We all deal with it, more than one way in our lives we find ourselves ignorant. Lacking knowledge or truth, simply because we had not learned. Ignorance can be resolved through learning/teaching. But ignorance that is brought up willfully is both foolish and smart. This ignorance I speak of is of politicians. Not just one's side of politicians, or the most mainstream, but all politicians fall into this gap of willful ignorance. Do they desire to be ignorant of the past, of the future, or of what was once obvious? Politicians sway to where the votes demand, they use time as a method of pushing what was once known into something that is unknown, or something new and fresh that can be used as a weapon against other politicians.

What brings this journal entry?

Politics.

I really don't care what side you see yourself on, or what side you choose to not be associated with, but if for just one moment the news was shown, would you have a true understanding at what's happening? Is it the issue at hand that is the issue, or is the issue irrelevant, leaving only the sides with the relevance of opposition. I find politics today is more 'us' vs. 'them' and if there is an issue, we either win or lose it. So if you are going to lose it, try to use it to hurt the other side. This is unhealthy for a political system that requires at times a middle ground.

The firing of several attorney's under Gonzales is under fire. Is this because he's under Bush and this is a way to go after Bush? Is it because this is the first time attorney's have been fired? Bush is attacked because politicians are acting ignorant so that they can claim this is an outrage. But Pres. Reagen fired all, yes... that's right, all sitting attorneys in 1981. Then Pres. Clinton fired all sitting attorneys in 1993. Yet Pres. Bush did not fire all in 2001. Now some attorney's are being fired. Is it still a big deal that Bush is firing a couple attorneys? Did he do something new, unique, something so outrageous that no one has ever done? No. The issue is simply, Democrats don't like Republicans, Republicans don't like Democrats. To become ignorant for the sake of damaging the other side is what matters, not the truth.

So what is the result, irregardless to if you like Bush or not, this is simply an 'us' vs. 'them' issue. It has nothing to do with the firing at hand, but simply the attempt to use the firing as a weapon against Bush. And Gonzales is the scape goat in this situation.

Bush might have been better off if he followed the example of the other two Presidents and cleared house as well.

There are many political commercials on TV due to the mid-term elections here in the US. And as usual, they push assumptions and generic concepts that hold very little to the actual policies and nature of the politician. Is it just me, or is anyone else tired of these pointless ads?

For example, I just watched an ad stating that terrorists and problems with terrorists were caused by the Iraq war. That is, the root cause to terrorism was caused by George W. Bush taking over and freeing Iraq. Does anyone see the problem with this? Like or dislike the war, by stating that the Iraq war caused terrorism, and with that, knowing that terrorism caused the Iraq war, it leads me to ask, who came first, the Iraq war or the terrorists. While the advertisement is focused on an anti-war mentality, it lacks to argue a real argument. I've won several arguments (in a public view point) without actually making a real case. How? Because people are emotional and sway to arguments that sound right. The problem is a false argument that sounds right is still a false argument.

Politics today are more focused on public view than they are on real aspects on who is better fit to serve the people.