Political Ideology Way Too Overrated and Misunderstood

Political Ideology Way Too Overrated and Misunderstood

Voters tend to believe in political ideology much more than those who are actually running for office. Naturally candidates will more often than not say whatever they must in order to get elected and worry about their promises later. Oh well, that is politics I suppose. Still, finding a candidate to believe in can be a rather difficult endeavor especially for those who don't turn on to the electoral process until the home stretch. Rarely, if ever though, do voters get the full measure from the men and women they eventually commit to.

And no where is that clearer than when voters try and decipher which judges to retain or not - know what I mean? Speaking of Judges, the Democratic Machine is no stranger in getting longtime political hacks to move on over to the judiciary when and if golden opportunities exist to change the outcome of an election or two. Is it any wonder then that we have a rigged judicial system? Hell, it took a Delaware Judge to see that former Mayor Daley's nephew Robert G. Vanecko and President Obama pal Allison S. Davis were screwing taxpayers by mismanaging government pension funds. Now do you see what I mean?

Still, for most people, their political choices pretty much comes down to a belief in a particular ideology as opposed to the candidate being the best qualified for the job. Personally, I have always tried to look for candidates who I thought were capable of doing the job as well as having the guts to buck the party if their position is to deny Americans the proper discourse required to solve a problem. Americans should not be held hostage by partisanship and/or obstructionism.

What is it about this false sense of security in a particular political ideology? As I have said umpteen times already - ideology isn't all it is cracked up to be and way too overrated. Matter of fact I don' think it even exists, at least not in the traditional sense. You know, I have this friend who claims he isn't a Tea Party loyalist but you wouldn't know that by what he says - especially when he starts rattling off all the buzz words. Now don't get me wrong, the man is my friend and I respect his opinion, but I have to wonder if he sees the full picture?

As such, I once presented him with this rhetorical question:

Why is that Gay Rights Groups hate Tea Party supporters when the man behind many of the Tea Party core beliefs sits on the board of a Pro Gay Rights Advocacy Group? Yes, Grover Norquist (and even Ann Colter?) is on the Advisory Board of GOPROUD. Now isn't that some sort of an affront to just about every Social Conservative who identifies themselves as a Tea Party Supporter? After all, aren't Conservatives generally unified in the belief that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman? Yet, here is a guy that is leading Tea Party Candidates around by their nose rings who evidently has another take on that issue. So what's up with that?

My friend says: "well gee I didn't know that and that doesn't make me happy." Then I ask: "Well Why In The Hell Not?" But I guess it just goes to show that people only want to hear the part of the message that resonates with them while choosing not to look deeper into who's saying it.

But hey, that is just one example of the hypocrisy behind one of the major forces of the Tea Party, but I think you get where I am going with this. And let's not forget that the original intent and purpose of the Tea Party Grassroots Movement was hijacked by these hypocritical political psychopaths. That is why I think that true Political Ideology just doesn't exist anymore. Besides, if you think about it, how can anyone dispute that politics is nothing more than a game of promoting narrow agendas instead of solving the nation's problems? Politics today is all about power and greed. Nothing more and nothing less. So far as I am concerned Grover Norquist is nothing more than a wealthy lobbyist whose only real concern is preserving his own wealth. And if the truth be told, he and others like him, are part of the 2% who want to dump all the costs onto the remaining 98%. At the end of the day these 2% are strictly in it for themselves.

Of course Chicago Democrats are in it for themselves too. They will pander to people and tell them that they are the true defenders of their rights - yet they have no qualms stripping them of those rights whenever it interferes with their agenda. Sadly there are ethnic groups who will swear by these politicians despite knowing that they will ultimately be the hardest hit when it comes to their own public safety, public health, education, etc.. And if that demographic just happens to be poor African-Americans and/or Latinos - well guess what? They will get screwed even more!

You know, I have never understood this silly phenomenon of people voting mindlessly for an ideology that doesn't seem to exist. But what I find even stranger than that is knowing that they will go out and do it over and over and over again! Even though all they have to do is take a good hard look around them to see that they have been deceived. I don't know what it is, but it certainly can't be about politicians and their operatives being particularly good at wagging the dog. So I guess we must fault the people who fall for the deception.

People should be smart enough to realize that politics have absolutely nothing to do with defining or adhering to a particular political ideology as it is about distorting them!

America is now at a crossroads and the only thing that will pull her out of the quagmire is if people really begin taking the process seriously. And it really should go without saying that if their original political choices are not courageous enough to do the job that they were sent to do (in whichever government body) then they need to be removed from office. And that should be particularly true for those of us living in Illinois. The political corruption and cronyism has destroyed whatever semblance there is to living in a democracy. Why? Because people have misunderstood their role and then accepted what they have been given as the norm.

Well dammit, it should never have ever gotten to that point.

Politicians who continue to ignore the will and the welfare of its people are not fit to govern. Nor is engaging in questionable, if at all legal, activities that deny constituents and taxpayers their rights to fair and transparent representation.

Man, I sure hope people finally wake up and see what they have created. Before it is really too late.........

Then again this is just an ordinary guy's opinion!


Leave a comment
  • I'm too confused already. But it probably is because all politicians are b.s.ing us.

    Romney is in favor of creating jobs, except not here, in favor of Romneycare until it is Obamacare, wants to put back the ~$750 billion that Obamacare takes out of Medicare, and then picks a VP whose budget relies on taking out that money. I still wonder whether the likes of publius and Davis are going to vote for him or stay home.

    Supposedly last night, Hannity said that the senate candidate who said a woman can't get pregnant if she is raped should get out of the race. I thought that's what conservatives believed in.

    In the meantime, there was the "Chicago Values" debate a couple of weeks ago. I thought that the only Chicago value was being rolled by an aldercreature. And, apparently no alderman in Chicago or Evanston believes in the First Amendment.

    Then I see on Channel 26.2 that the paid advocates for "race and poverty" are white girls. And yesterday that Atty. Gen. Byrnes doesn't have control over States' Attorneys, with Glasgow proving again that his office is incompetent.

    The only constant in Illinois is that the more unaccountable politicians you have, the more relatives they can put on their payroll, even if there supposedly are ethics laws.

  • In reply to jack:

    I think your first sentence says it all Jack. Hypocrisy abounds in politics and I think we have both about covered it.

    p.s. Interesting FYI: I noticed that my computer's time was different than Chicago Now's website as I posted this morning. It is off by about three or four minutes. Maybe that explains some of the issues people have had in commenting.

    Second FYI: you must be causing a stir on some CHINOW websites. I noticed that the author of a blog asked members on our Facebook Page if they had had any experiences with you. Anyhow it seems the consensus was that you are something of a troll. Now I found that kinda funny as I always viewed you as being a Devils Advocate.

    Oh well. Just so you know - I happen to appreciate your comments as they help me stay honest. Besides, if bloggers post something then they need to defend what they write.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    I know which one called me a troll (she was overwrought that I suggested that she "think" before clicking the Groupon button and buying botox while she was breast feeding) and is now on a growing list of people on my boycott list. She also didn't think that troll was an insult. Add to that list the white female proponents of race and poverty, too. 4 of the 5 under "Related Blogs," in the right panel, also. Throw in one more under "Related Posts," although I went back to him once to tell him that he was wrong and I was right about the Arizona immigration case and the health care case. No fun grappling with fools.

    Also, since you bring up Facebook, apparently ChicagoNow (and strangely enough Yahoo, but not the Tribune) allow Facebook comments on another sign in, if you allow a Facebook cookie, and also it appears (from Yahoo) that it displays, in effect, one's e-mail address. Thus, even if Facebook comments allow nonmembers to sign in, I won't. One blogger, with which I usually agreed, but called me properly cynical, made that mistake over the weekend. Oh well, apparently the Sun Times (and its comment board) is no longer behind a pay wall, but I have to wean myself from that type of faux interaction.

