The Edge with Sean Engmann

The Politics of Association

The political era that we are living in right now is one of style and rhetoric over substance, and it is very sad.  That will be the unfortunate legacy of the presidency of Bill Clinton.  While I can take a lot, I find the latest political ad in the California gubernatorial race to be particularly nauseating.  In the ad, the California Democratic Party uses the tactic of guilt by association by linking Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to President Bush.  The ad does not address any of the issues and challenges faced here in California, nor does it present any sort of an alternative plan, it is merely a blunt attack ad directed at President Bush and indirectly at Arnold.

The problem that I have with this ad is similar to the problem that I have with the tactics of San Francisco Democrats who use local government to pass meaningless resolutions, which, among other things direct City workers from cooperating with federal law that they disagree with and call for the impeachment of Bush.  We get it, Bush is not popular here, but the goal of the left is simply to foment hatred for our president, and then try to tap into that hatred to get their candidates elected.  Although I did not vote for him in the recall election, I think Arnold has done an outstanding job as our governor, staring down special interest groups, such as the teachers unions in order to create real reform and fiscal responsibility.

The Democrats, locally, in California and nationally have no plan.  The closest thing Arnold's opponent Phil Angelides has to a plan is to raise several taxes across the board to broaden entitlement programs, which harkens back to the 1970s, a policy that has been soundly rejected.  Nationally, the Democrats are outraged by every move that the Bush Administration makes in the War on Terror, yet they fail to come up with an alternative plan.  The Democratic agenda is not based on ideas, rather, it is based on focus groups and opinion dynamics to tell them what needs to be done to get elected, and the playbook now is to promote as much hate and spew as much venom toward George W. Bush as possible.  Bill Clinton was a brilliant politician in that he was able to reinvent himself on a daily basis, and in doing so, he actually helped the country by signing most of the Contract With America into law.  However, he destroyed his own party, which used to at least stand for something, and now only knows how to try to get elected.

Bumper Sticker Politics and General Idiocy

I'm sure you've all seen it, the guy in the car in front of you, who incidentally has trouble driving, feels that he can craft a witty political or personal statement and conveniently place it on the back of his car in the form of a bumper sticker.  These statements come in all forms, but most come in the form of haughty, contemptuous "humor" in the Jon Stewart vein, which I hate.  My hatred of that form of expression reaches new heights when the yahoo driving that car decides to do something stupid like cut me off in traffic, get in front of me in traffic or just drive slow (which is the worst of the aforementioned offenses).  Sitting behind the car, I am often a captive audience, with nothing to do but look at the poorly thought out views of the person in front of me with more contempt than is shown on the bumper sticker.  Simply put, bumper sticker humor or politicking is its lowest form no matter how you slice it and no matter what side of the aisle you operate.

San Francisco, an otherwise beautiful city, is chock full of superior arrogance when it comes to politics.  Many people here take pride in having views that are on the fringe of American politics and are supercilious enough to think that not only are they in the majority, but also that nobody has a right to a divergent viewpoint.  Needless to say, the atmosphere here, especially since the beginning of the war has made for very interesting bumper sticker fodder.  With the number of Kerry-Edwards bumper stickers still around, you'd think by looking that it was still the Fall of 2004 (guys, it's over your guy lost, get a grip and move on).  Not only that but the selection of creative anti-Bush stickers is staggering.  You've got your classic "Impeach Bush" and a W with a circle and a line through it, another more classic one where a "No War" bumper sticker has been recycled and transformed into a "No W" bumper sticker (I'll give these people credit, at least they're trying to save the environment in their contempt for the Bush Administration).  Beyond these, come some of the more creative and annoying, including, "Re-Defeat Bush" (well he was re-elected, not sure that's what they wanted...), "More trees, less Bush," "Support our troops, bring them home now," "Doing my part to piss off the right," and "Some village in Texas is missing its idiot."  These bumper stickers are moronic and sophomoric in my opinion, and I feel that people who put them on their cars do not grasp politics well enough to have an intelligent debate.

Aside from the individual messages about specific candidates or current events, there is another class of bumper stickers that take the cake as the absolute worst.  We've all seen them, these are the stickers with lengthy political statements on them, often four to five lines.  These are problematic for a number of reasons: primarily because they're too small to read, so, out of curiosity I often maneuver into a position where I can eventually read what the sticker says, and secondly because once I finally do read the thing I am more pissed of because I had made an effort to read something so ridiculous.  The prize for the most absurd bumper sticker message I've seen is actually a fairly popular message, "It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber."  That bumper sticker is very popular with teachers, and I actually first came across it in my middle school English class.  It is laughably wrong on so many levels, mainly because it marginalizes the military (as protection is the single most important thing our government is charged with providing), and it assumes that schools are underfunded, which they are not (more on that in a future blog).  It's scary that people who can put this ridiculous statement on their cars are charged with teaching kids.

