Our 2-week National nightmare is over. All that's left is a spot of media/politician hanky panky followed by odd outbursts by the Bronzed Ego.
One thing conventions do signify however is that the entire slog of this Presidential campaign has finally reached the beginning of the end. We've moved from "presumptive nominee" to "nominee" and soon it will be "President elect". In between these points I have to advise that it's still going to be wise to ignore the media, at least until after November and probably wait until after January (the inauguration) just to be on the safe side.
Again, some notes:
- No, this was not "the best convention ever" put on by the Democrats. It was a good convention, marked by all of the things the uneducated proletariat wants to see (Hollywood, politicians, Katy Perry, etc.) but it was always going to be drug down by the utter lack of quality that the Anointed One possesses as a Presidential candidate. It was a low ceiling, although they certainly bumped up against it.
- Politics is show-business for ugly people. And while that's (admittedly) a canard it's one that has the added benefit of being 100% true. Politics in the electronic age isn't about making and keeping so-called "promises", and it's certainly not a battle of ideals. Today politics is bread and circuses. Morgan Freeman hits the Stage and everyone gets rapturous about "God" all of the sudden. Katy Perry (HS Dropout) comes on stage, sings something and then extols the audience about the virtues of the Anointed One. People are ecstatic that Ms. Perry likes their candidate, it makes them feel cool somehow, as if they have something in common with the Katie.
- The truth is, we vote how we have been conditioned to vote. For the most part anyway. Yes there ae examples of people who break away from the family voting pattern, switch parties etc. etc. Most of those however are because a different conditioning took place outside the home. Right now, Democrat/Statist ideas are cool. "President Obama is your Daddy" would have, in a sane Republic, been laughed out of the public square and been made into a symbol of vapidness. Today however it's made Chris Rock (Chris freaking Rock) into a deep political thinker.
- The bigger scandal, if it can be called that, is that your vote doesn't matter. I know, voting is the "cornerstone of democracy" and you have an obligation to run to the polls and cast a vote for a horrendous person who is going to get away with it, I promise. Even if you think you are taking the time to study the issues you're not. Because there are people out there who are taking more time, it's their jobs, and have a much better understanding of the complexities of modern-government in the authoritarian age than do you.
Also, there are more people out there casting what are basically auto-votes, or votes that they cast almost without thinking, than you. There is no more useless form of personal expression in American Democracy than vote-casting, yet no form of expression has been held more sacrosanct despite having very little meaning in today's environment of creative electoral map-drawing and incumbent protection schemes. This is doubly true if your voting district is either deep red, or deep blue (and, it probably is).
Voting in America is nothing more than an exercise in crowd control. It's not about whether or not the Democrats or Republicans have the best ideas. It's whether or not their conditioning sticks. Once in power they then control the message to pass things they want to pass anyway.
- They can do this because the media is stupid. (With a few exceptions, mostly at the local, investigative level) Really stupid. While the linked article tries to make the case that Texas could do all sorts of cool stuff (instead of try and protect it's powers) with the money they used to sue, is anyone asking what could be bought with all of the money donated to politicians instead?
That's because the media have been conditioned just as we have. They've been raised (probably) in Democrat homes, taught in Democrat schools and graduated from Democrat-ran J-schools. They now work under Democrat bosses. They don't view taxation as bad or, honestly, even understand how it works, and they still operate under the assumption that politics is operating just as it has during the Watergate era. As political scandal grows increasingly sophisticated, reporters yearn for the days of large press pools and "press" tags jammed inside the bands of reporter fedoras.
Instead of reporting the news they 'analyze" the news or, worse, try to 'explain' to us the events of the day. The worst journalism possible is so-called "fact-check" journalism which is neither factual, or actually checks out all that much. In most cases it's just a reflection of how a particular reporter feels about an issue.
All of what we are seeing here is a ham-fisted attempt to dumb down the complicated into simple, bite-sized portions in order to stir up the easily irritated. Give Trump and Hillary this, they understand what makes the simpletons in their party tick and they are currently tugging on the right levers. For better or for worse.
