Shit Happens

September 6th, Thursday... I have been trying to keep up with the conventions and hone in on what has been said and I started thinking, maybe the whole damn thing should be revamped? Why not elect a president for eight years instead of four years? Cost would definitely be cut down significantly from campaigning. Cost would also be cut from putting on the dog and pony show the conventions seem to display. The elected president would have a significant amount of time to clean up the mess created by the previous president and a decent amount of time to do his/her thing! It would also place a higher value on the vote itself. What's the downside? Well, if the wrong cat is picked, your ass will suffer for eight years!
We, as Americans, should be used to long term suffering. Between Reagan, Bush, and Bush, Americans have endured more BS than a field of bulls can produce after taking massive amounts of a laxative!
The other piece is, stop fucking the president's name! I mean, what the fuck is a "MITT? What's his history? Was he a leather baseball glove when he was born?

A Warped POV by A. Dacosta Brathway

I do not have a taste for American politics. I don't care about the process of it, the results of it, nor do I care that history is kind to it. It is a dirty process designed by dirty people who get quite rich from it. Right now History is being made in it. A Black man is running against a White woman for the Democratic nomination. I'm sure to most Americans is some big deal(?). I guess... But I'm thinking that no matter who gets the nomination and, lets say, one of those people wins the presidential election, I'm wondering how effective that person could be to exact change considering the mentality of the American people? Why am I even pondering this question? Well, I read an article in the Wall Street Journal about a woman named Valerie Benjamin who had a Hillary Clinton sticker on her van. She was waiting for a light when a man pulled up beside her, saw the sticker, rolled his window down to shout to her, "You can be for Hillary all you want, but there is no way that thing is going to win!"
Sure the statement is sexist. But is it wrong to say? America is supposed to be the poster country for freedom, but is it in good taste to voice your ignorant opinions, arbitrarily to people you don't even know just because you have the freedom to say what you want?
There is another issue here, as I see it, that speaks to what a black man or a white woman could do if they were in the White House? Would either one be able to exact change for the betterment of all races in America? By calling Hillary Clinton a "thing" clearly, to me, speaks to a population of bigotry that has not and will not go away willingly. (I can only imagine what Obama is being called to his bumper sticker face!) It's funny that there is a population of people who thought GWB was the answer for eight years. I guess he was if you like bankruptcy. Not only did he bring down a company and a baseball team, he has now managed to bring down a whole country! But hey, that's business as usual in politics in America. It seems like the attitude about politics is like what the character, Norman Gechco (is that spelled right?)in the movie "Wall Street," felt about destroying a business at the expense of the workers. Wreck it because it is "wreckable!" And with that line of thinking, maybe it is okay to be a bigot. Be one because you can if you want!