Bumper sticker politics plainly stink, as do any other bumper sticker messages, and they just convey bad messages about you if you use them.  "Proud parent of an honor student," means that you're pretentious, while the counter message of "My C student beat up your honor student," reeks of insecurity.  "How's my driving, call 1-800 EAT SHIT" reflects a simplistic person who thinks he's clever, while the morons who put "School's open drive safely" bumper stickers and/or, "If you can read this you're too close," stickers on their cars are just pricks (especially since the small writing entices you to drive closer so that you can read it, go figure...).  All in all, stay away from bumper sticker politics and bumper sticker humor, all it does is further piss off the other drivers on the road.

Radical Islam

Radical Islam is the biggest scourge on the world at the moment and the biggest danger to humanity.  Following religion, many of these devout followers seek to upend western civilization and return to a period where women are subservient to men in every way and all the benefits of modern technology have been nullified.  While everyone is trying to be politically correct and not offend Muslims, we are neglecting the fact that in the current world, the radical Muslims parallel the barbarians who succeeded in destroying the Roman Empire.  These people are armed with a fervent ideology that seeks a world full of followers of Islam, with no tolerance for any divergence in opinion, and they will continue to brutalize innocent civilians in order to forward their quest.

One thing to consider is what the fall of the Roman Empire meant to humanity.  Many of the components of the Roman Empire and their great civilization were lost until the 19th century, nearly 1500 years after the fall of the Romans.  Like the Barbarians, Osama bin Laden and the radical Islamists seek only to destroy everything that has made the West and the world great, including our culture and our technology.  We are clearly superior to the Muslim world in every way, especially in terms of our inclusion and our technology.  With the fifth anniversary of September 11th a few days away, it is a great time to review who we are and who our enemy is.  Osama bin Laden, who proudly presided over the attacks that brutally killed several thousand people and destroyed American landmarks has recently released footage showing him with the 9/11 hijackers.  Many in this country say we should try to understand what made them do this, my opinion is that we must destroy them, and we are off to a strong start.

September 11th was a prime example of good versus evil, and the fact that our enemies will kill each and every one of us if they had the chance.  They have proven it by capturing and torturing civilians just because they happen to be of Western descent.  This is an enemy that we should not waste our time trying to understand, rather it is one that, for humanity's sake, we need to destroy.  Additionally, we need to surveille and scrutinize the Muslim community in the West, as that is a community that has yet to convincingly condemn its radicals.  While communism was a threat to our way of life, Radical Islam is a threat to our very existence, and we should use any means necessary to completely eradicate it from the Earth.  We need not repeat the tragedy of the barbarians, led by Attila the Hun, destroying civilization, which these radical Muslims intend to do.  The agenda of radical Islam makes the Nazis look like humanitarians, and we must destroy them.

Enough Al Gore Already

Is it just me, or are others getting nauseated by all of the publicity that Al Gore has been getting recently?  Yes, the uninspiring former Vice President has been making the rounds recently, and has seemingly been successful at redefining himself as a man of the people while taking potshots at President Bush and preaching about global warming.  The fact that he is being embraced by the activist left in much the same way that Michael Moore was a couple years ago is a bit more irritating to me.

Yesterday, Al Gore appeared on stage at the MTV Video Music Awards ostensibly because Justin Timberlake was bringing sexy back, but actually to continue his global warming crusade.  My question is, what was he doing there and how did he get there?  Has he now been embraced by pop culture simply because he made his documentary?  Is Gore now a champion of the left, the same left that did not rally behind him in 2000? 

The reality is that Gore had no business being at the VMAs, and, personally, I'm sick of seeing his mug.  Gore has joined a list of people who continue to take potshots at the current administration from the outside, a list that includes Moore, former President Carter and to a lesser degree, Bill Clinton.  My problem is not that they are highly critical of the President, but simply that they attack him without presenting any sort of an alternative plan.  Not only that, but they fuel the fringe left by making ridiculously over the top and irresponsible statements abroad, such as Gore's commentary at the Edinburgh International Television Festival that "Democracy is under attack."

One of the main problems in polarized America is a lack of communication between the left and the right.  Living in San Francisco, I get the distinct impression that liberals think they are superior to the rest of us and look down their noses at conservatives. There is the automatic assumption that anybody with any intelligence must be a liberal and they take it for granted.  It is the ultimate form of intolerance.  The fact that liberals are in the minority in this country is not well represented in pop culture, which seemingly clings to every liberal cause, while dismissing conservatives as dumb and out of touch.  The fact that everyone's making a darling out of Al Gore as this noble intellectual prancing around trying to save the world illustrates my point.  Al Gore lost in 2000 and if the election were held again today, he'd still lose.  I love to hear ideas from all sides, but I'm sick and tired of having the agenda of one side being portrayed as noble by a minority while the same people sneer, mock and look down on President Bush and the other side.  The liberal agenda is not noble, and I'm sick of having Al Gore and the like rammed in front of my face telling me that they're better than everybody else.  You lost, get on with your life, I'm sick of seeing you everywhere.