At the end of this process one fact remains: Out of 300 Million(ish) people in the United States we have chosen, through a quasi-Democratic process, two of the worst among us to lead us. We have done so willingly, and we were just force-fed two shit-show spectacles congratulating us for hitting a new low.
If you watched however. I'm proud to say I didn't, not a second. And my life is better for it.
You should try it some time.
Friday, July 29, 2016
Thursday, July 28, 2016
Political season: The Democrats are not "becoming" the party of the wealthy, they HAVE been the party of the wealthy.
They're just a LOT better at convincing the poor that they're on their side by promising them a ton of shit that, ostensibly, others will pay for and they'll get for "free".
Some Slate writer is in a tizzy. Because Michael "the Demagogue's Demagogue" Bloomberg has cast his faux-independent brand behind Hillary Clinton. "Soda-bans for all the Country!" to shortly become the Democrat's battle cry.
Or will it be a tax on carbon? A tax that most corporations support, as opposed to Al Gore's self-enriching cap and trade scheme, because taxes of this type are the easiest to pass along to both the customer and private royalty owners.
How about "free" college education for those making under $125,000 per year? The Democrats are basically proposing we do for higher education what we've done for primary education. In short, making it all but worthless, prohibitively expensive and the quality version of such being priced out of the market except for the wealthy?
Think I'm wrong? Currently our primary education system is, by almost every measurable metric, failing spectacularly. Schools are underfunded, taxes are being raised prohibitively on the poor to make ends meet while teacher's unions continue to strike and hold-out for more and better freebies from the governments that run the thing.
Getting a diploma from a public high school is meaningless in the job market. It doesn't signify a base level of learning, or that one understands the concepts of basic math, reading or writing. (or, say, personal finance). What it means is that you were stubborn enough, or popular enough, to stick to it for 12 years before finally walking across a stage without spiking yourself on the staircase.
Even a college degree is diminished these days. Experience on the job is much more valuable than book learning. In fact, unless you're studying to become a teacher or college professor, I'm willing to bet that most, if not all, of the daily work you do has nothing to do with what you learned in school.
But businesses do value degrees from certain, private institutions, and they are going to be the only ones that matter if we make education "free".
And the primary people that gain acceptance to these private schools? The rich. Or the connected, or the handful of "diversity" students who are given what basically amounts to a pity pass. Sander's populist rhetoric notwithstanding, nothing is more perpetuating to a ruling class than convincing the rubes who are ruled to accept something with no inherent value as valuable. It's really the Democrat's greatest political success and they're building a winning coalition off of it.
"But the people aren't that stupid" you are saying right now.
Oh really? How else do you explain cities such as Baltimore continuing to elect Democrats into positions of municipal power despite the fact that almost 60 years of Democratic rule has morphed their communities into dysfunctional dystopias?
With the implosion of the Republican party, and an education system that's stopped valuing classical liberal thought, the Democrats are on the verge of making all of America into it's urban cores. A nation, much like Mexico FWIW, where the ruling class and their courtesans dine on peacock, baby seal and champagne while the poor eek out a living on their allowance of cheese and soylent.
Bread lines? Phaw. Peasant food of the future will be manufactured, from cockroaches.
Drink up fellow proles.
Some Slate writer is in a tizzy. Because Michael "the Demagogue's Demagogue" Bloomberg has cast his faux-independent brand behind Hillary Clinton. "Soda-bans for all the Country!" to shortly become the Democrat's battle cry.
Or will it be a tax on carbon? A tax that most corporations support, as opposed to Al Gore's self-enriching cap and trade scheme, because taxes of this type are the easiest to pass along to both the customer and private royalty owners.
How about "free" college education for those making under $125,000 per year? The Democrats are basically proposing we do for higher education what we've done for primary education. In short, making it all but worthless, prohibitively expensive and the quality version of such being priced out of the market except for the wealthy?
Think I'm wrong? Currently our primary education system is, by almost every measurable metric, failing spectacularly. Schools are underfunded, taxes are being raised prohibitively on the poor to make ends meet while teacher's unions continue to strike and hold-out for more and better freebies from the governments that run the thing.
