Why, Barack, why? Why are most people so stupid?

Today I was at the gym and I glimpsed some interesting news on CNN (it's really odd, the only time I ever watch CNN is at the gym--I belong to two gyms and they both show CNN--why is that?). It seems that Barack Obama has changed courses and now supports offshore drilling.

In contrast to CNN and most corporate media outlets, I will analyze this news from two points of view. First I will analyze it from a policy point of view. Then I will analyze it from a political point of view. Then I might go back and analyze it from a policy point of view again.

First, expanding offshore drilling is a terrible idea. The main argument by the proponents is that the price of oil (and thus gasoline) is too high right now. The high prices are hurting the American consumer who is also being squeezed by the housing crisis. All that is true. They then argue that allowing offshore drilling will reduce gas prices by increasing supply. I am not convinced that the drilling will reduce prices quickly enough to help consumers and even if it did, the environmental consequences wouldn't be worth the oil.

How is it possible that drilling offshore wouldn't really help consumers. Two words: Chevy Volt. It takes about 4 to 5 years to build an offshore oil rig and a decade or more of geologic exploration before construction can start. The Chevy Volt goes into production in 2010. When everyone is driving a plug in hybrid, we won't need more oil. In fact, some longer term investments in oil producing infrastructure may actually lose money. It is true that the offshore drilling will help consumers somewhat in the medium term, but not one bit in the short term. And isn't the proposal to allow drilling a reaction to short term economic pain?

Besides, if consumers are still so reliant on internal combustion for ground transportation that they need more oil production 20 years from now than they do today, then the planet is FUKT. F-U-K-T FUKT. Someday I will get deeper into the science behind global warming, but for now, let me just say that greenhouse gases are recycled very slowly by the Earth. This means that the Earth will continue to get warmer decades after we stop emitting greenhouse gases (the jusry is still somewhat out on this one, but chances are it'll take a while to cool off). This will lead to flooding, pestilence, and droughts. Think that ought to concern the 155.2 million Americans living on the coast?

Well, it doesn't. [Now we get to politics] According to Gallup, only 37% of Americans worry about climate change much. And thus, 69% of Americans favor offshore drilling even though alternative technologies could ease the energy burden on Americans faster (and as I've stated before, lowering income and capital gains taxes while implementing carbon taxes would spur the economy--not harm it). So although I am not pleased with Barack's decision, I do understand that a controversial candidate in a tight race can't afford to side against 70% of the American public on an issue (energy prices) that is number #2 behind the economy in general. grumble ... grumble ... wish he had stuck to his guns ... grumble ... grumble.

Which brings me to my next question. Is the American public too stupid to be allowed to vote? I used to think that democracy was the greatest thing since sliced bread (err ... I guess democracy predated sliced bread), but I am completely disillusioned. After 2000, when the American People elected a man whose grammar is almost as fucked up as his moral compass, I blamed it on the antidemocratic leanings of the Supreme Court. When 2004 came and the American People reelected the same poo flinger that lied to us and got us involved in a horrible quagmire in Iraq, I started to lose faith. The recent shortsightedness of the American Public has all but ruined my faith in them.

My wife says that democracy is a terrible idea and that benevolent dictatorship is the only answer. I think that's kind of risky ... isn't that what

kim jong-il claims to be?

She does however have another good idea. Let's bring back voting tests. I'm slightly leary. It seems that the poor uneducated proletariat might be severely disadvantaged by this. On the other hand, what have they done for themselves anyway? Another idea is to let experts in various fields (i.e. professors or Ph.D. holders) elect the higher ranks of some government agencies (i.e. the SEC, FDA, EPA, Justice Department, maybe FCC). This way at least those agencies--which do wield some policy--would not be filled with morons. The problem with that is that they might be beholden to rich corporation who dole out grant money and might file those agencies with corrupt sleaze bags (would that be much different?)

In conclusion: the unwashed masses are morons who can't be trusted to be from 32 ice cream flavors much less pick the most powerful person in the world. The best idea that I have heard to fix this is to not let them vote ... or at least make their votes count less.

Obama Sells Out--McCain Sleeps In

Let me preface my remarks by saying that I am inclined to support Barack Obama, but haven't made my decision, yet. As an undecided voter, the events of the past week have given me pause.

On July 9th, Barack Obama voted to increase the Federal Government's ability to spy on Americans and granted immunity to the telecoms who had violated their consumers privacy in the past.

First, a little background: in 2002, the NSA asked AT&T multiple telecoms to turn over millions and millions of phone conversations of Americans communicating with people overseas. The telecoms complied. George Bush has been trying to get these acts legalized ever since.

The FISA Amendments Act gave the NSA eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval, provided the government files required papers within a week. It also granted retroactive immunity to the telecoms. Both parts of this law are likely unconstitutional. The retroactive immunity is Ex Post Facto. The allowed search is an unlawful search. We'll see if the Supreme Court is comptent enough to overturn the law. My money is on the telecom immunity being overturned and the actual spying powers being upheld.

Barack Obama voted for the FISA Amendments Act. John McCain didn't bother. Now I'm not sure which bothers me more. The fact that Barack Obama who holds himself up as a champion of individual liberties would support such a rancid piece of legislation. Or the fact that John McCain wouldn't bother to show up to such an important vote. Both are reprehensible.

Let's try to analyze their motivations a bit. Obama would like to be able to say that he is tough on national security and terrorism. It may be misguided, but some people actually think that terrorism is the biggest challenge that we face.

As to McCain's motivation for not voting? I haven't a clue. Maybe he feels that Yea or Nay, the vote could be held against him. I'm not sure how wither vote could be worse than abstinence given that he has supported unlawful electronic searches in the past. Oh well, I never fucking understand why McCain does what he does. Senility maybe?

So who do I vote for? Not McCain. He'll lead us into war with Iran. Obama? Maybe. There is a third option:

Stupid People vs. A Well Run Political System

This rant concerns the stupidity of the average American. That's right, I said it, most people are stupid. Average people are even more stupid. How does that work? Well, everyone has some good ideas and some terrible ideas, but if you average them all together, there are just bad ideas. In business, bad ideas die a Darwinian death. In politics, bad ideas are elected or enacted as compromises between extreme but creative ideas.

So why does the average person get to vote? I guess democracy has worked well in practice in the past when people generally voted on the recommendations of newspaper editors (who tended to be more intelligent and better informed than average).

But in this day of excessive television coverage and extreme scrutiny of sensational issues such as sex and religion (neither of which is relevant to 97.3% of issues), people tend to vote for the politician who looks good on TV and tends not to make mistakes. Well, you know what that gets you? Mediocrity. Imagine if Babe Ruth or Michael Jordan had been more afraid of making mistakes than intent on success. What sort of athletes would they have been?

Still, as Sir Winston Churchill has said, ...democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. Maybe there's a better form of government that hasn't been tried, but maybe if the average 'tard would stop watching American Idol and start paying a-fucking-ttention to what's going on, democracy might work a little better.

We should let our politicians make mistakes. If they make somewhat insensitive remarks, we should let them slide a bit. If they misspeak, give them a pass. If they have associated with undesirables, let it go. On the other hand, if a candidate shows real inexpertise over important issues, consistently demonstrates a lack of intellectual ability, or puts forth unwise policies, let 'em have it with both barrels.

Let's look at some examples of faux pas and categorize them Slip Up (don't cast aspersion on this brilliant leader) or Fuck Up (you are a dumbass who shouldn't be elected).

John Edwards' $400 Hair Cut	Slip Up	Obviously
Bill Clinton bangs Gennifer Flowers	Slip Up	Or maybe Go Bill!
Bill Clinton probes Monica Lewinsky with a cigar	Slip Up	Dude is freaky!
Ken Starr probes Bill Clinton with Subpoenas	Fuck Up	Ken Starr has contributed to society about as much as Star Jones.
George Bush uses the word "nucular"	Slip Up	He watches The Simpsons too much?
George Bush can't make his verbs and subjects agree	Fuck Up	Me fail English? That’s unpossible.
Barack Obama goes to a church with an insane preacher	Slip Up	Aren't all preachers insane at some level? And don't politicians generally hang out with the worst sort?
Barack Obama makes a deal to take public funding and then goes back it	Fuck Up	Dishonest, but then $100s of millions would be tempting
John McCain confuses Sunni with Shia	Fuck Up	Okay, plenty of people could make that mistake, but none of them should be in charge of the free world either.

So think about the issues and when a controversy starts to dominate basic cable, try to consider what it really means. Is it a slip up or a fuck up?