Vox Lucens

So I just saw one of CNNs top stories for today.  The headline simply read, “Voters Ready.”

Aside from being inane and totally unimaginative as a headline, I really expected a story like this…

****

“Voters Ready”

PALM SPRINGS, FL - After a countywide voter education project, voting authorities claim that voters are ready to cast their ballots.

“We’ve had extensive training for the citizens of Palm Springs on the use of a Number 2 lead pencil to fill in an oval.  In addition, we have handed out thousands of pamphlets with detailed instructions and definitions on the use of chads, the meaning of a straight line between a candidate’s name and an oval, and the emergency number to Barack Obama’s campaign headquarters in case of confusion,” one election official told CNN on the condition of anonymity.

Mary Jones is a Palm Springs resident that experienced difficulties understanding the ballot eight years ago.  “Before, I was frightened,” she told CNN.  “I thought maybe the line between the oval and the name meant ‘minus,’ and I did not want to cast a negative vote for anyone except Pat Buchanan.  But because of this voter training, I know that if I accidentally fill in the oval for John McCain, Obama campaign lawyers will read my mind and know who I meant to vote for and fight it all the way to the Supreme Court, so I am confident that justice will be done.”

When reminded that Bush won the landmark election case of Bush v. Gore, involving similar mind-reading issues, Ms. Jones claimed that breakthroughs in European theories on chad-reading, like European theories on socialism, were on the rise, so she was confident that her ballot would be read properly.

John Doe told reporters that, prior to the training, he had difficulty fitting the candidate’s name inside the tiny oval provided.  “Before voting, I tried to shrink my handwriting so that I could write the answer in the space provided,” he complained.  “But my friendly Obama rep assured me that I just had to fill in the oval with little circles next to the candidate I want to vote for.  That alone convinced me to vote for Barack,” he went on.  “If someone would have told me this in high school I might not have flunked the SAT and be stuck in this soup kitchen.  Barack has the information Americans need to succeed!”

In a token appearance so that this article does not appear biased, CNN interveiwed a John McCain spokesman who claimed, “It is the McCain campaign’s contention that putting ‘George Bush’ next to Mr. McCain’s name on the ballot misleads voters into thinking that John McCain is, in fact, George Bush.”

“That is blatant hatemongering,” an Obama spokesman responded.

****

Alas, the actual story was far more boring.  And to be fair, I did intend to write a more serious election post.  There’s just so much to write about that anything but parody is overwhelming.

I was highly fascinated by the BBC’s coverage of American elections, as broadcast by PRI on my little Pacific island. But as I was sitting in the Detroit airport during a long layover yesterday, I found the most highly prescient statement of current American politics I’ve ever heard.

Problem is, despite the news blaring around me, I found it in the book I was reading - a history of Burma. On page 216 of the fascinating book “The River of Lost Footsteps,” the author actually thought he was talking about 1940s Burma!

…the political parties inhabited a strange middle space between responsible government and theater.

One of the primary advantages–no pun intended–of being done with the Republican side of the South Carolina vote is that half of the political ads are now no longer on the air. I am heartily sick of looking at ancient pictures of X Candidate with Ronald Reagan–especially when such a picture is the only proof that X Candidate is actually the conservative he claims to be.

But the primary problem with the Democratic primary being next Saturday is that the worst ads are still on air. I mean, unless you’re a hippie, Obama’s ads aren’t for you. And unless you’re a diehard fan of candidates who read their speeches, Hillary’s ads just aren’t going to resonate.

But Edwards’ ads are the worst. First, they have no video–and with just still pictures, I could do a better job with PowerPoint. And as far as the message, I could write a better ad in my sleep. I mean, really–”He will be our president. Not theirs.”

What?

And his other slogan–”A winner every time.” I guess they mean except for his last presidential campaign. Oh, and his last vice presidential campaign. Oh, and every state so far this campaign season.

The primary can’t come fast enough to get this hilarity off the air.

This week I finished up a fascinating book on international human rights, which I read for my Senior Seminar Paper. It discussed a number of world situations–hopefully I’ll blog more about those later, in book review fashion–and really focused in the last chapters on the potential tensions between promoting human rights and promoting democracy.

I found a news story today that made me think that the author missed an important detail, though. Those of you that follow international news know that East Timor, a hotspot of rights violations for decades, held elections recently. Here are the results, as posited by asianews.it:

With 90% of votes counted, the outgoing premier has won 753% of votes cast…

And THAT is the problem with international elections.