Getting a diploma from a public high school is meaningless in the job market. It doesn't signify a base level of learning, or that one understands the concepts of basic math, reading or writing. (or, say, personal finance). What it means is that you were stubborn enough, or popular enough, to stick to it for 12 years before finally walking across a stage without spiking yourself on the staircase.
Even a college degree is diminished these days. Experience on the job is much more valuable than book learning. In fact, unless you're studying to become a teacher or college professor, I'm willing to bet that most, if not all, of the daily work you do has nothing to do with what you learned in school.
But businesses do value degrees from certain, private institutions, and they are going to be the only ones that matter if we make education "free".
And the primary people that gain acceptance to these private schools? The rich. Or the connected, or the handful of "diversity" students who are given what basically amounts to a pity pass. Sander's populist rhetoric notwithstanding, nothing is more perpetuating to a ruling class than convincing the rubes who are ruled to accept something with no inherent value as valuable. It's really the Democrat's greatest political success and they're building a winning coalition off of it.
"But the people aren't that stupid" you are saying right now.
Oh really? How else do you explain cities such as Baltimore continuing to elect Democrats into positions of municipal power despite the fact that almost 60 years of Democratic rule has morphed their communities into dysfunctional dystopias?
With the implosion of the Republican party, and an education system that's stopped valuing classical liberal thought, the Democrats are on the verge of making all of America into it's urban cores. A nation, much like Mexico FWIW, where the ruling class and their courtesans dine on peacock, baby seal and champagne while the poor eek out a living on their allowance of cheese and soylent.
Bread lines? Phaw. Peasant food of the future will be manufactured, from cockroaches.
Drink up fellow proles.
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
A convention guide from someone who isn't watching the conventions.
Some thoughts.....
Yes WE can! (Pander to a group in an attempt to lock them in a cycle of perpetual poverty as we've done in the past)
...and lie. (We're politicians, it's what we do)
Shame! (ding, ding) Shame! (What America needs are workable solutions, the Republicans gave us a shit-show, the Democrats are giving us Sarah Silverman's Game of Thrones fantasy)
Warren also did the 'nazi' salute when waving. (In the manner of Alt-Right talker Laura Ingraham. Not so amazingly, the media let this one pass)
Positive - no hate (It's easy to sit around and call the other side "stupid". That's a rhetorical crutch for the simple-minded. It's harder to come to the realization that YOUR side doesn't have many of the answers that are needed because it's locked into a vicious cycle of cronyism and patronage that is running the country and many of it's cities into the ground.)
Personal politics aside: It was a good speech. (And the tweet from POTUS was spot-on as well.)
238 years of American "progress" (We've morphed from "Yearning to be free" to "Where in the hell do I pee?")
Free! Stuff! Now! (Paid for by those making just a little more than you. In other words, every Bernie speech ever.)
Comedians for Clinton! (Or, two boobs supporting a lying boob)
Of course, there's the usual rumblings (From Republicans of a Lee Greenwood lean) about the Democrats having no visible American flags on their stage. This should not surprise you since the Democrats stopped being an American party, and morphed into a globalist party, a long time ago.
Oh sure they have the same problems as the Republicans. A large bloc of under-educated, noisy, uncivil, Nationalist, borderline racist and "activist" groups sucking up a lot of the political oxygen right now but for all of their Black Lives Matter pandering the Democrats are still a lily white group at the top, the only difference being that they do a better job of integrating minorities into their lower ranks, primarily through the promise of freebies.
In the end both parties are purveyors of the same snake-oil, only the labels have changed. The ingredients of hatred, smugness, Statism and a stripping away of the rights of those whose ideas differ is still the nasty concoction inside the bottle.
One other not so subtle difference. The media is actively marketing the Democrat's snake-oil. And that is an advantage the Republicans may never be able to fully overcome. Americans are being convinced that stuff is free and sold the idea that one party is "correct" while the other is "wrong". That's never a sign of long-term viability in a functioning Republic. If you believe that way it's a good damn sign that you're the problem.
