Keith Watanabe * NET 2.0

Yesterday, Obama officially picked Joe Biden as his running mate.  The choice is one that appears to appease both sides in supposedly boosting up Obama's foreign policy and making him appear stronger.  However, Biden is also more of a conservative in some ways, especially on technology.  Not sure if this will play a role ultimate as VP, but it doesn't look generally good for students and non-Hollywood/music industry people.

Also, yesterday I was reading an article about Jessie Venture, the independent Minnesota governor.  While initially, I was more interested in his thoughts on pro-wrestling, naturally I wanted to read more on his views on politics.  The guy is supremely interesting and intelligent.  Surprisingly, despite his military background, he's definitely not a conservative.  But one of the most interesting statements was him comparing Cuba's Fidel Castro and the US' two parties.  He said that the only difference between the US and Cuba is that the US has one additional majority party that supposedly we can choose from.

His acumen was on target here.  I never really thought about a point like that until that statement.  But then something hit me: what if these elections are all bullshit in the first place?  What if there is not even two parties, but just one party with two voices during election time to give the perception to the American people that we have a choice?

When you look at the upcoming ballot, truthfully the choices aren't great.  Originally, I wanted to vote for Obama since he was the lesser of two evils.  But the addition of Biden and his previous platform doesn't sit well with me.  It's obvious that Obama wants to give the perception that he's covering his bases.  However, the choice might be there for other reasons, namely to be able to cover a potentially conservative agenda should Obama be elected.

Well, what does that mean?  Part of my theory on the history of US politics is that since possibly WWII or WWI even, the government has never been the same.  Perhaps, the demonstration to the world of two successful global wars proved to the American administration itself that it had the power to control things, especially its people.  As a result, in order to establish a firm grip over the world and its people, a new hidden agenda was established long ago to ensure the continuation of the strength of the US.  And every year, this agenda seems to "strengthen" as the political process seems to gain more understanding of its people and adapting quickly to make sure people in America stay in line.

So for instance, there's no such thing in reality as the two parties.  Obviously, the US elections are a joke because of the electoral college system.  You can't have true choice when you're voting for a proxy to make your decisions.  So that makes voters' roles meaningless.

The other thing one has to wonder is policy.  After the Republicans got ousted recently, we've yet to see improvement in the US.  Some people have pointed out some fallacies or 180 degree shifts with people like Pelosi.  So again one has to wonder what the true point of voting in the Democrats in at the time was if they've done nothing to improve the situation?  Sure, we have a lame duck president supposedly, but for instance, why did Congress approve a new budget for the war?  I thought we ousted those GOP fucks to help stop this madness.

Some times I also think that the voices of dissent in the government are there to spood feed us into thinking that they're fighting for us.  South Park had an interesting episode where they showed that the political process originally created was a "save my ass" type of thinking where people were allowed to be hypocritical yet safe at the same time.  When you think about what's going on now, certainl this is the case.

Venture pointed out something else that was interesting in stating that America needs to take back the political process.  It was something along the lines of my thinking or maybe what I've stated previously in a blog.  That is, the American public might eventually sense that they cannot trust their own government.  Ventura and I both believe that exterior forces won't be the thing that harms America the most.  Instead, it'll be the interior forces that destroy the fabric of the American government.

The big problem is that, as I've mentioned before, the limited choice of parties in the American system, despite being called a democracy, really isn't about choice or making the right decisions.  If the democrats win fall, people will have high expectations with the decaying American society.  People expect a quick bandaid to be provided by the government.  Clearly, this will not be the case, but it won't stop the strong wishes of a disillusioned American society.  Politicians will talk and life will continue. But it's doubtful that any policy will expediently be installed to fix things like gas prices, the crumbling American economy, stifling job losses, ending the Iraq war.  There's no easy answer for these in a realistic political manner.

As a result, the biggest problem will be the perception that the American government is weak and ineffectual.  If things worsen, like many people irrecoverably lose their jobs, then the situation will be far worse than a natural disaster.  A natural disaster you can blame on lack of foresight.  But the government is in the hands of a small group of people.  You can easily blame them and inflate history in such a way to show that there's nothing the government can do anymore to help people.