tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26494404.post-26364338622572964312008-02-15T12:07:00.008-05:002008-02-19T11:24:09.092-05:00Warning: Political Rant Ahead<span style="font-family:times new roman;">I don't think I'm alone in saying this may be the most volatile political season our country has experienced in generations. I, like many of you, find myself at a crossroads: While I'm more passionate about the political process than ever before, I'm also beyond the point of being exasperated with it. For the average Joe, it's annoying enough that the media frenzy surrounding this November's election seems to have started around, oh, 320 B.C. But for those who actually like the fact that <em>The Biggest Loser</em> or another <em>CSI</em> rerun have been routinely pre-empted by a televised debate, there's a greater annoyance: this season's brash, blatant and maddening media bias.<br /><br />You don't have to be a political junkie (which I'm not) to realize this is nothing new. In fact, it's <em>very </em>old news when you consider the machines that have run the parties for decades. And yet can you ever remember such a barrage of hyped-up public debates, forums and Q&A sessions that overtly squelched the predetermined "losers"? Regardless of where this season ranks in terms of dirty politics, it still scares me to see the effects of such coverage on the common voter.<br /><br />Case in point: My wife was at a coffee shop the other day, where at the next table two older women adamantly discussed their dislike for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain. It became obvious that the women were Christians, so my wife was curious about their interest in other candidates. "I'm sorry, but I couldn't help overhearing your conversation," she said while leaning over to their table. "If you don't mind me asking, who are you voting for?" Neither had decided, but they certainly knew who they <em>weren't </em>voting for. "So what about Mike Huckabee?" my wife asked. Both paused for a while, shrugged a bit and then matter-of-factly stated that he probably wouldn't win.<br /><div align="center"><br />[<em>Warning: Editor rant ahead</em>]</div>Therein lies the heart of the current problem. It's one that's equally frustrating for fans of Ron Paul, who I think beautifully epitomizes the stirring, rabid underground movement that is fed up with conventional party politics. Paul and Huckabee are two different candidates, with unique positions, unique theories and unique followers. And both, we've been repeatedly told for the past year, are surefire losers. Can't win. Don't have enough cash. Don't have the support of key figures. Don't have the evangelical vote. Don't have enough charisma, experience, hair, Armani suits—you name it, they've been doubted because of it.<br /><br />Surprise, surprise ... here we are, mere months from the party conventions and at least two of those "losers" are still hanging on, despite a process that is bent on dismissing them. They're certainly not surviving because of air time. Mainstream media outlets have, as usual, been successful enough to brainwa—er, convince the general public who the <em>real </em>winners are. As a result, we stand a few delegates away from McCain gaining the GOP nomination. Still, I believe people are finally catching on to the reality. When Ron Paul gets invited to a two-hour debate but isn't asked a single question, you know something's up. Or when Mike Huckabee is asked to attend the same event yet only gets tossed the token "evangelical" questions, it's just as infuriating. It doesn't help that major Christian leaders have added to that frustration by either supporting those who seemingly contradict their core values or, as in the case of guys like James Dobson, offering endorsements that reek of settling for the "<a href="http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1711615,00.html">best remaining choice</a>"—and too late at that.<br /><br />So who wins in all this? I honestly don't know. On one hand, I'm confused by Christians who say they stand for certain fundamental values but refused to get behind a former pastor and denominational leader simply because he supposedly wouldn't win. And on the other hand, I feel for a 10-term Congressman who is propheticly bold enough to call this a political scam—while being a victim of it. What I do know, however, and what gives me hope for the future, is that things are being exposed. Slowly, yes ... but at least they're being exposed.<br /><div align="center">[<em>End rant</em>]</div></span>Marcus Yoarshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17904433211603328492noreply@blogger.com