Here I am, living in America (as Richard would say, it's a beautiful place, shame about all the American's) and supprting, not just chosing the lesser of two evils, but actually supporting a left wing politician.
In New Zealand there is the right, and the left. Basically the right (National) support the country's economy by encouraging business, and the left (Labour) support the country by taking care of welfare type issues. Neither is wrong, and both incorporate both approaches, in different proportions. You have Labour supporters, and National supporters, they disagree, but I've never seen a polarisation of the population like here and now.
Here you have the added issue of Conservatives and Liberals. In essence (and I'm biased here, so it will proably come out in the way I word it) liberals want every individual to make their own choices about themselves, conservatives want the government to lay down a list of acceptable behaviours.
What I find strange is that the conservatives go with the right wing. So the people that want a more hands off approach to state services, want a more hands on approach to state control. Liberals want the state (ie. taxes) to pay for all sorts of services, but not to tell people what to do with their lives. Not strange I suppos, but an interesting dichotomy.
And then there is 'The War'. *sigh* Oh how I hate Bush for that. Anyone who knows me, probably understands that I have right wing economic views (lower - flat - taxes, user pays), and believe in pro-choice when it comes to adults deciding about them selves (marriage, abortion, assisted suicide). If it were'nt for the conservative aspect over here, I can't imagine ever considering a left wing politician. And George 'Dubya' Bush is the worst of the conservatives, or perhaps his prime minister Dick Chayney is. To this day they claim that the war on Iraq is part of the war on terror, and the ignorant average american who wants to believe that America is the greatest nation in the worl, and infallible, goes right along for the ride. Sadam Hussein was involved in the attacks on Sept 11, Sadam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, there are terrorists in Iraq, the war in Iraq is going well, we have apointed a government - but they aren't pupets. What a joke.
Iran and Saudi Arabia were involved in the attacks, but no one went in there. Osama Binladen remains at large. Hussein had no WMD, but kept up the talk because it was his 'cold war' against Iran - UN weapons inspectors were most of the way to provng this before the US opened hostilities. The terrorists in Iraq started arriving after the US invaded the soverign lands of a nation which, while hostile in attitude, posed no threat to them. Right now, the terrorist population is growing because of the hate American actions engenders. Terrorists are able to flood into Iraq because the borders are wide open since the invasion destroyed the infrastructure. Even if you count Iraq as part of the coallition - the US bears about 66% of the casualties and 90% of the US$120B cost. "We have appointed" yeah, not pupets. Alawi may be leading the country, but he does not have the support of his own people. Lets see how he does when these 'elections' are held.
This is the issue which polarises the nation. A war which Dubya has pursued because he:
In New Zealand there is the right, and the left. Basically the right (National) support the country's economy by encouraging business, and the left (Labour) support the country by taking care of welfare type issues. Neither is wrong, and both incorporate both approaches, in different proportions. You have Labour supporters, and National supporters, they disagree, but I've never seen a polarisation of the population like here and now.
Here you have the added issue of Conservatives and Liberals. In essence (and I'm biased here, so it will proably come out in the way I word it) liberals want every individual to make their own choices about themselves, conservatives want the government to lay down a list of acceptable behaviours.
What I find strange is that the conservatives go with the right wing. So the people that want a more hands off approach to state services, want a more hands on approach to state control. Liberals want the state (ie. taxes) to pay for all sorts of services, but not to tell people what to do with their lives. Not strange I suppos, but an interesting dichotomy.
And then there is 'The War'. *sigh* Oh how I hate Bush for that. Anyone who knows me, probably understands that I have right wing economic views (lower - flat - taxes, user pays), and believe in pro-choice when it comes to adults deciding about them selves (marriage, abortion, assisted suicide). If it were'nt for the conservative aspect over here, I can't imagine ever considering a left wing politician. And George 'Dubya' Bush is the worst of the conservatives, or perhaps his prime minister Dick Chayney is. To this day they claim that the war on Iraq is part of the war on terror, and the ignorant average american who wants to believe that America is the greatest nation in the worl, and infallible, goes right along for the ride. Sadam Hussein was involved in the attacks on Sept 11, Sadam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, there are terrorists in Iraq, the war in Iraq is going well, we have apointed a government - but they aren't pupets. What a joke.
Iran and Saudi Arabia were involved in the attacks, but no one went in there. Osama Binladen remains at large. Hussein had no WMD, but kept up the talk because it was his 'cold war' against Iran - UN weapons inspectors were most of the way to provng this before the US opened hostilities. The terrorists in Iraq started arriving after the US invaded the soverign lands of a nation which, while hostile in attitude, posed no threat to them. Right now, the terrorist population is growing because of the hate American actions engenders. Terrorists are able to flood into Iraq because the borders are wide open since the invasion destroyed the infrastructure. Even if you count Iraq as part of the coallition - the US bears about 66% of the casualties and 90% of the US$120B cost. "We have appointed" yeah, not pupets. Alawi may be leading the country, but he does not have the support of his own people. Lets see how he does when these 'elections' are held.
This is the issue which polarises the nation. A war which Dubya has pursued because he:
- Likes oil.
- Wants to get out of daddy's shadow (Daddy lead the coalition which kicked Hussein out after he invaded Kuwait, but didn't invade Iraq "because there was no viable exit strategy.")
- Declaims himself as 'A War President' and likes the way that sounds.
- Is stuborn as a mule.
- Couldn't catch the real bad guy, so went after someone who he felt he could blame - and catch. But had no plan for the peace after the capture.
And he's managed to make the who election about that war. Because he has nothing else to come to the table with. Economically and socially he is ruining the country, and that's his four year record. But Americans who don't like him, and don't believe a word he says, will still support the troops on the ground. The oposition has been painted as anti war, and not supporting the troops or the allies. That is why the nation is polarised.
No comments:
Post a Comment