Better not

I was thinking this morning about what I wish I could do better. Strange but true. But strange. I'm not talking about the things that would be outside of a reasonable wish, like flying. Sure, I'd love to fly but the physics of it eludes me. maybe if I could fly...

Anyway, there are things I can do but not well, and I'm talking about those. And I'm not talking about things that I think I do fine -- I can cook, both by following a recipe and by dead reckoning (which does not involve cooking road kill -- that is dead racooning). Sure, my food isn't gourmet but it is warm, tasty and abundant so siddown and eat. I write passably, especially as I'm the one giving out the grades. I drive, usually forward, I know how to juggle and can recite the multiplication tables hands down. For long division, I throw my hands up. After I eat them.

I've had caffeine this morning. Can you tell? Please don't.

So what I want to be able to do is ice skate. Like hockey, not any other. Go figure. I want to race across the ice, do a hockey stop that throws a spray of ice chips, and then glide backwards and not fall down and get a concussion. I do know how to skate, but in that awkward way that the only way I can stop is by aiming at the wall and letting it, or anyone between me and said wall do the hard work. A natural question to ask is whether I would also want to be really good at skiing. The answer is no. While skiing looks like fun it is really just controlled falling and the promise of hot chocolate at either the beginning or end. Ice skating is down on a flat surface with the option of hot chocolate AT ANY POINT!

An unnatural question might involve a dead racoon.

My Vote

People have always been curious about my politics and my voting habits. I don't know why, but I get asked (or told) for whom I voted most every November. So I'd like to clarify my position.

Politics is dumb, politicians are liars and, well, yeah. That.

My voting patterns have changed over the years. As a younger man, imbued with idealism and stupidity, I embraced a party, convinced that overarching questions of one's approach to governance should drive major decisions, individuals be damned. The platform, as it reflected an underlying understanding of the role of government should hold sway. Even when I flirted with voting for a particular candidate, I was still focused on issue-driven positions. I learned to let slide moral lapses that included a commander-in-chief indulging in infidelity while in office though it violated my personal moral code, and ignore positions which didn't accord with certain understandings of my religious value system because the party spoke for an approach to the entire structure of government.

I continued, despite the rampant tendency of political leaders to embrace practices (both in their policies and their lives) which ran counter to essential aspects of my identity, to vote for the representative of the party whose stated positions more clearly reflected my priorities. I defended the players and the groups by parroting those supposed truths about the size and function of government and its place in the day to day lives of the public. But I stopped when I realize that it was all junk and lies. Beneath the offensive personal practices, the abhorrent policy positions, the hot-mic comments, or the problematic deals and decisions there was never a heart driven by and towards and chewy-nougat moral center which I could fall back on. There was no code which compelled any group to do anything, and I realized that the labels and groups were interchangeable and fictions.

Ultimately, politics is defined as "lying while wearing a suit" and any particular position is subject to the whims of the highest bidder or nearest election. The most admirable quality in a politician is the ability to keep his or her mouth shut so that we don't have made obvious what is rotting under the surface and we can keep pretending that it isn't the case. No politician stands for me and no one is a role model for how I think or who I should be. When a public statement echoes my feelings then, hey, great. It is valuable until it isn't in vogue any more. I am too leery of the entire system to expect anything more and I hope I have taught my children a similar distaste. It isn't cynicism or pessimism, but a healthy realism -- don't look to scientists when you want positions on religion or politics, and don't look to politicians for their stances on anything related to morals. I can applaud something that is to my advantage while keeping an eye on its half-life and seeing that its future is dependent on the squeakiest part of the electorate. Its staunchest supporter or ally might change his mind tomorrow and I shouldn't be surprised. The messenger no longer matters for good or for bad. I shouldn't rely on a politician to set any personal standard because if I hang my hat on his or her characteristics, I run the same risk I do if I look for scientific or archaeological proof and validation for the bible. If you live by that sword, you will, the next day, probably die by it. So you embrace the support while you have it but don't let that giddiness spill over into any other arena. Make that hay while the sun shines but expect the other shoe to drop. But you never admire the useful idiots in suits who put it forward because their other statements, their lapses and flaws make it impossible to latch on to them in any larger sense.

Now I vote for third party candidates. Am I throwing away my vote by refusing to participate in a broken system? Aren't I just ensuring that someone's vision of the wrong candidate will win? Yes and no. Remember, to me they are all undesirable, all liars looking for expedients and pay days, looking to line their pockets and make some speeches along the way. And what if one explicitly announces that he holds a major position which is one which threatens the well-being of me and mine, or which calls into question his valuing of deep-seated values which I adhere to? I can then wonder if anyone's vote can make any difference. This person got to a position of prominence -- he rose through the system to represent his party or group. They are willing to field him as their go-to guy which means the problem runs so much deeper than a single candidate. The move to overthrow the social order must be a clearly popular perspective and the country may just be too far gone.

So there you have it. My politics is the realization that politics stinks. I have certain feelings about specific laws, rules and such, views which have developed from my experiences and my own moral compass but I certainly don't think that any politician is in line with all of that so I have stopped looking.