Yes WE can! (Pander to a group in an attempt to lock them in a cycle of perpetual poverty as we've done in the past)
...and lie. (We're politicians, it's what we do)
Shame! (ding, ding) Shame! (What America needs are workable solutions, the Republicans gave us a shit-show, the Democrats are giving us Sarah Silverman's Game of Thrones fantasy)
Warren also did the 'nazi' salute when waving. (In the manner of Alt-Right talker Laura Ingraham. Not so amazingly, the media let this one pass)
Positive - no hate (It's easy to sit around and call the other side "stupid". That's a rhetorical crutch for the simple-minded. It's harder to come to the realization that YOUR side doesn't have many of the answers that are needed because it's locked into a vicious cycle of cronyism and patronage that is running the country and many of it's cities into the ground.)
Personal politics aside: It was a good speech. (And the tweet from POTUS was spot-on as well.)
238 years of American "progress" (We've morphed from "Yearning to be free" to "Where in the hell do I pee?")
Free! Stuff! Now! (Paid for by those making just a little more than you. In other words, every Bernie speech ever.)
Comedians for Clinton! (Or, two boobs supporting a lying boob)
Of course, there's the usual rumblings (From Republicans of a Lee Greenwood lean) about the Democrats having no visible American flags on their stage. This should not surprise you since the Democrats stopped being an American party, and morphed into a globalist party, a long time ago.
Oh sure they have the same problems as the Republicans. A large bloc of under-educated, noisy, uncivil, Nationalist, borderline racist and "activist" groups sucking up a lot of the political oxygen right now but for all of their Black Lives Matter pandering the Democrats are still a lily white group at the top, the only difference being that they do a better job of integrating minorities into their lower ranks, primarily through the promise of freebies.
In the end both parties are purveyors of the same snake-oil, only the labels have changed. The ingredients of hatred, smugness, Statism and a stripping away of the rights of those whose ideas differ is still the nasty concoction inside the bottle.
One other not so subtle difference. The media is actively marketing the Democrat's snake-oil. And that is an advantage the Republicans may never be able to fully overcome. Americans are being convinced that stuff is free and sold the idea that one party is "correct" while the other is "wrong". That's never a sign of long-term viability in a functioning Republic. If you believe that way it's a good damn sign that you're the problem.
Monday, July 25, 2016
The Political Echo-Chamber: "Normal" Human Beings.
What the media doesn't get:
DNC Day One: Post Obama "drama" Edition. Unconventional. Yahoo!(Brought to you by Verizon!)
Actually, "normal" human beings weren't recuperating from the RNC at all. In fact, most "normal" human beings are either starting, or wrapping up, their last Summer vacations before they start the back-to-school slog and are incredibly busy worrying about other things.
"Normal" human beings are something that political journalists, and politicians, don't fully understand.
Most of this is due to the insular nature of America's current ruling class. They isolate themselves in 'political districts' free from interaction with the non-party faithful. Even when they go back to their districts they still only operate in a hermetically sealed bubble of "town halls" and "voter outreach" where they don't actually have to interact with the public.
The result is that they believe, honestly believe, that so-called normal people are the same people with which they interact every day.
But those people aren't normal. They're party loyalists who honestly believe that they have a skin in the game, or they're part of the patronage system who actually do. The beautiful thing about being in the ruling class, and operating in their strata, is that you have lower-level members of the courtesan class who interact with the actual ruled for you.
These people, the politically dependent, watched every minute of the Mistake by the Lake and put a lot of stock into Ted Cruz' refusal to endorse the Bronzed Ego. These people are more likely to view Ted Cruz as either a newly crowned champion of liberty or a modern-day Benedict Arnold who cast aside their precious party for the watery tart that is the nomination in 2020. And these people are actively engaged in social media, which is just about as far as the mainstream media goes to do research these days.
Normal people are at Wal-Mart, buying necessities with an ever-shrinking pot of disposable income. These people are taking the kids to movies, buying clothes, note-books or trying to have one last fun fling on the road.
