“Republicans” are VERY Different from Democrats, Day Two: Repubs Support Terrorists. Dems Do Not.

Another example of why the “no difference between the parties” line is a bunch of bulls***. Dems fight against Terrorists in word and deed, while Teapubbies talk a big game when it comes to law and order: but the Repub walk doesn’t match the talk.

Example Number A, take Cliven Bundy and his Moocher Militia, who violated even more laws than Bin Laden, but still got support from the GOP. In fact, not only do Repubs support Bundy’s sedition, they were lining up to get their pictures taken with him. And after members of the Bundy Bunch murdered some cops, “Republicans” said and did little or nothing  – except, of course, continued support.

Example Letter 2:  we see that Repubs love the Sovereign Citizen terrorists. The Justice Department calls these mutts the most dangerous security threat to our nation, but that doesn’t stop GOP politicos like LePage from including them in their inner circles, or granting them rights to carry weapons that scare the sh** out of law-abiding Americans. Hell, even when they commit terrorist crimes the Repubs don’t do much of anything about it.

Example the Third: always remember, Gentle Reader, Bush and his fellow Repubs allowed Bin Laden to get away with murder – the worst foreign terrorist attack on our soil, thousands dead, and the Tevangelicals said “meh”. They used hs face to whip up the population in a manner that even Goebbels would have envied. But while abusing his face, Repubs kissed his a**. Then, of course, they bitched about Obama, who brought Bin Laden to justice.

There we have it,  another example of the enormous differences between the two political parties.

Remember this when a Raging Righty or Loony Leftie tries to tell you that there is “little or no dfference”: that is a big, fat lie.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Giving Up = Guaranteed to Lose (Talking to YOU, Democrats)

Mr. Blunt and Cranky has become somewhat accustomed to dealing with weakness, vacillation and incompetence from the Democratic Party, but it is still possible to be shocked. Thus it happened when he read this article. In it, we find out that one of the worst Teabaggers in Washington is guaranteed to win, because Local Dems did not field a candidate. Seriously. Nobody is running against Mr. Sessions:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The primary season just ended and the general election campaign now unfolding looks the same to Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, tea party favorite, foe of immigration legislation and the only Republican senator running in 2014 without a ballot opponent of any stripe.

Sessions’ lack of opposition this fall in a state with a heavy African-American presence stems from a Democratic party weakness so pervasive that it holds none of the statewide offices, only one seat in the nine-member congressional delegation and a minority in both houses of the legislature.

Against this backdrop, we are compelled to inform you that two Dems are in a position to win in Georgia: for Governor and Senator.

All the talk of a Republican takeover of the US Senate after this year’s midterms may have been a bit premature as a new poll in Georgia shows that Democratic candidate Michelle Nunn holds a three-point lead over Republican nominee David Perdue for Georgia’s open Senate seat. The seat is currently held by retiring Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss. The poll, conducted by Landmark Communications, has Nunn up on Perdue, 46% to 43%. The poll’s margin of error is 2.9%, so Nunn’s lead is razor-thin. However, considering that Georgia is a deep-red state, it has to be extremely disheartening for Republicans to see themselves down in a race where they’d normally be holding a comfortable lead.

The GOP is also taking its lumps in the race for governor. Incumbent Governor Nathan Deal is currently trailing his Democratic opponent, State Senator Jason Carter. Like Nunn, Carter is the beneficiary of a famous last name. While Nunn is the daughter of former US Senator Sam Nunn, Carter’s grandfather is Jimmy Carter, the 39th President of the United States. The poll shows Carter leads Deal by three points, 47% to 44%. With Deal dealing with an ethics investigation, along with general voter dissatisfaction over his policies, trend lines seem to be pointing in a Democratic direction.

The difference in this Tale of Two Red States? Attitude. That is all. Both states are deep red, full of entrenched “Republicans” who rule with iron fists over what should be Democratic majority populations. Geryymandering? Check. Vote suppression? Check. Poverty and oppression? Check. Corruption? Check. These two states are far more similar than they are different.

