real america

i've heard the term "real america" being used several times by the mccain-palin campaign and i'm not exactly sure what it means. my impression from the context in which it was used it that to refers to rural, conservative, and religious areas that usually vote republican; red states. the very existence of this term implies that there is also a "fake america." is it safe for me to assume that "fake america" would refer to the urban, liberal, and educated areas; blue states. if that is the case then when did it become ok to classify certain areas of america as real or fake based on their views and differences. as much as i would like to consider highly religious or highly conservative areas of america as fake or fabricated, they never will be and will always have a say in the future of "our" country. so, this whole "fake america" thing that the mccain campaign has been throwing around is bullshit; it's immature and unrealistic at best.

john kerry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH5R1s5_w5E

i just recently came across this video, it is john kerry speaking about john mccain interrupting his campaign some weeks ago to save negotiations about the bailout plan in washington d.c.; while watching it i just kept thinking "what a badass." it's really a shame he wasn't elected president. anyway, the point of the video is that while according to the mccain campaign, mccain rushed from new york to washington d.c. (which is a one-hour flight) but instead it took him twenty-two hours and on the way he had an interview with katie couric and gave a speech at the clinton millenium. kerry concludes by tactfully pointing out that when mccain finally got to washington d.c. it was apparent that he interrupted negotiations to save his campaign instead of interrupting his campaign to save negotiations.

uninterested youth

watch this video.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1884021

it's completely ridiculous and there are hundreds of videos just like these, all making fun of some aspect of politics. you're probably asking yourself how these videos come into existence and for what reason. it's because many people out there (like myself) have little interest in politics, but instead are much more interested in parodying politicians and politics. i think this is because so much of today's youth is indifferent to almost everything, they are aware that politics affect them and how they live there lives but they just don't care; if today's youth was raised to be more outspoken and proactive, this would not be the case. we would have a much more youth-oriented government and they would be much better represented. but until then, the internet is full of videos like that made by uninterested youth, especially youtube.

religulous

some of you atheists, agnostics, and assorted non-practicing individuals out there may have heard (god bless you...just kidding) that religulous came out on october third (i meant to post this a long time ago but got behind). for those who have not heard, the movie is bill maher's take on the current state of world religion (bill maher is a stand-up comedian, television host, and a political and social commentator). from what i have seen so far, the world needs to lay off the opiates and try a hit of what bill maher is having. religulous denounces religion as "comforting but dangerous fairy tales clung to by adults who should know better," and i could not agree much more. but, i still have not seen it because i've been becoming more and more displeased with the service available at local movie theatres; five dollar popcorn, one person in the box office on a friday night...but that's neither here nor there. the point is that religulous speaks from a perspective that represents a large amount of cultured, liberal, and intellectual individuals and that as this group gets bigger i hope politics take the hint and stop emphasizing the religion of the candidates as much.