Normal people are only witnessed by politicians and the media that covers politicians through Internet memes and websites such as People of Wal-Mart who make fun of them.
Normal people, to the ruling class and the sycophants who cover and kowtow to them, are dysfunctional. Which explains why it's always felt that they need the wise and benevolent ruling class to make things right.
Yes, it's arrogance at the highest level, and it's institutional now. The only thing 'normal' about 'normal' people to the ruling class is their need to be corralled and protected from their supposed bad decisions.
The media is so far removed from reality as to be irrelevant to it.
DNC Day One: Post Obama "drama" Edition. Unconventional. Yahoo!(Brought to you by Verizon!)
As normal human beings spent their weekends recuperating from the RNC
Actually, "normal" human beings weren't recuperating from the RNC at all. In fact, most "normal" human beings are either starting, or wrapping up, their last Summer vacations before they start the back-to-school slog and are incredibly busy worrying about other things.
"Normal" human beings are something that political journalists, and politicians, don't fully understand.
Most of this is due to the insular nature of America's current ruling class. They isolate themselves in 'political districts' free from interaction with the non-party faithful. Even when they go back to their districts they still only operate in a hermetically sealed bubble of "town halls" and "voter outreach" where they don't actually have to interact with the public.
The result is that they believe, honestly believe, that so-called normal people are the same people with which they interact every day.
But those people aren't normal. They're party loyalists who honestly believe that they have a skin in the game, or they're part of the patronage system who actually do. The beautiful thing about being in the ruling class, and operating in their strata, is that you have lower-level members of the courtesan class who interact with the actual ruled for you.
These people, the politically dependent, watched every minute of the Mistake by the Lake and put a lot of stock into Ted Cruz' refusal to endorse the Bronzed Ego. These people are more likely to view Ted Cruz as either a newly crowned champion of liberty or a modern-day Benedict Arnold who cast aside their precious party for the watery tart that is the nomination in 2020. And these people are actively engaged in social media, which is just about as far as the mainstream media goes to do research these days.
Normal people are at Wal-Mart, buying necessities with an ever-shrinking pot of disposable income. These people are taking the kids to movies, buying clothes, note-books or trying to have one last fun fling on the road.
Normal people are only witnessed by politicians and the media that covers politicians through Internet memes and websites such as People of Wal-Mart who make fun of them.
Normal people, to the ruling class and the sycophants who cover and kowtow to them, are dysfunctional. Which explains why it's always felt that they need the wise and benevolent ruling class to make things right.
Yes, it's arrogance at the highest level, and it's institutional now. The only thing 'normal' about 'normal' people to the ruling class is their need to be corralled and protected from their supposed bad decisions.
The media is so far removed from reality as to be irrelevant to it.
HALV: This is GOOD News for Houston.
It seems that the NCAA is deciding that cities providing a special accommodation to transgenders in regards to bathroom access is going to be a key component in their decision making for location evaluation.
NCAA to survey potential host cities on discrimination laws. Morganton News-Herald.
The good news for Houston, and Texas (for now), is that they haven't passed any laws or ordinances that are "discriminatory" in nature. Yes, the State leaders are vowing to pass a silly "gender bathroom" law which strips the rights of individual businesses to make the determination themselves regarding who can use bathrooms within their (private) establishments but, as of now, no other laws exist.
While it's true that Houstonians, wisely, refused to provide transgender people with a special accommodation regarding bathroom access that other's don't enjoy (and, in the process, refused to establish the urinal tribunals that former-Mayor Annise Parker envisioned) there's nothing in the law that prevents private businesses from implementing so-called "gender neutral" restrooms should they so desire.
Of course, we'll now be on the receiving end of numerous articles in the increasingly irrelevant middling-regional daily and fainting couch, think pieces from it's editorial blog (Gray Matters) telling us that Houston is doomed, DOOMED mind you, because they didn't pass and heartily endorse Parker's Folly but it's just not true.
In fact, I would argue that Houston's relatively open regulatory structure regarding the same is a feature, not a bug in the way we handle the delicate matter of who potties where.
