12.21.2005

hopefully...

... this will be my last bit of political meandering for a while. that said, i can't keep quiet any longer: does it sicken anyone else as much as it sickens me (and i mean the violently ill variety of sick) when politicians add pet projects, however big or small, to larger bills that are more likely to pass, just so their bill will pass as well?

personally, i find the idea that our representatives in government are voting on bills containing any number of wildly unrelated measures. let's think for a moment. i've got a bill before me with three measures that, if the bill passes, will all be enacted:

1. cure cancer
2. abolish poverty
3. behead all children under the age of three.

being the good politician that i am, i now have a problem: pass the bill, thereby abolishing cancer and povery while killing millions of children, or save the children and let cancer and poverty continue a killing spree of their own.

i trust the absurdity of the example was appreciated.

now, as i took two semesters of logic, i realize it's not the strongest argument. such was not my aim. my point is simple, and it remains: you cannot apply one vote to more than one thing. cannot. do we vote for the president, congressmen, representatives, and our respective governors and mayors with ONE yay or nay? get real.

and we wonder why politicians are driven to evil: the devil offers them refuge from insanity.

i realize as well that politicians have a lot on their proverbial plates. too, i suppose efficiency/expediency were at least partly responsible for the birth of what seems to me a poorly conceived practice. perhaps, though, if the politicians weren't concerned with governing everything imaginable and instead concentrated only on matters of the utmost importance and severity, this silliness wouldn't be necessary.

(is it me, or is the general flavor of my political posts a heavily sarcastic "yay, america"?)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home