Monday, January 26, 2004

I've lived in Northern California (Bay Area) now for eleven years and two weeks. In that time my voting registration has always been "no party." That changed last week. I changed it to "Democratic." Silly as it may sound, this was a decision I did not take lightly. It may just be the last remaining element of who I used to be: an idealist with a contrarian streak. I've been firmly planted in the real world for those eleven years, out of the comfortable cocoon of the know-it-all armchair quarterback finishing his undergrad degree. I guess I do have some idealism left. I still play in a rock band, and juggle day jobs that I am underqualified for in between tours. That soon will end as well and within two years it is likely I will be a father. With all of this I have become more pragmatic. I'm getting that sense from a lot of people whose political leanings I share. Where we once flatly declared that the two party system was a sham and other such things, I now fully admit that the third party I had always hoped for was nothing but a ghost. None of the parties in existence today are without their faults. So the question becomes: which one is closest to my beliefs and has any chance of winning and actually delivering people whose governance I can feel comfortable with? With Clinton I felt that way and had the luxury of looking beyond the "great compromiser" for something a little more left-leaning. Now I am to the point where even Lieberman would be a better choice than Bush. Is this the language of someone defeated by his own reality, or is it the language of someone who is older and wiser? If I had this conversation with my 22 year old self, fresh out of my '77 Plymouth Fury into my first apartment in San Francisco, I have a feeling we would reach an impasse on this subject.

No comments:

Watch this space

If FB decides to reinstate the account of the former "president" tomorrow, I expect an uptick of activity here for random updates ...