A city, and State, possessed of real leadership would be able to make this case to the NCAA strongly, loudly and confidently.
Unfortunately Houston and Texas are ran by an incompetent group whose main goal is to pander to the increasingly under-informed masses and protect their patronage.
And the NCAA is allowing Baylor to continue operations.
Which tells you pretty much all you need to know about their commitment to providing a "safe environment" versus their pandering to the media as a bastion of modern-progressive thinking.
NCAA to survey potential host cities on discrimination laws. Morganton News-Herald.
The board in April adopted a requirement for host sites to demonstrate "how they will provide an environment that is safe, healthy and free of discrimination and also safeguards the dignity of everyone involved in the event." The questionnaire is intended to bolster that requirement.
The good news for Houston, and Texas (for now), is that they haven't passed any laws or ordinances that are "discriminatory" in nature. Yes, the State leaders are vowing to pass a silly "gender bathroom" law which strips the rights of individual businesses to make the determination themselves regarding who can use bathrooms within their (private) establishments but, as of now, no other laws exist.
While it's true that Houstonians, wisely, refused to provide transgender people with a special accommodation regarding bathroom access that other's don't enjoy (and, in the process, refused to establish the urinal tribunals that former-Mayor Annise Parker envisioned) there's nothing in the law that prevents private businesses from implementing so-called "gender neutral" restrooms should they so desire.
Of course, we'll now be on the receiving end of numerous articles in the increasingly irrelevant middling-regional daily and fainting couch, think pieces from it's editorial blog (Gray Matters) telling us that Houston is doomed, DOOMED mind you, because they didn't pass and heartily endorse Parker's Folly but it's just not true.
In fact, I would argue that Houston's relatively open regulatory structure regarding the same is a feature, not a bug in the way we handle the delicate matter of who potties where.
A city, and State, possessed of real leadership would be able to make this case to the NCAA strongly, loudly and confidently.
Unfortunately Houston and Texas are ran by an incompetent group whose main goal is to pander to the increasingly under-informed masses and protect their patronage.
And the NCAA is allowing Baylor to continue operations.
Which tells you pretty much all you need to know about their commitment to providing a "safe environment" versus their pandering to the media as a bastion of modern-progressive thinking.
Thursday, July 21, 2016
PostGOP: Your Party 'Tis of Thee.
Ted Cruz "Reagan '76 Moment" did not go as planned.
Thunderous boos for Cruz, who refuses to endorse Trump. Julie Pace and Jill Colvin, AP via Chron.com
After starting the campaign as a staunch Trump defender, and allowing others to try and take the lead attacking him, and consequentially, getting attacked, ruthlessly, by the Trumpets. Cruz eventually had to pivot late and became the victim of Trump's smears of his wife and father.
Outside of Texas, this is not a good look. In Texas, where Texas Republicans are desperate for a conservative water-carrier, Cruz is being hailed as not only wearing Ronald Reagan's underwear, but being present when they were woven from the bands of liberty.
Just. Stop.
The first thing is this. If you're of a GOP-lean to 'turn back the clock' to Reagan-era Republicanism then you're part of the problem. It's not the 80's and most of the electorate (myself included) wasn't old enough to have even cast a ballot for his Ronaldness. Yes, Reagan did some good things and he made the GOP (and America) believe again after the morass that was the Carter administration, but he also did some things wrong (refusing to go after entitlement reform along with cutting taxes) that was chief among them and, indirectly, added to some of the structural problems we have today. Reagan is great, as a historical figure, but he shouldn't be used as the basis for a party platform. We're never going back to the 80's (thank the Lord) and we shouldn't be trying to. Hopefully wherever disaffected conservatives (including myself) end up in these PostGOP days hopefully we won't bring the anchor of Reagan with us.
But Cruz is no Reagan.
He never was, and he never will be. In fact, despite his so-called principled (more on that in a minute) stand in his speech last night the fact remains that Cruz is a candidate with appeal in a very narrowly defined region: Texas and Oklahoma. He couldn't sweep the South as his campaign predicted and, Nationally at least, his favorable/unfavorable ratings fell off a cliff (even, to a lesser extent, in Texas) when he pivoted from Trumpet to Trump basher. Cruz' biggest problem is that, outside of the faithful followers, his sudden anti-Trumpness is seen to be just more opportunism from the opportunist's opportunist. Ted Cruz is widely viewed as having one guiding principle, his designs on the Presidency.
So Cruz makes his speech and the Trumpets blared. As they do. Some even went so far as to physically threaten both Cruz and his wife. If this is emblematic of the "new" GOP then count me, and many others, out. In fact, the new-ish alt-right GOP is an increasingly authoritarian, nationalist and white supremacist party. It's not a pretty place to be. Not all Trumpets are that way, of course, just as not all Democrats are stark-raving socialists, but enough are that they are currently controlling the narrative. At least they come about their beliefs honestly however, which is more than can be said for the remaining GOP faction.
I'm speaking about the party loyalists, the people who are glancing askew at the #NeverTrump movement and giving them the stink-eye over not falling in line. The people who still have #MarcoRubio2016 in their social media profiles and who, for some reason, think that they have "built the party" and feel that people "owe" the GOP a vote. What they don't realize is that when you lie down with dogs, you wind up with fleas. Pardon me for dissenting but to me principle is more important than assuaging the egos of people desperately trying to remain relevant.
The GOP is your party, not mine, and it clearly has no room in it for ideological diversity. In a way, it's become the Democrat party without minority groups. It's a monolithic turd in the punch-bowl of politics whose time has passed us by.
Both parties are relics, but they're being kept on life-support because they also write the rules. And those who write the rules have an advantage in the game.
No, I will not vote for Trump. And I will not vote for Hillary either. Nor do I have any obligation to ensure that down-ballot races are won by a GOP whose chosen to adopt into their platform, ideas that I find objectionable.
The GOP is your party Trumpets. Which is what all of you now are. Guilt by association and such.
Thunderous boos for Cruz, who refuses to endorse Trump. Julie Pace and Jill Colvin, AP via Chron.com
It's an open secret that Cruz viewed this speech as his "Reagan moment" harboring visions of the Gipper's 1976 Republican National Convention speech that catapulted him to the front of the conservative pecking order and into deity status among the party faithful (this, historical revisionism aside, despite not actually accomplishing the conservative goals that he set forth that evening).Undercutting calls for Republican unity, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz stubbornly refused to endorse Donald Trump Wednesday night as he addressed the GOP convention, igniting thunderous boos from furious delegates as he encouraged Americans to simply "vote your conscience" in November.In a surreal moment, Trump unexpectedly walked into the arena just as Cruz was wrapping up his remarks. Delegates chanted Trump's name and implored Cruz to voice his support for the businessman, to no avail.
After starting the campaign as a staunch Trump defender, and allowing others to try and take the lead attacking him, and consequentially, getting attacked, ruthlessly, by the Trumpets. Cruz eventually had to pivot late and became the victim of Trump's smears of his wife and father.
Outside of Texas, this is not a good look. In Texas, where Texas Republicans are desperate for a conservative water-carrier, Cruz is being hailed as not only wearing Ronald Reagan's underwear, but being present when they were woven from the bands of liberty.
Just. Stop.
The first thing is this. If you're of a GOP-lean to 'turn back the clock' to Reagan-era Republicanism then you're part of the problem. It's not the 80's and most of the electorate (myself included) wasn't old enough to have even cast a ballot for his Ronaldness. Yes, Reagan did some good things and he made the GOP (and America) believe again after the morass that was the Carter administration, but he also did some things wrong (refusing to go after entitlement reform along with cutting taxes) that was chief among them and, indirectly, added to some of the structural problems we have today. Reagan is great, as a historical figure, but he shouldn't be used as the basis for a party platform. We're never going back to the 80's (thank the Lord) and we shouldn't be trying to. Hopefully wherever disaffected conservatives (including myself) end up in these PostGOP days hopefully we won't bring the anchor of Reagan with us.
But Cruz is no Reagan.