In Georgia, we have two bad-ass Democrats running for statewide office: Nunn and Carter are lean, mean, politicking machines who are in it to win it. The Sessions race could be going just as well, but Alabama’s Democratic officials are a load of whiny little weenies with loser sweat all over them. They surrendered before the battle even began.

When you give up, you WILL lose.
When you stand up, you CAN win.

Let’s all remember that we are not defined by either of our two parties. We have the power to change things whether  our party hacks have any intestinal fortitude or not.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

“But when you talk about destruction, Don’t you know that you can count me out.” (Centrism Defended)

John Lennon, as he so frequently did, nailed it to a tree in this lyric. And while he may not have agreed with this writer on political matters, this line effectively points out one underlying premise of Centrism: the renunciation of extremism, and the violence that extremism requires to achieve its ends.

People often demonize Centrism as “ill-defined” or “meaning nothing”. This is no more true of Centrism than  is of Liberalism or Conservatism. The plain and simple truth of all political “isms” is this: none of them are monolithic, and all of them have as many variants as they have adherents. Put another way, Dennis Kucinich and Abbie Hoffman have both been described as “extreme Left” or “Liberal”, but they aren’t going to agree on everything. Bush The Dumber and Dick Cheney didn’t agree on everything either. The Cranky One  almost never agrees with the DLC Dimbulbs with whom he is automatically associated when he describes himself as a Centrist.  Labels are useful tools, but like any tool need to be used properly: when misused or overused, they create more harm than good.

Your humble correspondent  describes his political philosophy as follows: antidisestablishmentarianism, maximum personal freedom, keeping his nose out of other people’s private lives, and contributing to the overall good of our society. Except for the first point, he figures most Americans are on board with those concepts to a certain degree. So let’s look at that first point (the one Mr. Lennon so perfectly captured).

Antidisestablishmentarianists, of course, come in various shapes, sizes and degrees: some are ossified individuals who reflexively cling to the status quo, regardless of whether or not it works. Others (like this cranky writer) see it as an incrementalist approach to change. One thing to remember: Martin Luther, often depicted as a revolutionary, was in fact an antidisestablishmentarianist: that is why he proposed a reformation, rather than a revolution. So it goes in politics.

Revolutions kill people. They destroy lives and the works created by those lives. They burn away the good along with the bad. And rebuilding from a revolution is far harder and  more costly (in all respects) than implementing a plan for gradual, consensus-driven change.

Yes, sometimes thick-headed jackasses make revolutions necessary: King George, for example. But had he pulled his head out of his extremist, orthodoxy-addicted, ideological, narrow-minded, blinkered arse, the revolution need not have happened at all.

And that, friends, is why your Radical Centrist, contrarian, curmudgeonly correspondent keeps braying away from his position on the Political Compass (bang on the center of the L/R axis, and far away from the Authoritarian pole on that axis. See the link below to chart yourself.). He brays, hollers, and throws bricks upside the heads of the extremist community at every opportunity, hoping to get his point across. (“Maybe being nice would be a better approach”, you might say, and that’s a fair point. But he’s tried it and failed, so he’s going the blunt route these days.)

Far too many extremists are willing to “break eggs to make an omelet”. Those “eggs” are human beings with lives and loved ones. The idea that anyone could see the inevitable destruction of the lives and loves of their fellow Americans simply as a “cost of doing business”  is truly vomit-inducing. Particularly coming from the political Left, who are allegedly devoted to the betterment of mankind.

Anyone who advocates revolution when their people and country  are not in imminent danger of being killed en masse is a sociopathic mother***er who views his fellow Americans as disposable resources to be destroyed in the pursuit of his or her ideological Utopia.

And people like that are worth fighting. This Radical Centrist stands firmly for Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Revolutionaries do not. If they did, they would not advocate measures that would strip us of all three.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

http://www.politicalcompass.org/ 

OK, Then Prove Otherwise.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky has a tendency to throw gauntlets. Part of that is a personality trait, and part of it is designed to promulgate his viewpoint. When one issues a challenge, one must accept that the “challenge-ee” will pick the glove up and whup it right back at the challenger. And so it goes.

