, but I think I will do everybody a favor and not jump right into a thread specifically dealing with politics. A few years back, this would be next to impossible for me, but after marrying into a family that has almost completely opposite political opinions from my own and those of my family, I have learned the ability to strategically hold my tongue. But I will watch with anticipation how this one unfolds.

[Mr. Gillette]

I've participated in other discussions that veered into the political realm, but I think I will do everybody a favor and not jump right into a thread specifically dealing with politics. A few years back, this would be next to impossible for me, but after marrying into a family that has almost completely opposite political opinions from my own and those of my family, I have learned the ability to strategically hold my tongue. But I will watch with anticipation how this one unfolds.

EXACTLY!! This seems to be where all of us (myself included) seem to be. And I spent the weekend in a similar family situation, so I can relate. It's just odd, that if someone has a 5.00 Burma Shave Brush that sheds some hairs in a puck of Williams it seems to get more play than our leadership for the next 4 years...

...I just hope we all register and vote in our own primaries.

[kwk285]

All I will say about the upcoming elections is that in my opinion anyone who is running for president is in somebody or some groups pocket. The only changes that they will make is to help the person or group that owns them.

I am therefore what I call a defensive voter. Since none of the candidates are worthy, I vote for the one that I feel will screw up the least.

[moses]

It's just odd, that if someone has a 5.00 Burma Shave Brush that sheds some hairs in a puck of Williams it seems to get more play than our leadership for the next 4 years...

Well, it IS a shaving forum....

-Mo

[ILLfarmboy]

.... but after marrying into a family that has almost completely opposite political opinions from my own and those of my family....

I'm a very outspoken libertarian-minded Republican and I married a woman who is politically ambivalent but comes from a family of Democrats. After nearly ten years of marriage I still wear my party affiliation on my sleeve. But I have learned that alcohol, politics and in-laws don't mix.

[Dr. Mike]

I'm a very outspoken libertarian-minded Republican and I married a woman who is politically ambivalent but comes from a family of Democrats. After nearly ten years of marriage I still wear my party affiliation on my sleeve. But I have learned that alcohol, politics and in-laws don't mix.

Somewhat similar situation. I come from a very outspoken conservative Republican family (my grandpa can quote from memory everything Rush Limbaugh said the day before and my father had issues voting for Reagan because he was at one point a Democrat), but my wife comes from a family that is very much southern Democrat. It is just understood that certain topics aren't discussed (although my father-in-law did once go to my online political blog, and got very irate at what I had to say about a certain former president from the state of Georgia that he adores).

Don't get me wrong. I am very much involved in how this election goes, as I have been for every election since 1984 (when I was finally old enough to even understand anything about politics). I just know that things get out of control very quickly on here, and, as has been said, this is a shaving forum. I try to not be too disruptive, although I know that I have frequently been unsuccessful when my passion for politics (and religion) gets the better of me. But I hope everybody understands that it is never meant personally, and, as attested to by my marriage, I have no problem whatsoever getting along with individuals that disagree with me politically (my wife has told me that she would not vote for me were I to ever run for political office ).

[castlecraver]

Thank you! I'm weary enough hearing about it every day on the news and all Sunday morning on Meet the Press, etc., but it seems like someone would have brought it up in any barbershop I've patronized...

This may be a stupid question, but what do you expect to hear about on Meet the Press? It is a political news program.

There's probably other stuff on Sunday mornings (I wouldn't know, I'm a MTP junkie ).

[rabidpotatochip]

I'm a very outspoken libertarian-minded Republican and I married a woman who is politically ambivalent but comes from a family of Democrats. After nearly ten years of marriage I still wear my party affiliation on my sleeve. But I have learned that alcohol, politics and in-laws don't mix.

I find that any two of the three cause problems when combined.

As for politics, I wish it were easier to know what the hell the politicians were thinking. It would probably make all our lives easier.

[moses]

As for politics, I wish it were easier to know what the hell the politicians were thinking. It would probably make all our lives easier.

At least with Bill Clinton, whatever you might have thought of his politics, we all KNEW what he was thinking.

-Mo

[patrisVII]

All I will say about the upcoming elections is that in my opinion anyone who is running for president is in somebody or some groups pocket. The only changes that they will make is to help the person or group that owns them.

My own view takes that basic idea to its logical conclusion:

The person who seeks political office is, by definition, the last person who should hold it.

[Mr. Gillette]

This may be a stupid question, but what do you expect to hear about on Meet the Press? It is a political news program.

There's probably other stuff on Sunday mornings (I wouldn't know, I'm a MTP junkie ).

Bad choice...I agree...I was probably thinking more along the lines of Fox's "Fair and Balanced" approach, wholly owned by Mr. Murdoch. Touche to you...

[Mr. Gillette]

At least with Bill Clinton, whatever you might have thought of his politics, we all KNEW what he was thinking.

-Mo

Mo...you're ABSOLUTELY correct! LMAO!

As for your other post...that this is a shaving forum...true. But in my visits this weekend, I spent some time with my Uncle Bob, the retired barber. Poor guy...spent 50 years of his life on his feet, clipping hair, shaving faces, always talking, always spinning a yarn, always talking politics. Now he's retired, and when he gets an audience, six months worth of thoughts come spinning out in 20 minutes...his barbershop was always a political hotbed...

...not always a well-informed or thinking hotbed, but a hotbed nonetheless.

