Being an Independent, Mr. Blunt and Cranky loves divided government. Keeps both parties in check and drives consensus towards the center, thus away from either wingtip. Just the sort of thing Centrists want. And in his lifetime, that used to be what happened: one-party rule meant a forced march to one side or the other, and divided government kept things more in balance, closer to the center and not tipping too far to one side or the other .

But what happens when one or more parties decides that compromise is not in their own interests?  Remember, parties have their own agendas that do not necessarily line up with those of voters. If the parties’ interests are served by consensus, no worries. But when the interests of the parties are better served by divisive extremism, we arrive at our current situation. The divisions have grown to such a point that they have ceased to balance each other; said divisions now serve as reasons for obstruction, sabotage and inaction. As the parties jockey for the advantages that come from political warfare, the voters are left scratching their heads and wondering why their public “servants” are not doing the work they are being paid to do.

The answer is not comforting: there is more in the way of cash and goodies coming to them from lobbyists, news organizations, and other sources than they get from their public salaries. These people are indeed servants, but not of the public: they are being bought and paid for by other organizations, and those organizations have their own interests; these interests are narrow and frequently not those of the majority of Americans.

When these interests are tied to wingnutty agendas, these servants respond to their commands, in order to line their own pockets. How else to explain some of the legislative brawls we have seen lately? The public is clearly not served by shutting national parks, airports, medical clinics and the like – but certain deep-pocketed organizations are thus served, so the elected peeps go where the money is, driving to the wings and away from the interests of the majority of Americans.

This explains why, for example, Congress does not change its excessively divisive ways when confronted with their approval ratings (the lowest ever): they are not interested in what the voters think, but instead they are focused like a laser beam on what their true paymasters want. If obstruction and division harm the overall economy and the interests of the citizens, what do they care? As long as their pockets are being lined (nay, stuffed to overflowing), the mayors/governors/representatives/judges/and so on will cheerfully stop the government from doing even the most basic work that is required to care for the nation as a whole.

Indeed, if we say “as a whole” very fast, we will appropriately label the people who are causing this breakdown in governance.  On the Right, “as a wholes” like the Koch Brothers, who would make more money if their crooked business practices are made legal; and on the Left, “as a wholes” like Nader, who think that if America sees how “bad” a Repub government would be, said Americans would somehow convert en masse to communism. On both wings, the “as a wholes” who took our votes and then proceeded to stab us all in the crotch (Repeatedly. With dull, rusty shivs). Finally; the citizens of the nation “as a whole”, who have enabled this behavior for many years, allowing things to get this bad.

The only solution this writer can see is for the voters to have a brimming cup of “I don’t effing think so” and vote out the ones that can be voted out: then we all go after the bank accounts of the rat bassets who paid for us to be screwed over.

Mr. B & C