Monday, February 25, 2008

My Republicrat Post

Several days ago, I blasted out a series of tweets on the whole McBama topic.

Come September and October, you will hear both of the major party candidates saying things like this:

This is a crucial election that will change the history of this country.

I reflect the mainstream of American views. My opponent does not.

Basically it all boils down to this:

Democrats and Republicans are really, really different.

To which a portion of the nation will reply,

Yeah, right.

So, back on February 19, 2008 - several days before Nader's formal entry into the 2008 presidential campaign (although he was on two party ballots in the California primary) - I tweeted my impressions of what the other parties would say about this "choice":

green party on mcbamas: 2 corporate minions promoting monopoly over democracy.

peace & freedom party on mcbamas: 2 fascists out to destroy the workers.

constitution/american independent party on mcbamas: 2 liberal anti-God washington insiders who will try to enslave patriots to washington dc

libertarian party on mcbamas: 2 warmongering, freedom hating, drunken washington insider big spenders who think you work for government.

I should clarify that the word "drunken" in that last tweet was intended to refer to "drunk on power," not "drunk on booze."

So, depending upon your perspective, there really isn't any difference between McCain and Obama (or McCain and Clinton, should lightning strike).

For example, this is what he said. This is what Ralph Nader said:

In announcing his 2008 bid for the White House on “Meet the Press” yesterday, Nader said: “All, all the candidates — McCain, Obama and Clinton — are against single-payer health insurance, full Medicare for all. I’m for it, as well as millions of Americans and 59% of physicians in a forthcoming poll this April.”

Well, Senator Obama, for all his talk of unity, must have HATED being lumped in the same boat as McCain and Clinton. Because he lashed out:

Sen. Barack Obama dismissed Nader's latest candidacy at a news conference in Ohio, calling him a perennial presidential campaigner. "He thought that there was no difference between Al Gore and George Bush, and eight years later I think people realize that Ralph did not know what he was talking about," Obama said.

But Nader isn't the only one who thinks that there is no difference between the Republicans and Democrats. Here's what the Constitution Party says:

The Democrats and Republicans have squandered the Founders' legacy of liberty and justice under the Constitution. Countless government officials in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government ignore their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Join the Constitution Party in its work to restore our government to its Constitutional limits and our law to its Biblical foundations.

And for those who are convinced that the Republicans are the lowest right-wing scum on the face of the earth, while the Democrats are decidedly different, see what Chuck Baldwin has said about the Republicrats:

Instead of representing the people, both the Republican and Democrat parties are bought and paid for by special interest groups and multinational corporations. Neither party pays any attention to the U.S. Constitution but both are largely marching in lockstep toward bigger and bigger government. Both Republicans and Democrats eagerly sacrifice what’s good for the country for what’s good for the party. As they now exist, neither major party deserves the support of patriotic Americans. Furthermore, blind allegiance to the two major parties has created a "lesser of two evils" mindset that has warped the thinking and perverted the values of otherwise good people.

Then, of course, there are those people to whom the left-right continuum just doesn't make sense - namely, the Libertarians. There has been some exposure to libertarian thought via the Ron Paul campaign. Let's see how the official Libertarian Party distinguishes - or doesn't - the Republicans and Democrats:

When the Democrats previously controlled Congress, they spent a lot of our hard-earned money on entitlement programs and pork barrel spending. When the Republicans gained control of Congress, they spent even more of our hard-earned dollars in the same reckless manner. As the Democrats have just regained control again, we will have to wait to see what they do. However, their actions don’t look too promising at this moment.

Of course, Congress can’t take the entire blame for bad spending bills. The President is required to sign bills into law, and the current President never found it important enough to veto even one bloated Republican spending bill.

While we are amassing a tremendous federal deficit, many Americans are forced to make tough decisions about retirement, health insurance and even the education of our children. It is imperative that we immediately cease the wasteful federal spending so we can pare down the national debt and significantly increase the amount of our own money we get to keep. The federal debts aren’t going away and there are but two choices we can make. We can either tighten our belts a bit today or force our children and grandchildren to starve tomorrow. It’s time that we start expecting our representatives in Washington to act with the national checkbook as we do with our family checkbooks.

But no, this isn't the Constitution Party under another name:

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have legitimate authority to define or license personal relationships. Sexuality or gender should have no impact on the rights of individuals.


Individuals should have the right to use drugs, whether for medical or recreational purposes, without fear of legal reprisals, but must be held legally responsible for the consequences of their actions only if they violate others’ rights.

But the true measure of us vs. them may not be party-specific. It may not be war vs. peace, morality vs. immorality, or freedom vs. slavery. Even the major party candidates realize that one of the resonating factors in this election may be Washington vs. America.

So who will lead us into this America vs. Washington battle? Well, it's probably going to be either U.S. Senator John McCain from Washington DC, or U.S. Senator Barack Obama from Washington DC. Oh, I guess it may be U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton from Washington DC. Or, if a miracle occurs, perhaps it will be U.S. Representative Ron Paul from Washington DC.

No wonder Mike Huckabee's staying in the race.

[mrontemp business] | [mrontemp politics] | [mrontemp technology] | [mrontemp tags]

Sphere: Related Content


Reverse_Vampyr said...

Neither Hillary nor McCain will take on the Washington establishment, because they both exist to expand their political power. Obama might, but many of his positions are so radically left that I worry how his proposals could alter America's basic fabric (just look at what FDR's welfare state did to America... now multiply that x10).

Ontario Emperor said...

I suspect that Obama is somewhat plugged into the political establishment himself. If not, then he will be by November. In the 1976 election, Carter had to turn to the unions and to the political bosses in Chicago and elsewhere to get out the vote.