I just find it strange, because it doesn't seem to be a topic of conversation this time around in my day to day interactions. Barack and Hilary are going to be neck in neck to the end-- and it's not appearing too exciting in the republican arena...one by one they'll drop out, and Mitt and McCain will tangle a bit until one wins out. There's a war going on in Iraq, some say the surge has worked, some say it hasn't...and the only issue we seem to have on the table is "Change vs. no change."

One candidate talks about experience, one about hope, one about the past..one about the future...nothing about the issues-- maybe that's why it doesn't hit home with any of us jaded old folks who just want to know how much of a hit we'll take at tax time.

So maybe my thought in posting this thread wasn't to talk about politics, but to talk about talking about politics...

Tom

[ILLfarmboy]

What I find irksome about politicians is their vague meaningless clap trap about "the future" bla...bla.. bla...

Tell me about your voting record. Did you fight to reduce taxes and regulation? Prove to me via your voting record you believe the Second Amendment means exactly what it says. Don't dress up in blaze orange, borrow someone else's shotgun and come out here for a photo op. THAT WON'T GARNER MY SUPPORT!

[Hobbesoxon]

Oddly enough, talking about American politics seems to be happening a great deal here in England. It's become rather a fascination to us. The tactics of some of the candidates (e.g., Giuliani's promotional videos describing how the world is trying to kill you) are really rather entertaining compared to our staid and traditional party politics. Very enjoyable to watch, and it's making a lot of people talk... :)


Toodlepip,

Hobbes

[rabidpotatochip]

My own view takes that basic idea to its logical conclusion:

The person who seeks political office is, by definition, the last person who should hold it.

How very Douglas Adams.

It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

[analog_kid]

What I find irksome about politicians is their vague meaningless clap trap about "the future" bla...bla.. bla...

Tell me about your voting record. Did you fight to reduce taxes and regulation? Prove to me via your voting record you believe the Second Amendment means exactly what it says. Don't dress up in blaze orange, borrow someone else's shotgun and come out here for a photo op. THAT WON'T GARNER MY SUPPORT!

+1 Ron Paul is my homeboy.

[moses]

...and the only issue we seem to have on the table is "Change vs. no change."

The place of the word "change" in political discourse is pretty fascinating. Just the degree to which it is a motivating factor, throughout the history of electoral politics is amazing, and the degree to which its impact is independent of specification as to what exactly is to be changed.

-Mo

[Mr. Gillette]

What I find irksome about politicians is their vague meaningless clap trap about "the future" bla...bla.. bla...

Tell me about your voting record. Did you fight to reduce taxes and regulation? Prove to me via your voting record you believe the Second Amendment means exactly what it says. Don't dress up in blaze orange, borrow someone else's shotgun and come out here for a photo op. THAT WON'T GARNER MY SUPPORT!

Brad...well put. I think you and I share a common...uh...Senator from our state.

He was a State Senator for a term, then became one of "our" U.S. Senators.

Can you tell me what he's done to make your life better in the Land of Lincoln? He's "in town" today raising money...but I don't know what he's doing to help me out here in the suburbs today, to bring the cost of Gas down, or to help put a roof over someone's head...meanwhile, I'm watching flooding downstate, on the news, a couple of tornadoes in my neck of the woods, and he's raising $1,000 a guest from a nice dinner.

As one of that "unnamed candidate's" constituents, doesn't this rub you a little bit the wrong way? What has he DONE for the people of your state in 4 years? Why should we expect him to do more in the next 4 than he already has?

As for the orange suit and hunting...you made me laugh!!! That was so completely funny-- but I did see today online where that hunter was about the throw his support toward that Senator who has done so much for you and I and the people of Illinois.

I gotta get running-- gotta scrape up $1,000.00 and head out for lunch!!!!

[Dr. Mike]

I roll my eyes at all this talk of "change" as if this is the latest thing in politics. Every 4 years that is the catchphrase. The problem is, everybody really means that that guy in the other district or the other state should change who he is sending to Washington, and none of it is actually meant for themselves. With as much as the populace is supposedly fed up with incumbents, in many cases it takes some kind of grand jury indictment before constituents will oust their elected representative.

Honestly, I think the problem is that everybody is asking the wrong question here. You ask what they are going to do for you. I am more interested in what they will not do to me. The problem when you start wanting your politicians to do more for you is that it is probably going to hurt me. You want them to magically insure everybody? Somebody still has to pay the bill. Our government was not created as a body that could collectively provide for our every heart's desire. They have very definite instructions on what they should and should not do. I don't mind attack ads where candidates are challenged on things they have said and done in the past that tell me how they might govern. I don't like candidates who get up and start promising new things. At this point, somebody who actually strictly does what the constitution tells him he can do and butts out of the rest would, sadly, be about the biggest "change" in our form of government since almost the very beginning, but certainly in the last 100 years.
I like the 2-party winner take all system we have. I have real issues with coalition governments. In coalition governments, typically a more mainstream group has to garner the support of a more radical group in order to have a governing majority, and this often entails pushing through some more radical legislation. In our system, the parties check each other. Nothing too radical really goes through because the other party can check it in various ways, and there is no other group that can be pulled in to pass radical legislation. Every once in a long while, when the electorate gets fed up enough on an issue, they give one party overwhelming power to push through whatever big issues they want. Then the electorate decides that it might not have been such a good idea to give any one party so much power, and things swing the other way.