![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Old Sneelock's State.
It really does concern me that Schwarzenegger is the focus of the media attention on California. While reading the LA Times, I picked up another of Arnold's soundbites that are so vague as to be seriously troubling. The first was in Time Magazine: "I will fight for the environment. Nothing to worry about." Next came "It doesn't matter if you are a Democrat or Republican, if you're young or old, what the racial thing is, nothing matters to me," from the LA Times. Now we have, "I support immigration," also from the LA Times. This is in addition to the plethora of quotes that are vague, but not quite so troubling, like "I'm for gun control; I'm a peace-loving guy" (Time Magazine again).
It's been pretty much admitted that the Schwarzenegger campaign plan is to avoid the political press. A secondary plan seems to be the "stunt casting" of his campaign staff, which allows the political press to wildly speculate on how these appointment reflect Arnold's views instead of, you know, actually finding out what those views are. And today, the television ads will begin, which, unless I miss my guess, will be all about image, not about issues.
In view of this, I'm getting pretty sick of reading reports that this special election is a circus because of the fringe candidates. I'm sick of reading stories about how serious a candidate Schwarzenegger is without saying why (other than, of course, his fabulous wealth, always a plus in California elections), then sticking in one line about how wacky it is that porn king Larry Flynt is running against it.
Flynt has a very comprehensive set of beliefs on social liberties, a plan to increase Nevada-style gaming and a controversial view on the loss of California business (namely, that there's no way to win them back directly, and so focus has to be placed only on the ones that are still here.) However, I only know of one local radio show that has dealt with them. Every other media outlet has stopped at the "smut peddler" as though that is the issue he's running on, like he's going around saying, "Vote for me because I make porn!" Despite a clearly displayed platform, Georgy Russell has been portrayed as the candidate who is selling thongs to raise money. Even the candidates who have personal reasons seem to get ignored, or it would be more widely known that Mary Carey (besides being an adult film actress) wants to prove "that you can do porn and it doesn't mean you are stupid . . . that running for governor isn't just for high-class, older men."
Now, obviously, I'm not against wacky, and it's understandable that this happened at first. With 135 names, you tend to look only at the highlights, and the highlights of this election are very wacky. But there's a reason I rushed to skim the candidate statements as soon as the ballot was finalized: these jokes get old fast. It's been a week since we got those lists, and it's pretty much digested. Everyone who's been following the story knows that there's a sumo wrestler running for governor. It's time to get beyond who's on the ballot and start getting into why they're on the ballot.
Some of the common complaints about modern politics is that there's no one to vote for, that the candidates are all the same, that there's nobody who represents the views a voter wants represented. That shouldn't be a problem in this election; there are over a hundred citizens running for public office and each of them has his or her own reasons. So then why are 130 options being reduced to one-dimensional ciphers, while someone who is seemingly running on name recognition alone is given hours and hours dedicated to what he might, possibly, we think, stand for? Why is every media outlet sitting on its hands waiting for Arnold to maybe say something that actually matters, when there are so many people, most of them everyday citizens, who have plenty to say and who've put themselves into the public eye, facing ridicule, hoping for a chance that they'll finally, finally be heard? Why the hell isn't anyone listening?
Tonight, the television ads begin, and more wackiness will ensue, and I'll be keeping track of it. But I'm not following this election because it's wacky; I'm following it because there is so much happening that hasn't happened before and that tests the limits of the system, because there are so many shades of opinions on so many issues, because there are so many possibilities, because it's a circus filled with so many surprises that you couldn't see it all if you had forty eyeses (to paraphrase the good doctor). Apparently, though, everyone else wants a rather anemic circus, with a few acts on the flow in succession, and a sorry side show, filled with obviously fabricated freaks, which means that either they're criminally lazy or someone has a disappointing idea of what makes a good story.
It's been pretty much admitted that the Schwarzenegger campaign plan is to avoid the political press. A secondary plan seems to be the "stunt casting" of his campaign staff, which allows the political press to wildly speculate on how these appointment reflect Arnold's views instead of, you know, actually finding out what those views are. And today, the television ads will begin, which, unless I miss my guess, will be all about image, not about issues.
In view of this, I'm getting pretty sick of reading reports that this special election is a circus because of the fringe candidates. I'm sick of reading stories about how serious a candidate Schwarzenegger is without saying why (other than, of course, his fabulous wealth, always a plus in California elections), then sticking in one line about how wacky it is that porn king Larry Flynt is running against it.
Flynt has a very comprehensive set of beliefs on social liberties, a plan to increase Nevada-style gaming and a controversial view on the loss of California business (namely, that there's no way to win them back directly, and so focus has to be placed only on the ones that are still here.) However, I only know of one local radio show that has dealt with them. Every other media outlet has stopped at the "smut peddler" as though that is the issue he's running on, like he's going around saying, "Vote for me because I make porn!" Despite a clearly displayed platform, Georgy Russell has been portrayed as the candidate who is selling thongs to raise money. Even the candidates who have personal reasons seem to get ignored, or it would be more widely known that Mary Carey (besides being an adult film actress) wants to prove "that you can do porn and it doesn't mean you are stupid . . . that running for governor isn't just for high-class, older men."
Now, obviously, I'm not against wacky, and it's understandable that this happened at first. With 135 names, you tend to look only at the highlights, and the highlights of this election are very wacky. But there's a reason I rushed to skim the candidate statements as soon as the ballot was finalized: these jokes get old fast. It's been a week since we got those lists, and it's pretty much digested. Everyone who's been following the story knows that there's a sumo wrestler running for governor. It's time to get beyond who's on the ballot and start getting into why they're on the ballot.
Some of the common complaints about modern politics is that there's no one to vote for, that the candidates are all the same, that there's nobody who represents the views a voter wants represented. That shouldn't be a problem in this election; there are over a hundred citizens running for public office and each of them has his or her own reasons. So then why are 130 options being reduced to one-dimensional ciphers, while someone who is seemingly running on name recognition alone is given hours and hours dedicated to what he might, possibly, we think, stand for? Why is every media outlet sitting on its hands waiting for Arnold to maybe say something that actually matters, when there are so many people, most of them everyday citizens, who have plenty to say and who've put themselves into the public eye, facing ridicule, hoping for a chance that they'll finally, finally be heard? Why the hell isn't anyone listening?
Tonight, the television ads begin, and more wackiness will ensue, and I'll be keeping track of it. But I'm not following this election because it's wacky; I'm following it because there is so much happening that hasn't happened before and that tests the limits of the system, because there are so many shades of opinions on so many issues, because there are so many possibilities, because it's a circus filled with so many surprises that you couldn't see it all if you had forty eyeses (to paraphrase the good doctor). Apparently, though, everyone else wants a rather anemic circus, with a few acts on the flow in succession, and a sorry side show, filled with obviously fabricated freaks, which means that either they're criminally lazy or someone has a disappointing idea of what makes a good story.