Feb 8, 2007

Announcing a Candidacy for President with a Twist (and some common sense)

I wear a few different hats, one of a teacher at a local university. This semester I'm teaching a course on politics & media, so, obviously, we're dealing with the presidential race among other subjects. In one of the assignments, I've asked the students to declare their candidacy for president of the US! I've been getting several very interesting papers. This exercise makes someone sit down and think what he/she would like to talk about during the campaign and the important issues they'll tackle once elected. I wish more Americans did this exercise. It's not as simple as you may initially think. You have to take into account today's reality, geopolitics, and the audience that will receive your message. Have you thought about it?

Here's one such presidential candidacy, by ..Demos.[pictured]

Good morning. Today, I would like to address those who love this country; those true patriots who are willing to contribute into making the United States an even better country to live in.

Before I explain my reasons for seeking the presidency of the United States, I’d like to briefly address those who do not know anything about politics and may have voted in the past. Please, do not do it again! Don’t vote! This way, I won’t have to spend tons of money to buy expensive ads to push your emotional buttons and “swift-boat” my opponent—even though he deserves it, the country certainly does not. Please do not dilute the votes of those who have invested some time and energy into making educated political decisions. You may turn off your TV and radio sets now. Thank you.

I am an ambitious man. I want to be the most powerful person in the world. But, ambition without direction and power without wisdom are two very dangerous things a person can have. My ambition is to strengthen all those values and attitudes that have made America great—democracy, human rights, equality of opportunity, tolerance, the arts & sciences. I want to use the power of the president’s office to implement smart policies that will truly enhance and encourage a culture of life. In the here & now—when it makes a difference in people’s lives.

I advocate a culture of life in which the pursuit of happiness is a right not a privilege of the few. Let a person give meaning to his/her own life. We are a wealthy nation so we can do many things to enhance the quality of our lives. It’s a matter of priorities, which we should examine and re-arrange.

Our government, our society, all of us should be pro-life advocates. But, this means providing a strong social safety net, medical care, education, and opportunities when a person is alive and our actions can indeed make a difference in the quality of their life! We cannot limit our interest to the period between the time when 2 cells meet and childbirth.

We’re having a debate about marriage these days. I suggest we define marriage as a union for a specific purpose: PROCREATION. Only those who want to have children and are able should be allowed to marry. If after a period of five years, a couple doest have any children (or a pregnancy), that marriage should be null and void!
Otherwise, if we agree that marriage is about love, then we should open it up to anyone regardless of sexual orientation or any other particular trait. It's that simple, and honest! Let love be the deciding factor.

In times of crisis, people become insecure and fearful. This is the time when we need strong leaders. Unfortunately good leaders that can rise to the occasion are harder to find during such times. A smart leader knows how to use his power and not react with the mentality of a brute or that of a frat boy. But, above all, we cannot give up all those attributes that have made us strong in order to protect them.

If, we give up everything that makes us special, our enemies win. I urge you to be vigilant in protecting our very specific freedoms and not exchange them for some undefined safety. This new war on terror--that can take place anywhere for an indefinite period of time--cannot be an excuse to create Big Brother. As Benjamin Franklin said, those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither!


With opponents like these, winning the presidency is assured.

We are all here. Hopefully we have a future. That will depend on the choices we make today. It's about taking care of our beautiful lonely planet and about taking care of our country. I ask you to take your responsibilities as citizens seriously. In the land of the free & the home of the brave, we need to have people who want to be free and be brave. Remember, freedom is not free, and that we are the guarantors of democracy.

Being brave does not mean pointless sacrifices. It means having the courage not to be afraid of new ideas and of progress. It means to be gutsy enough to admit mistakes. It means to follow the evidence where it leads you. It means to keep alive our adventurous spirit that opened new frontiers for America, for the world.

Just remember, we cannot change the politics for the better unless we change the people we send to Washington DC. Please vote for my candidacy but only if you promise to send like-minded reformers to Congress as well, and only if you’re going to keep an eye on us.

Thank you.


14 comments:

Kelly said...

Excellent post and very much to the point. Who'd have the guts to actually say these things in public.

As for marriage=procreation or love.... You left out that many people marry for ECONOMIC reasons too.

Andros said...

You're right about marriage being a cotractual relation as well. Anyone who's been through a divorse knows it's about ownership and obligations.

However, this contractual bond should NOT be limited to only a particular set of a couple. It should be open to any combination of two people.

Drew said...

Great post, but I have to say that # 1 sin in politics--yes, above all else--is offending the public. Even if you're saying truths, we don't want to hear them!

wondering said...

Isn't elitist to exclude people who don't know as much as you do?

Isn't this what the South was doing with literacy tests?

Demos said...

No, I'm not saying that there should be any literacy or any knowledge test. Actually, I do want to see more people participate in the affairs of our nation.

But, don't you agree that when you participate in an important activity you should put some effort in knowing the basic issues at the very least?

I confess, it pisses me off to see so many voters making up their minds in the last few days before the election basing their decisions on the (misleading) ads and casual impressions... Both parties benefit from this practice but the country is worse off in my opinion.

And, I'd never, ever put any obstacle to voting. On the contrary, I'd make sure that voting was easier, more accessible AND ACCURATE!

;-) said...

OK, perhaps I shouldn't say this, but I sense a singularity of views here...

Oh, nevermind, it's probably some quantum phenomena taking place...

;)

drew said...

This reminds me of JFK when he asked Americans to do something about their country. Politicians only want votes and, I bet you, like cynicism and apathy.

RD said...

Are you going to publish more ..announcements? This was an interesting one.

Andros said...

There are several essays,editorials, etc. worth publishing, but I won't publish them here--this is not the place. However, we do have a blog were the students (and others) can post.

I also don't want to mix my personal blog with the one that's part of my teaching activities, so if you really want to read stuff about politics that college students write, email me and I'll send you the link to that blog.

a.c. said...

Back to the topic of marriage, I don't think that attempt to legislate the nature of marriage as a union to have children is going anywhere. Is there anyone who doesn't know that getting married isn't always about having children.

That attempt in Washington may harm the cause of civil unions for same-sex couples.

anderson said...

No, the point is to draw attention to this issue. Sometimes even the most obvious thing needs to be brought into focus.

I agree that that proposal isn't going anywhere, just like Charlie Rangel's proposal to bring back the draft. But, it does make you think our leaders may have had a different approach to war & casualties if members of their own families were drafted into the armed forces.

beverly said...

No matter what you say, whatever rational argument you may have, lots of Americans have problem with accepting homosexuality. That's the bottom line, and you can't have a rational argument to an emotional response!

Anonymous said...

Maybe we can use whatever pastor Haggard used to de-gayfy himself in a few weeks' time!

No more gays, no more problems with marriage!

Wait! Does his method also work on lesbians? If not, Houston we have a problem...

Thetan said...

Ha! Funny.

As long as we think homosexuality is a disease, we'll seek to treat it with voodooo spells and stone-age religious mubble-jubble.