Tag Archives: Democrats

Are the Political Parties Cults?

I’m probably nowhere close to being the first person to realize this. The problem is, us independents are very definitely a minority, so things we notice like this don’t get bandied about on Facebook and other social media. We’re drowned out by the faithful, yammering as they do about their candidates.

And the majority of them actually do act like they’re in a cult.

donald-trump-is-still-soaring-in-iowa--but-there-are-now-some-clear-warning-signsConsider: you have the Trumpites (Trumpets?), who seem to be the majority on the Republican side of things at the moment. Of course, in political terms, it’s a long, long time till November, so anything can happen by the time the election comes around, but right now he seems to be the one riding the wave. I think it interesting—and a bit disturbing—that the Republican leadership differs with their members on this one, as they don’t like the man. Do they know more than the average Republican voter? Who knows? But one thing is for sure: it’s a disturbing trend—and reflective of a larger issue I see in our government in general—that they are determined not to listen to their constituents on this matter.

Then there are the Cruzerians, following a man many are questioning as they did Obama ted_cruz13before him: as a Canadian born to an American mother, does he have the right to even be president? This has plagued Obama for his entire eight-year stint, and will likely follow him to his grave. I imagine the same will happen to Ted Cruz, should he win. Or, for that matter, should he lose the nomination or bid for the presidency. Talking heads will no doubt point to this as a major factor in his defeat—along with the fact he has the gall to actually be religious.

RubioThe Rubiomites seem to have a hard row to hoe, as Rubio has flip-flopped on some issues—especially illegal immigration—about as much as John Kerry flip-flopped on our Middle Eastern ventures. He seems to have earned his sobriquet of being a RINO (Republican In Name Only), at least if you ask a Trumpite or a Cruzerian.

On the opposite side, you have the Hillaryans, who apparently believe we need to follow upHillary-Clinton-Crazy-Face the first black president with the first woman president, which is fuzzy logic at best. But then, politics and logic rarely coincide. In fact, I was once derided on Facebook for uttering the blasphemous phrase Logic dictates. Apparently the commenter thought making decisions based on knee-jerk reactions (PATRIOT Act, anyone?) and emotions was a much better method than examining facts to make an informed choice. But I digress. Much like the Cruzerians, the Hillaryans have to face the fact their candidate is (yet again) under investigation for something. But hey, since when has a scandal meant anything in American politics?

socialist-bernie-sandersAnd last but not least, there is the Church of Bernie, where any day now, he will usher in a utopia where there’s all kinds of free stuff and the lions will lie down with the lambs and all that. I wouldn’t say they’re any worse than the others—after all, I don’t support any of the current crop—but they do seem the least pragmatic, since it’s pretty easy to see nothing is free. But I’m not here to argue policy, and saying he’s the least pragmatic is like saying his shit stinks less: it really doesn’t matter, cuz it’s all crap.

I realize there are likely sensible people who have decided on one of the above candidates for what to them are sensible reasons. The problem is, they’re not the ones you see commenting and foaming at the mouth on social media. They stay more or less quiet—with a few exceptions—and make their voices heard at the polls. I don’t know if they’re in the minority or not, though I suspect they’re not. After all, there aren’t as many rabid dogs as there are good ones, so I imagine those who spout off about anything and everything and resort to name-calling to make their points are an embarrassment to the rest.

And the thing is, the mouth-foamers are the ones you can’t reason with. I have a man I now consider to be a good friend, Gordon Bonnet, with whom I agree on very little politically. But you know what? We can have intelligent discussions about it without insulting one another, and he’s made me rethink some things, as I hope I have him. I don’t want to bring him over to my way of thinking, and I don’t believe he does me, but we can talk about these things and do it with respect for one another. That’s a rare thing these days, at least on the discussion threads I see online.

As an independent, I tend to like to go onto these threads and be a troll, and it’s amazing to me how alike both sides actually are. Not in what theyposts believe, but in the fervency of that belief. They absolutely refuse to entertain any viewpoint but their own—much like, say, Christians and Muslims, to use just two examples—and if you dare suggest anything different, they yell at you and call you names. And when you point out the fallacy of their argument by stating facts and figures—or simply point out that what they’re spouting is an opinion and they haven’t backed it up with fact—they go silent. I don’t know if they’re pouting or what.

And one last thing to consider: both parties are having something of an identity crisis (I suppose that’s the correct term) at the moment. On the Republican side, you have the schism between the party leadership and the voters, where many of the latter support Trump, mostly as a major sea change in the way the party does things (that in itself isn’t a bad thing), while the leaders themselves threaten to boycott him at their national convention.

On the Democrat side of things, the contentions between followers of Hillary and Bernie also seem to threaten to tear the party apart, with supporters on both sides saying if the other candidate wins the nomination, they’ll vote Republican. Or stay home.

genetic ignoranceThe bottom line is, the hate and vitriol I see both sides spewing is very much reminiscent of religion. I saw a meme on Facebook positing that anyone who is against Obama is not only a racist, but also a victim of genetically inherited ignorance. This was put out by Occupy Democrats. I have no idea how radical they may be, but if this is one of their beliefs, I’d say fairly radical. My first thought on reading this was to wonder if they were going to start espousing their own form of eugenics at some point in the future. You know, instead of eliminating “inferior” races, just eliminate those with genetically inherited ignorance, or at least decide they can’t vote.

Cult, indeed.



Everybody’s Wrong But Me

I’m going to deviate from the main topic this week, so if you don’t like rants, go read Hints from Heloise.

 Unless you’ve been hiding under an extremely large, remote rock on the dark side of the moon, you know about the dog-and-pony show Congress has been putting on lately. And it’s not a particularly good dog-and-pony show. In fact, I’d say it gets an emphatic thumbs-down.

It looks more like pro wrestling than democracy. And don’t even get me started on what I think of democracy. I’ll just sum it up in two words: mob rules.

Apparently, in order to get elected, you need to do two things: abandon any principles you might have (which are probably few) and learn how to point at everybody else. Everything else is just window dressing for that.

If you think we have a government of the people, that white stuff you put on your cereal every morning may not be sugar. Want proof? If the debt ceiling hadn’t been raised (according to numerous experts, anyway), two groups of people right at the top of the list not to be paid were those on Social Security and the military.

The ones who’ve already served their country or are currently doing so.

Nobody said a thing about Obama and Congress not getting paid.

Not that it would matter, since they’re all independently wealthy aristocracy, the only people who can afford to run for office these days. Want another smidgen of proof? Obama made $400,000 last year as president—and something like $5 or $6 million off a book he purportedly didn’t even write. I say we take away his presidential salary. What’s he need it for? It just puts him in a higher tax bracket.

And Congress? I’m not current on their average pay, but keep in mind that, as long as they serve for one day, they’re set for life. They get that pension forever more. Pretty good scam—er, job, if you can get it. Heck, if that was true in the private sector, I wouldn’t be writing this damn blog and trying to get published. I’ve had enough jobs, including in the military, that I’d have pensions coming in left and right.

But, see, a private corporation can’t afford to do something like that. Only the government can, because they can just steal it from Social Security and the military salaries. No problem.

What we have not isn’t democracy, and it’s certainly not representative. Consider: on the left, you have the Democrats, who can’t be swayed from their socialist agenda. We need a nanny-state government, and we need it now. Let the government deficit go higher and higher as we take care of you from cradle to grave, all the while telling you what’s correct and how you should conduct your life.

What was that noise? Oh, it was Jefferson rolling over in his grave. Sorry for the interruption.

Then there’s the Republicans: steering us in the direction of the mega-corporation imagined in so many science fiction stories, and they’ve got their feet on the accelerator, pressing it to the floor. The corporation is God and we must bow down to its greed and corruption. All hail the Profit!

Was that Franklin I just heard stirring around?

And, last but most certainly least, there’s the middle: small, ineffectual, jumping at its own shadow. Should it be politically correct? Should it grant concessions to Wall Street? Maybe Obamacare ain’t so bad, even if no one can figure out just what it says in its 2,000 pages (Nancy Pelosi: We have to pass this so you can see what’s in it. Huh? Aren’t we supposed to see it before it becomes law? Seems a bit bass-ackwards to me, but I’m just a private citizen, apparently too stupid to know what I need.)

Now they’re all rolling around in their moldy coffins.

And we have each and every one of these people pointing at the Outsiders (i.e., those not in my party) pointing and saying, “It’s their fault! If they’d just quit being so stubborn about holding onto what they want (which is entirely wrong, by the way), then we could solve all the country’s problems. It’s those pesky Democrats/Republicans/Independents/TEA Party members!”


Pardon my American.

But see, here’s the thing: we can only blame ourselves. We elected this pack of idiots, from the Big Kahuna on down, and ain’t one of ’em cares about anything except crafting enough lies to get (re)elected. And blaming it on the other guy.

Obama points at Congress. Congress points at the president. Dems point at Republicans, Republicans point at Dems, and they both blame the independents, the TEA Party and the populace as a whole.

Meanwhile, I may have to go on blood pressure medicine. We all might. Our so-called government is ignoring us, all while proclaiming they were elected to achieve their pet goals. Has it ever occurred any of them that the houses of Congress are balanced because we may not want them to achieve anything? Or, conversely, we don’t want it to be all one agenda or the other. We want some social programs, but we want corporations to shoulder some more of the burden of paying for these things (for example. I don’t know if that would work or not).

Consider this: the Dems want to remove the subsidies paid to oil companies because they’re making “obscene profits.” They ignore two things (and probably more): 1) the oil companies like their current level of profit. If they don’t get it from subsidies, they’ll just raise the price at the pump to make up for the shortfall; and 2), oil companies make less than fifty cents a gallon from gas. The rest is made up of federal/state/local taxes that go to pay Congressional salaries. And build bridges to nowhere. And protect five salamanders somewhere, whose contribution to the environment is “irreplaceable.”

Emerson, Lake and Palmer have an old song, the title of which escapes me right now, that begins with the line Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. Or something like that.

So welcome back. It’s just getting started. Sit back, do nothing, we’ll take care of it for you, and take your money while we’re at it. It’s what you elected us to do, after all.