Good magazine's current issue has over 1,200 reasons for why voting matters. Some of them are funny, some desperately serious. Here are a few, with more to follow all week:
644. If he wins, Barack Obama might actually appoint people of color who care about the interests of minority communities. Attempts at this by previous presidents only led to appointments of people who worked to protect their respective administrations by any means necessary, no matter how damaging it was to the communities they came from. (We’re looking at you, Condi.)
646. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act has already passed in the House. And if this Bush-endorsed bill is signed into law, it will give the government leeway to scan your emails, Facebook page, and Skype chats in an effort to determine if you’re just a run-of-the-mill activist or a full-blown homegrown terrorist. Naturally, it’s also up to them to tell the difference between the two, which chips away at the most fundamental American right—to holler loudly about the things you think are unjust.
649. Bristol Palin isn’t the only one. Teen birth rates are up for the first time in 15 years, and many blame Bush’s brainchild: abstinence-only education.
651. Surely you remember that scene in Election, when Matthew Broderick’s character tossed a couple of ballots in the trash bin and changed the outcome of the election? Yeah, that happens in real life, too.
Blog the Vote is set to run here on November 3rd. Don't miss out - be part of telling the blogosphere why voting matters and why we Americans are determined to do it in record breaking numbers this year. (Follow the link for more info.)
October 29
2008
08:55 AM
Hey- these are great! I can't wait to hear about the other reasons in that article you liked.
re: reason #644, It makes me think of Supreme Court Justice Thomas, who is an anti-affirmative action Black man.
The parallels to Sarah Palin, an anti-choice, anti-feminist woman, are real and frightening.
Republicans seems very good at getting members of minorities to join them, work AGAINST their minority group of origin, and yet at the same time their very presence, no matter their conservative actions, seems to make the Republicans look "inclusive."
Even the gay community is poorly represented in a similar way by the group "The Log Cabin Republicans."
Is it progress to have anti-black black politicians? Anti-women women politicians? Anti-gay gay politicians?
Personally, I don't think so.
Thanks, Colleen, for everything you do!
Namaste and a Hug,
Lee