In this season of politics

I actually read through George Nethercutt’s latest editorial, as found in the most recent edition of “The Inlander.” This time, I am not going to address or rebut on a blow-by blow basis, what he wrote. It isn’t worth my time and effort. Instead, I will comment on the fact that when it comes to pre-election politics, Mr. Nethercutt is always guaranteed to lie about something, misinform about something else, or ignore anything that would make his fellow GOPers out to be total losers. Well, they are. So is Mr. Nethercutt. If he is going to harp on matters of value all the time, then the first value must be that of telling the truth.

At the age of 60 my chosen career is that of writing fictional books. That’s right, I write a falsehood, hoping that you will buy it, read it, and enjoy it. But between ourselves, myself as the person producing the book and you as the person supposedly buying the book; we already do know that it is fictional. It is not material to be taken seriously. It is not intended to change the world. It is a falsehood intended solely for your entertainment. That being said; Mr. Nethercutt, if he wishes to be taken seriously, should take just as seriously the people who read his written comments. Otherwise, the Republican Party that has already dragged down Congressional poll ratings, may very well be in for a rude surprise this year.

Did the GOP during the years Clinton was in office, actually work with him on a number of issues? Not exactly. Was the “Contract with America” really intended to re-invent Congress and make it more accountable to the voters? Not exactly. The sole purpose for such a “contract” was to put the GOP in power. After that, they could cause serious headaches for President Clinton while engaging in not so serious politics themselves. Monica Lewinsky comes to mind. Today, GOP “values” is that of telling women they can’t have a menstrual cycle, apparently. A menstrual cycle washes away a “living child.” Just as women can now be criminalized if during their pregnancy, a miscarriage happens, or at the time of birth, the child does not live. The only argument I am seeing here, is in the name of some perverted use of the bible, or in the name of some perverted use of religion, we see the kinds of governments forming that the GOP once said they were supposed to be afraid of. I noticed that Mr. Nethercutt mentioned nothing about that.

What he did mention, was “progress on tax reform.” Never mind that since this progressive era on tax reform —Yes, it actually did change substantially a lot about this nation, and not necessarily for the better.— Business interests look for new ways in which to avoid having to pay any taxes at all. What is also true with high levels of poverty, there are fewer people to take over the taxpaying that business interests and the truly wealthy don’t wish to pay. Yes, the unemployment rate went down to 5.9% Which is a good thing. But it did not happen with the GOP actually working with President Obama to bring this country out of a recession. It had to happen despite the fact of how much the GOP engage in obstruction as a career. Which I find to be an irony. The GOP don’t want “babies washed away” during a menstrual cycle, but they don’t value their constituents or the children of their constituents enough, to actually want to do something for them.

Locally, with regards to Spokane, Washington’s political races, one which was showcased in “The Inlander.” Seems it is a Mr. Patookas, an underfunded and nameless underdog versus Representative Cathy McMorris-Rodgers. I am an Idahoan, therefore I am not in a position to vote for Mr. Patookas. However, maybe this blog post ought to encourage Spokaneites in McMorris-Rodgers’ 5th district to vote for her opponent. If you are as tired of her as you claim to be, then it shouldn’t matter how underfunded Mr. Patookas happens to be. Or the fact that he is a man who “lacks name recognition.” You do know who the man is, because “The Inlander” mentioned him. So, even if he gets to Congress on the anybody but McMorris-Rodgers vote, it will be because you prefer him over the individual you have no use for. I have no use for Ms. McMorris-Rodgers, but I don’t live in her district.

In the closing page of “The Inlander,” was this hilarious commentary, in which the author whines about how reading books is hard to do. In this era of instant gratification, entertainment at your fingertips, he no longer reads books. In which case, I don’t suppose that I can tell him all about my Kindle book, “Are You a Space Alien?” You can only find it on the internet, it is immediate entertainment at your fingertips, yes it is also a book. Welcome to the 21st century. My actual argument is, if you prefer social media to reading, that is your loss. If you prefer instant entertainment to actually continuing your education, that is the fault of yourself. I don’t find books “too hard to read.” I find something useful that I wish to read, then over time I proceed to read it. Reading books you see, adds to ideas. By reading other peoples’ works, it broadens horizons on where I might just take my own writings. What is hard for me, is trying to understand the people who want “instant entertainment” over learning new things. If it can happen on “YouTube,” then it will also play out in politics besides. The presumption is, that the voters prefer to be ignorant. If they are ignorant, then they are more readily controlled.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: