Paying for Parties

Quick! How many of you are aware that the two old parties’ quadrennial conventions are subsidized by taxpayers? For you more conservative followers of the GOP are you now all-a-tingle knowing that your (borrowed) taxes were used, in part, for John McCain’s grand RINO march across the stage in St. Paul while fiscally responsible and possibly lamenting Democrats all pooled tax dollars for Barrack Obama’s triumphant grand eloquence before the pillars in Denver? How do you feel now…knowing you helped pay for both huge events? How can it be in a country that is so broke and nearly bankrupt, we subsidize the two political parties who have controlled the electoral and governing apparatus for 150 years? This travesty is compounded by the fact that that one third of the voters identify themselves as Republicans, one third as Democrats and the final third is split between minor parties and independents. So, why subsidize a grand march and booze-ridden blowout for a party or any entity that represents a mere third of the voters? Also, the presidential nominees for both parties have usually been chosen via the primary and caucus process prior to the convention’s opening. The gripping national interest in the convention outcome is nonexistent….so, again, why should the taxpayers pay?

As a Libertarian, I am double-minded about this fiasco. If Big Brother is going to throw worthless cash around to benefit the national political system, some of those dollars should flow into the convention coffers of those of us who actually believe in the Constitution. But…my Libertarian principles prevent me from crying “for my fair share” because I truly desire Constitutional government, equity in government services and fiscal responsibility. This isn’t just about my political preferences, however, because so many voters self-categorize themselves as “independent.”  Independents have no convention, no nominating process and no structure for snookering the American people. Why can’t they have a huge party with the funny hats, rivers of lobbyist-provided booze and legions of hospitality suites… all provided by the taxpayers hard-earned money? You may not share my alarm and disgust that the two-party oligarchy dips into the public trough for their every four-year party parties, but the practice is not small “d” democrat nor small “r” republican. One party despotic states use the government’s resources to maintain power and crush opposition. The difference here in the United States is merely one of tone…not of practice. The two old parties and their buddy-buddy system have corrupted our government to the point that they believe they are entitled to do the Watsui, drink the Dom Perignon, and munch on broiled salmon at your expense.

Each of the fossilized controlling parties received $18 million dollars for their 4-day bashes. In the grand scheme of government waste 18 million is but mist in a bucket, but the principle of forcing United States taxpayers to underwrite a partisan convention, smacks of Soviet-style rule wherein one could not participate in the electoral process unless one belonged to “THE” party. In our case all taxpayers are required under penalty of law to shell out the fruit of their labor for ideologies, personalities and policies with which they may diametrically disagree. This is a free country, right?

This practice might not be so egregious if some semblance of equity were involved for those voters who object to the ruling duopoly. Just the opposite is true in many cases. For example the two old party career politicians have erected barriers and hurdles that make it nearly impossible for other representative parties to have ballot access. They claim these parties do not have much support ergo they haven’t earned a reasonable standard for ballot qualification. Clearly, our exalted careerist rulers are masters of circular reasoning: Minor parties cannot gain traction without appearing on the ballot, and they must have traction to meet the excessively restrictive criteria established by the duopolistic goons. The 156 years that the two ruling elites have held absolute power is not enough time. They need more time…just like Obama says does. The century and a half of deal-making, compromising and collusion have given us an ungovernable monstrosity in the halls of power.

If defunding sweetheart deals for the two tyrannical parties and allowing dissenters access to the process has an impact, what would it be? For one, some small savings would be achieved, and second, perhaps the career ruling elites may be forced to be more accountable because of their third-party challengers. Historically republicans run to the right in primaries then backtrack to the “mushy middle” for the general election. Democrats do the opposite, but the compromisers meet in the middle without very little distinction between them. Third-party candidates from the left and the right would encourage the two old party careerists to be more honest about their positions for fear of losing votes to a minor party. It’s time for the oligarchic duopoly to remove the pacifiers from their mouths, the tax-funded benefits from their party coffers, and the deal-making abuse of the people and our liberty. We have anti-trust laws, but they have exempted themselves. It’s standard operating procedure….sadly.

Comment:    cearlwriting@hotmail.com       or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

The Mouse and the Elephant

Ohio Senate Bill 148 passed on a party line vote. Twenty three Republicans decided to restrict voters’ choices in future elections and ten Democrats voted against the bill for a variety of reasons…primarily because the early voting window was narrowed. Third party candidates must gather an extraordinary number of signatures to qualify for the Ohio ballot. Usually because most third party candidates and supporters have real jobs and are not full-time career politicians, outside professional petitioners must be hired to accumulate the necessary signatures. In the realm of hardball politics, time and money are precious commodities. If the third party candidates do manage to attain ballot access, they have already expended an inordinate amount of physical and financial capital. The mouse must scuff and scurry to get in the game because the cowardly elephant is afraid of the smaller creature. It should be noted that the elephant is typically a gelding until it is time to intimidate the mouse.

In past years I rode the elephant as it studiously looked after its own interests while stomping on the little folks as it made its way across the land. The elephant entered into a pact with the donkey whereby whenever either of them became too afraid of the little folk, they would band together to isolate the diminutive ones until the supremacy of the pachyderm and ass could be assured. The elephant and the ass direct themselves according to two prime principles: survival and power. For the two self-serving critters all other principles and values are mere baggage. Sometimes the donkey brazenly brays his misbegotten disdain for standards of constitutional conformity and simple liberty, but the elephant never fails to laud the ideals of freedom, frugality, and fundamental principles. The ass is stupid, and the elephant lies.

Now comes the mouse to claim his place among society’s critters. A modest creature the mouse desires to live in a land of principles and liberty. He wishes that the other critters would allow him to be what he is…a mouse, but they insist on making him conform to their preferences. The donkey and the elephant assume that because of their large sizes, they have the power to force the other animals to do it their way. So, the two grey beasts trumpet and bray to intimidate the others. They change the rules so frequently that the other creatures are constantly hustling to conform. They conspire to make life difficult for all the other creatures of the Creator’s world. In extreme cases when they feel threatened, the elephant and the donkey do not allow the others to roam the wildlife sanctuary. They force the other creatures to roam outside on the periphery of the society.

Whenever the mouse can find an opening into the center of it all, he is amazed at the elephant’s reaction. The massive animal cowers in the corner and refuses to engage the mouse in any meaningful way. The mouse is puzzled by the elephant’s over reactive, cowardly behavior. After all, the elephant professes to share many of the mouse’s values about how the wildlife area should be governed. Why is he so afraid? The donkey runs away when the mouse appears, and the mouse is mystified because the donkey claims to believe that the animal kingdom should not require everyone to behave the same.

It was a moment of epiphany for the tiny rodent. The legal and regulatory mistreatment that he suffered because of collusion between the donkey and the elephant (who was the primary abuser) was a mere symptom of their fear and inadequacy. They were afraid that the mouse would live according to his principles, and they could not tolerate the comparative scrutiny. If the mouse were to assume a role of leadership within the animal sanctuary, the elephant and the donkey would be exposed as dishonest frauds. It wasn’t really the mouse that the elephant feared. It was the little critter’s integrity that made the elephant tremble. The donkey is always stupid.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com    or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

It's My Party

If you are sick and tired of being given the same old choices when you go to cast your vote, your state legislature and the two old tired dominant parties are generally at fault. For more than 150 years the Democrats and Republicans have been taking turns holding power nationally and in most states. There have been periods of time when one party or the other dominated the political scene in various states and the country. Most of us, I suspect, would not consider one-party rule a healthy prescription for good government. Two party rule is marginally better…especially when the two parties have become so similar to one another. Two party rule does not serve the electorate when the parties collude on the practice of governing even if they openly disagree on the policies for governance.

In 1854 at Ripon, Wisconsin, the Republican Party was formed, and their 1860 candidate for President, Abraham Lincoln, was elected. Although several upstart parties have through the years attempted to crack the vise-grip hold of the two decrepit parties, they have generally been unsuccessful. The GOP bills itself as the party of small government and economic prosperity yet it joins hands with the Democrats to enlarge the federal government to an uncontrollable level while approving legislation that negatively impacts the abilities of Americans to earn and to prosper. The Democrats, on the other hand, claim to be the party of the “little guy,” but they insist on promoting intrusive Nanny-state government that over taxes and limits freedom for most of our citizens. The Republicans often follow their lead to increase the scope, power and oversight of the government while severely curtailing the rights and freedoms of the people.

The two party system can be a workable one IF the two primary parties provide contrasting visions for the country. While the current two parties do use their public relations units to articulate varying positions, their actual practice is to share an unyielding commitment to bigger, more intrusive and more powerful government. Words do matter, but “actions speak louder than words.” The actions of BOTH parties lead to a loss of individual liberty, economic freedom and property rights for every citizen of our once-great republic. While pretending to differ about the important philosophical questions that face our nation, they have willingly and knowingly colluded to undermine the Constitution of the United States and the God-given unalienable rights of our people. How long will we continue to endorse this insane path to our country’s destruction?

Because of their monopolistic/oligarchic practices the two parties collude by limiting third party access to the balloting process in many of our states. If a third party cannot achieve ballot access in several states, it limits that party’s opportunity to challenge the status quo on a nationwide basis. The two old parties control the election apparatus lock, stock and barrel. While “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” were guaranteed to us at our founding, the two old parties have joined together to de-value life by allowing babies to be killed, our liberties to be eroded through the growth of large intrusive government, and our pursuit of happiness to be defined by government edict rather than via individual choice. Open the windows of freedom, fellow citizens, and let in the fresh air of liberty. Demand that your states allow real choice at their ballot boxes. Third party candidates can provide the constitutional balance that has been sacrificed by the two old parties. Third parties can hold the old two-party oligarchy accountable. Third party candidates can advance the ideal of “we the people” that has been lost by the two old parties.

We citizens can continue doing things the same old way with the same old results, or we can insist that our states open the padlocks of access so that we have real choices when we vote. Merely changing the names and faces within the two-party structure is similar to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The two old parties have guided us toward the iceberg and have not shown that they have the courage and the wisdom to change course. Opening the system by allowing more legitimate parties who respect the Constitution and smaller government may be our last best hope. You can wager your bottom dollar (a worthless one) that the career politicians of the two old parties will not be around to mourn when our ship of state collides with the iceberg of reality.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com     or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

  

Parsing Davy

It was a number of years ago, but I can recall when our family got its first television set. It was a black and white GE console with a 13 inch screen. As a six-year old, I marveled at the variety of entertainment options that our single channel provided (Channel 13, WSPD-TV). There were two programs that I didn’t want to miss (even in 1952, television addiction became an issue). The first show was a 15 minute Gabby Hayes program that was on daily at 4:15pm…just when my school bus (Willard Hipsher, driver) dropped me off. I would watch the show as I changed clothes to go to the barn and do my chores. The other favorite of mine was “The Wonderful World of Disney” which appeared on Sunday’s at noon. My imagination would run wild during the opening sequence that featured Tinker Bell and Fantasyland. My fertile mind filled in vivid colors on the black and white screen. Disney programming was always interesting, but my favorites were “Johnny Tremain” and “Davy Crockett.”  Tremain was an active, astute and accomplished young boy during the colonial-revolutionary period of America. I often identified with his exploits as he advanced the cause of Liberty.

Crockett was a true hero for a six-year old farm boy from North Central Ohio. Wearing my coonskin cap and clutching my junior-sized replica of “Betsy,” I watched the master frontiersman defeat the forces of evil and nature.  Fess Parker, who portrayed Davy, represented the embodiment of honor, courage and integrity. Nearly every boy of that era could sing “The Ballad of Davy Crockett,” and recite the famous Crockett motto: “Be sure you’re right, then go ahead.”

..\..\Videos\RealPlayer Downloads\Ballad of David Crockett.flv

We need a Davy Crockett today in the United States. Our political leadership has consistently failed us. To illustrate the difference between people of character like Davy Crockett and today’s statist political class, I will parse his motto for both major political parties. I choose to use the Democrats and Republicans for the parsing because they have shared power in our country for 150 years…ever since the Whig party went to that smoke-filled room in the sky. Let the parsing begin.

Be: For Republicans, “be” means living being… a definite pro-life message that is given lip-service and                               little action. 

 For Democrats, “be” means that you are alive, having escaped the abortionist’s knife, and are therefore entitled to the wealth of others.

Sure: For Democrats, “sure” equals certitude or that minorities, unions, leftists and the poor will ALWAYS vote for them…so take them for granted and abuse them frequently.

For Republicans, take the social conservatives, the fiscal conservatives, the small-government types, and the Tea Party activists for granted and abuse them constantly.

You’re: For both parties it means me, myself and I.

Right: For Republicans it means “don’t make waves” just initiate micro-movements toward the Constitution and blame Democrats.

For Democrats it suggests that “if it feels good, do it.” The fact that someone wants it, and it may generate votes makes it right.

Then: This is the linkage that both parties use to justify their theft and pillage plus their crushing of our liberty.

Go: For Democrats this word means to blindly go forward as in “we’ll find out what’s in the bill after we pass it.”

For Republicans the word suggests Chamber of Commerce meetings, corporate outings and international intervention. The word “go” never refers to repealing toxic legislation or reducing the size of government.

Ahead: For both parties this refers to the cranial portions of the citizens’ bodies “on a platter.”

For Republicans this also refers to enabling the progressive/statist agenda of the Democrats while limiting personal liberty.

For Democrats “ahead” is a synonym for bigger, more intrusive government.

When two parties have controlled the apparatus of government for more than a century and a half, it seems logical that they would become smug and elitist. Their primary concerns are partisan ones, and they have forgotten the concept of principle. Both parties would dismiss Davy Crockett as an unsophisticated rube, and would not offer him a seat at the table of power. To me, Davy Crockett represents the Tea Party, Liberty, Patriot and 912 movements. We need men and women like Davy Crockett to recapture the spirit of the United States. Davy and his legacy died at the Alamo. Our current gaggle of political hotshots may be leading us to Armageddon.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com    or    www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Face Book:  www.facebook.com/pages/Earl-for-Ohio/