Somebody Told Me

Friday evening I found myself with a strange hunger for pizza. My brother, one of his friends and I had dinner at a relatively new pizza place here in the city, Wedge, and I make a point of pointing out the restaurant's newness so that it doesn't seem strange when I say that none of us had previously been there. But we'd heard it was good.

Word of mouth is extremely important in this world. We trust what our friends tell us, mostly, because we trust them. So when someone says "yeah, that place is really great," we'll go and see for ourselves. We'll sit outside in the cold for 40 minutes waiting for a table and then wait another 40 minutes for the food to arrive. By the way, it was fantastic. Our friends didn't lie, and if you do go, try the hot Earl Gray tea. It's the best I've ever had.

And that's what makes Presidential politics so difficult for me. It is impossible to really know what we're getting into when we throw our support to a candidate. Even if you manage to dig through election coverage which is... okay, I'm going to digress here for a while.

*NEW TOPIC: WHY DOES THE NEWS MEDIA SUCK BALLS?*
Please note, this is not a new condition. The news media has always, and will always, completely suck balls when it comes to covering the Presidential campaigns. The problem as I see it is the process story. Process stories focus on campaign strategy, poll numbers, endorsements, and idiotic things human beings manage to say when they're under constant scrutiny from an entourage of press professionals. They tell us nothing of policy choices, of plans, or really even of the character of a candidate. Instead we're left with a glut of information in the vein of "well, if 42% of 35-44 year olds in South Carolina like her, she must be pretty good." That's great, glad they made up their minds. Now why the hell should I like her? Oh, because she's focusing now on a late-state strategy for Super Tuesday and she's got James Carville advising her on Southern States? That sounds like a great strategy. WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT TELL ME ABOUT WHAT KIND OF PRESIDENT SHE'S GOING TO BE? It doesn't tell me anything. And in a day that story probably won't even matter any more. But what's even worse is the transitive conferral of credibility that comes from these stories. If we spend all our time talking about three candidates, those are the important ones, right? So, if someone is polling in the single digits, we probably shouldn't spend any time discussing his or her ideas, right? Whew! Thank goodness. I was *this close* to thinking about new and different ways of solving our nation's problems. Thank God that's over! Now, I know that sounds simplistic, but there is some very solid research in the area, and the indication is pretty much "out of sight out of mind."
*END TOPIC*

Now we can't lay everything at the feet of the news media, as worthless and contemptible as they often are, because there's another heinous factor at work here to obscure the truth about candidates, their positions and their characters. I am speaking of course about the candidates themselves. Sure you can call yourself "Compassionate Conservative" or tell me you want to make America strong again, but what the hell does that mean? And is it even true?

It's not like I can't make a decision for myself (and on February 5 if Kucinich is still in the race I'll be voting for him) but it would be nice to have some information I could use from a source I can trust.