Intelligent Choice Party... IC
[I make arguments for both sides before I choose a position; and only really need to choose a firm position on election day]
Most of what I hear about politics, and have heard since the late '60s, both from those on the "left" and those on the "right" is one-sided, straight-across-the-board, all-or-nothing hyperbole—"Bush is a liar," "Hillary's an idiot," "conservatives are moral," "liberals are smarter." On and on go the iterations of talk radio and TV pundits, newspaper and WebNews writers, college professors and activists.
Then come the expected, usually unsupported, reiterations at the street level: colleagues, coworkers, friends and relatives. That's fine if your only goal is to promote your own extremism to the demise of all else, but what about the rest of us that choose the truth regardless which side it falls on.
Is it really intelligent to totally approve of or dismiss absolutely everything about any one political figure, party or issue? The probability is that there's some good and a little bad in everything. What about validation, open-mindedness, listening to the opposition, reading a different point of view? Is it a waste of precious time to validate political rhetoric... would that kill anyone! Things are still relatively good in America these days, Cold Stone is always busy at the mall, why waste time tonight when you can get "informed" tomorrow in a neatly packaged, not so straight from the horses mouth (or is it the other end), talk show or website format.
Now, I know there are those of you that do your homework, that try to be "fair and balanced" when it comes to today's hot issues. You read, you listen, you mine the Web for details and inconsistencies, always holding on to the option to change your mind, like true scientists, if overwhelming evidence presents itself. You listen to Rush Limbaugh in the mornings and Air America Radio in the afternoons. You scan the Web newswires of Independent Media Center and then bounce over to Fox News, just in case you missed anything. You're not afraid to sneak a peek at National Review or Aljazeera, and you've lived to tell the story.
So, with all those in mind who make intelligent political choices, I launched the Intelligent Choice Party (or the "IC" Party) on August 27, 2005.
You may think I'm kidding... Ok... I report, you deride. But just to add some credence to my cause, I have re-registered to vote at the California Secretary of States' website, choosing as my political party the Intelligent Choice Party (entered in the write-in box labeled "Other"). If we get just 1% of the number of persons who voted at the November 5, 2002 General Election to make this same "choice" on affidavits of registration, mailed in by the 154th day before the primary election, the new party becomes official.
It's a meager start, a statement of purpose, a rebellion, nonsense, but it's mine. It's a voice you don't hear often and when you do speak it few know what you're talking about. We'll see what happens.
Reporting from the underground...
Stan Morris
Most of what I hear about politics, and have heard since the late '60s, both from those on the "left" and those on the "right" is one-sided, straight-across-the-board, all-or-nothing hyperbole—"Bush is a liar," "Hillary's an idiot," "conservatives are moral," "liberals are smarter." On and on go the iterations of talk radio and TV pundits, newspaper and WebNews writers, college professors and activists.
Then come the expected, usually unsupported, reiterations at the street level: colleagues, coworkers, friends and relatives. That's fine if your only goal is to promote your own extremism to the demise of all else, but what about the rest of us that choose the truth regardless which side it falls on.
Is it really intelligent to totally approve of or dismiss absolutely everything about any one political figure, party or issue? The probability is that there's some good and a little bad in everything. What about validation, open-mindedness, listening to the opposition, reading a different point of view? Is it a waste of precious time to validate political rhetoric... would that kill anyone! Things are still relatively good in America these days, Cold Stone is always busy at the mall, why waste time tonight when you can get "informed" tomorrow in a neatly packaged, not so straight from the horses mouth (or is it the other end), talk show or website format.
Now, I know there are those of you that do your homework, that try to be "fair and balanced" when it comes to today's hot issues. You read, you listen, you mine the Web for details and inconsistencies, always holding on to the option to change your mind, like true scientists, if overwhelming evidence presents itself. You listen to Rush Limbaugh in the mornings and Air America Radio in the afternoons. You scan the Web newswires of Independent Media Center and then bounce over to Fox News, just in case you missed anything. You're not afraid to sneak a peek at National Review or Aljazeera, and you've lived to tell the story.
So, with all those in mind who make intelligent political choices, I launched the Intelligent Choice Party (or the "IC" Party) on August 27, 2005.
You may think I'm kidding... Ok... I report, you deride. But just to add some credence to my cause, I have re-registered to vote at the California Secretary of States' website, choosing as my political party the Intelligent Choice Party (entered in the write-in box labeled "Other"). If we get just 1% of the number of persons who voted at the November 5, 2002 General Election to make this same "choice" on affidavits of registration, mailed in by the 154th day before the primary election, the new party becomes official.
It's a meager start, a statement of purpose, a rebellion, nonsense, but it's mine. It's a voice you don't hear often and when you do speak it few know what you're talking about. We'll see what happens.
Reporting from the underground...
Stan Morris
Comments