In some cases, the replies are piles of neatly arranged facts (real or alleged), with which the combatants duel away. This usually happens with economics and other quantifiable topics. But there are done subjects that are not as easily proven or disproven, and that’s where we can’t always settle on a common view.

For example: last Saturday’s post about Steubenville , in which this writer threw down on the town for their lack of action in the face of a truly horrific rape crime spree.

A lot of responses came back, alleging bias, assumptions, tendentiousness, and so forth. All reasonable thoughts, and worthwhile discussion topics. However, no one came back with any proof to counter the original post: rather, the replies were either themselves based on inference and anecdotal evidence, or were naught but ad hominem attacks.

It is always possible that your humble correspondent is full of s***. If you can prove that 90 % of Steubenvillians are in fact bravely and loudly fighting back against the rape culture that permeates their city, just forward your evidence along and a full retraction will be published.

Bring it. It would be good to be proven wrong on this topic.

Mr. B & C

A Week of Harsh Truths, Day Five: The Parties Are The Problem

Today is yet another day of Federal Failure. Like Groundhog Day, Partisanship is resulting in repeated crises of its own manufacture, proving to everyone but the incurable lemmings among us that the political parties have destroyed our institutions, subverted our processes, stolen our money and generally put America on life support.

We were warned by some among the Founders that this might happen, President Washington among them. And it has indeed happened, as he foretold.

Don’t believe it? Name a governmental problem or crisis that does not have the word “partisan” associated therewith. Go on, we can wait all day. But here’s a bet that you can’t find one.

You can blame one party or the other, say that one is worse than the other, and you may be right. But the simple fact is: without parties, none of the crap that is used to manipulate us, rob us, divide us, and create manufactured crises would exist. The parties are the problem.

If each and every American would free their mind and renounce partisan affiliation, activities, and financial support, we could force the change that our nation, states, counties and localities deserve. This writer has been living so since 1976, and it has saved him much money while allowing votes for the best candidate, never mind the label attached.

If there was ever a day for Americans to wake up and smell the stench emitted by the corrupt, venal, disgusting and manipulative two-party system, today is it. Put your principles over your party. The nation you save might be your own.

Mr. B & C

The Real Reason for Legislative Gridlock: Political Parties

If Mr. Blunt and Cranky had a dollar for every time a politician said something like “never mind the individual opinions of our caucus members, for the good of the party we must come together and be 100% united”; well, he could afford to give out his songs for free instead of hawking them on iTunes and other such sites. But alas, we don’t get dollars from our dysfunctional elected “representatives”, and so on we go with our jobs, while they fail at theirs. Over. And over. Again.

And the reason they fail is their devotion to their parties, and their corresponding lack of devotion to us. Even though we pay their salaries, they spend their on-the-job time working for their parties. We see and hear them apologizing for voting with their party, say it isn’t their view, but they have to hew the line, and so on. Hey, Chuckles, we are paying you. Either work for us, or quit and work for your friggin’ party.

Look at the past few years for a classic example: the “Republican” Party and their openly avowed Number One Priority of getting a “Republican” in the White House in 2012. By their own admission, they put their constitutionally-mandated work aside to focus on partisan politics, to the detriment of the nation.

This is far from the only example of such party-centric focus: it has been a staple of partisan operations for many a year, in many a place. It is only unusual in that it was so baldly stated, without the slightest hint of shame. And without much in the way of consequences from the voters, who have gotten very little for the billions spent on and by the Legislative branch of late.

Two relevant comments from very prominent politicians:

Number A; President Washington, in his Farewell Address, warned us that political parties would someday steal the reins of power from the voters and their legally constituted organizations. His prediction has come true, even if we choose not to recognize it.

Letter 2; Haley Barbour recently announced that his “Republican” party was in need of “a proctology exam”.  True, if vulgar.

If we squashed political parties like the cockroaches they are, we could take the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on them, apply it to the deficit, and maybe have our “representatives” start to represent us for a friggin’ change.  Until we do, we will continue to be ruled by organizations that have no right to govern us.

Mr.  B & C

All Political Partie$ Suck. Each and Every One

Three points, one for each useless and ridiculous party:

Number A: the “Small Government Republicans” who want to vastly expand the ability of said government to monitor the speech, sex lives, and other hitherto private activities of American citizens.

Letter Two: the Democrats, who change their tune so often, they’re like an ADHD karaoke singer on Meth.

Thirdly: the Libertarians, who believe that the world is a jungle, in which Darwinian rules apply, which means that one must be rapacious and aggressive so as to thin the herd of weak and ethical humans. They simultaneously believe that every one of us is basically good, kind, charitable and decent; so no regulations on our behavior are required.

Conclusion: none of these parties can be relied upon to support the citizens of the nation. Instead, they are using the system to usurp power and wealth from we the people: just like President Washington told us they would.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

One in the Eye for Those Who Want to Steal Your Right to Vote

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/02/14182503-judge-blocks-pennsylvania-voter-id-law?lite

After a key Keystone State Legislator came out and said that their new Voter ID law would allow “Mitt Romney to win Pennsylvania”, one would have thought that any sane judge would have squashed the law out of hand; obviously, it was politically motivated and a bold-faced attempt to rig an election. But noooooooo.

Instead, there have been expensive and time-consuming hearings, rulings and counter-rulings, media circuses and so on. Finally, yesterday morning, a judge put a stay on part of the PA Voter ID Law. Half a loaf for those who believe in free, fair, and un-rigged elections, but you know what they say about half a loaf.

As an Independent, Mr. Blunt and Cranky really dislikes parties. A lot. He thinks, in fact, that they should be outlawed, because they have turned out to be just as insidious an infection as President Washington warned us about (“However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion”).

In this case, one of the parties (“Republicans”) have spent most of the past two years working on behalf of their party’s interest, to the detriment of the nation.The modern “Republican” party bears no resemblance to the party we once knew. The party of fiscal discipline has become the party of Voodoo Economics. The party of minding our own business has become the party of foreign wars of choice. And the party that trumpeted the rule of law has become the party of lawlessness, influence selling, election rigging and voter suppression.

The right to vote is one of the foundational rights of our nation. When one weakens the foundation of a structure, how long can the structure stand? Read President Washington’s words once again, and ask yourself if you really want to vote for people who would take away your rights; using the law of the land to weaken the nation for the benefit of a few corrupt politicos and those who buy them.

Again: “Republicans” don’t want you to vote. They want to take away your right to vote. If you care about your rights, you cannot afford to vote for these crooks.

Mr. B & C

“Should” Sounds a lot Like “S***”. For Good Reason

Mister Blunt and Cranky really hates the word “should”. It is a flight from reality, an attempt to linger in la-la land, and is often used to blame and shame others for not somehow living up to impossible standards:

“It isn’t fair –  I shouldn’t have to work every day”

“You should vote for (fill in the blank) or you hate America”

“We shouldn’t have to choose to between the lesser of two evils”

Let’s focus on the third example, because it is directly relevant to the upcoming election: the understandable frustration with the binary nature of Presidential Election Mathematics. Your sometimes-humble correspondent (in the tradition of President Washington) firmly believes in the abolition of political parties. So if anybody in the nation is gonna dislike the current paradigm, it’s this guy right here. But he understands that it makes no difference what “should” be; reality is what it is, so he sucks it up and votes for the lesser of two evils, sometimes holding his crooked beak the while.

So Obama “should” be more/less liberal, or have launched more/fewer drone strikes, or created more jobs, should, should s***….what a load of crap, people. He is what he is, and that is a center-left Dem.

So Romney “should” be more/less Hard Right, more/less greedy, should, should, s***…what  a load of crap, people. He is what he is, and that is a money-hungry Repub with zero convictions or morals.

There is no other choice. One of the two. D or R. Obama or Romney. What we think “should” be has no relevance. Pick the one you dislike the least, and move along. Just don’t, please, let your s***ty  little “shoulds” cause you to sit the contest out.

Mr. B & C