    Anyway, you confirmed another reason why I won't be signing up for Facebook. FB and Groupon stockholders, take that.

  • In reply to jack:

    As you see I haven't gone to FB commenting. The way I figure I already have a page for the blog there and all it takes is a Like to get there. If people want to comment anonymously then so be it (even though I don't like hiding behind a mask). FB has its positives, but mostly negative when it comes to privacy protection. Then again, nearly every site has same issue.

    Your email address? Not sure but I'll tell you how I got yours - when you commented the first time I get notified there is a comment via email and your original message there contains your email. It is not, however shown on the post thread on my blog. Naturally that is different than what you are describing. But I wouldn't like that forum. I don't mind my name being used but unless I have an option to turn on or off my email - I won't sign up. Or at the very least I would use a throwaway like I do at the Washington Post / New York Times.

    By the way - many of the bloggers on our "members only" FB page appreciate your comments too. They told your detractors to "live with it - being Jacked is not a bad thing - just means you inspired a response and have arrived as a blogger." Just so you know!

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    O.K. However, Greenfield noted (before he converted his comments) that the key to getting hits (and apparently Google money) is to put "Obama" and "Tea Party" in the headlines, and not rely on the right pane.

    And I guess I gave the others 2 ways not to live with it.

    I knew that the blogger had my e-mail address based on having gotten responses via it. But, as you note, that isn't the same as publishing it.

    In fact, I'm surprised that people are willing to put their real names on a Facebook comment. I thought requiring it cut down on crackpots, but when I clicked on the first one I questioned, he had a picture of Calvin peeing on his FB home page.

  • In reply to jack:

    Yeah it is all about the hits for sure. That is why the FB thing appealed to the Tribune; but then again think of the reach? I see the point. Now Facebook used to be good at keeping crackpots off and I think that is why people didn't mind using their real names - besides it was required if I recall correctly. But like anything else people can manipulate it. Now I happen to think Twitter is the best but not for general topic subjects as that medium is all about what is trending NOW. I guess we just live in a social world Jack - but I remind people to not put too much personal stuff there or at least set your privacy settings (you do have real control by the way) even if FB tries to hide the controls.

  • I do not know how we fit the failed economies as I read the "Death Of Economics" By Paul Obemoroi and Joseph Stiglitz in the failed globalisation, We have CRM failures, too. Where exactly we come up with the few scarce, very scarce, factors we have used and IT is now still booming, but the poverty is in transition, too, Surprises me. Maybe we need better lean and clean honest brains for the still new innovation to meet the standards. With the trade free, we still complain of China that is growing and Russia that failed, but gets the contract for the chunk of the oil deals in Iraq. May I have someone help with the above? Then I am better equipped to remark. For now, I am still a student at the 65 and still learning. You cannot teach old monkeys new tricks but I am old and young and want to learn more from you. I thank you. Firozali A Mulla DBA

  • In reply to famullar:

    Your observation that "Maybe we need better lean and clean honest brains for the still new innovation to meet the standards" would seem to be the solution - but, and herein lies the BIG BUT, those few lean, clean and honest brains are far too often consumed by the system. I think the reason for this is that there is in fact a new world order led by a relative few. Their influence is staggering and has a profound effect upon the rest; ergo the rise in poverty. As poverty rises, so does the corruption. It is, as they say, a vicious cycle.

    I don't know what the answer is but I am convinced that we are in desperate need of a political renaissance, but apathy hinders us. Perhaps people should reacquaint themselves with the writings of George Orwell. After all, humanity has hope when there is a common purpose uniting them.

    Thank you for your comments, they are very much appreciated. I will have to pick up a copy of the book cited. Cheers.

Leave a comment