He never was, and he never will be. In fact, despite his so-called principled (more on that in a minute) stand in his speech last night the fact remains that Cruz is a candidate with appeal in a very narrowly defined region: Texas and Oklahoma. He couldn't sweep the South as his campaign predicted and, Nationally at least, his favorable/unfavorable ratings fell off a cliff (even, to a lesser extent, in Texas) when he pivoted from Trumpet to Trump basher. Cruz' biggest problem is that, outside of the faithful followers, his sudden anti-Trumpness is seen to be just more opportunism from the opportunist's opportunist. Ted Cruz is widely viewed as having one guiding principle, his designs on the Presidency.
So Cruz makes his speech and the Trumpets blared. As they do. Some even went so far as to physically threaten both Cruz and his wife. If this is emblematic of the "new" GOP then count me, and many others, out. In fact, the new-ish alt-right GOP is an increasingly authoritarian, nationalist and white supremacist party. It's not a pretty place to be. Not all Trumpets are that way, of course, just as not all Democrats are stark-raving socialists, but enough are that they are currently controlling the narrative. At least they come about their beliefs honestly however, which is more than can be said for the remaining GOP faction.
I'm speaking about the party loyalists, the people who are glancing askew at the #NeverTrump movement and giving them the stink-eye over not falling in line. The people who still have #MarcoRubio2016 in their social media profiles and who, for some reason, think that they have "built the party" and feel that people "owe" the GOP a vote. What they don't realize is that when you lie down with dogs, you wind up with fleas. Pardon me for dissenting but to me principle is more important than assuaging the egos of people desperately trying to remain relevant.
The GOP is your party, not mine, and it clearly has no room in it for ideological diversity. In a way, it's become the Democrat party without minority groups. It's a monolithic turd in the punch-bowl of politics whose time has passed us by.
Both parties are relics, but they're being kept on life-support because they also write the rules. And those who write the rules have an advantage in the game.
No, I will not vote for Trump. And I will not vote for Hillary either. Nor do I have any obligation to ensure that down-ballot races are won by a GOP whose chosen to adopt into their platform, ideas that I find objectionable.
The GOP is your party Trumpets. Which is what all of you now are. Guilt by association and such.
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
PostGOP: The problem with our politics
Politics makes us angry. And stupid. REALLY stupid (Caution, NSFW).
We know this but we continue to think that politics is a unifying force, a chance to walk into the ballot box and "do some good" by voting the "right way". It's activism without effort or consequence. You don't even have to do research any more because there are pay-to-play voter guides that arrive in your mailbox which tell you who the approved candidates are, depending on your party of choice that is.
Trudging out to a voting location on election day is the lowest form of political participation. It's a cop-out designed by a system whose sole purpose is the preservation of the system. Because it's so easy and, due mainly to voter fraud and gerrymandering, so meaningless today, it's cheapened what it means to be an activist as well.
Consider this: Yesterday 100 "sheroes" (Really Huffington Post?) stripped down into their pre-apple Eve outfits and held mirrors over their heads in "protest" of....what? The so-called "war on women?" In the Middle East there are the Yazidi women who are taking up arms and fighting against ISIS insurgents who would round them up, gang rape them, and sell them into sex slavery. In Pakistan their "Kim Kardashian" was just strangled by her brother in a so-called "honor killing" which drew cheers and praise from many Pakistanis. In America, 100 women in the buff holding up mirrors because they might have been, possibly, body shamed at some point. (ignoring the fact that the most egregious forms of body shaming often come from other women)
This does not give men a pass. In fact, the so-called "bro" culture needs to be placed on the ash-heap of history to be burned beside Lee Greenwood's "Proud to be an American" dirge. Here's an idea men: Don't sexually assault women. Full stop. Just because a woman is dancing with you, or speaking with you, or dresses and acts suggestively, doesn't mean that she wants a night of hot, sweaty sexual relations with you, or to even be groped by you. She probably just wants to be noticed which, in a way, is kind of sad.
The problem is that we've allowed the boundaries of personal relationships to be argued within the political realm. We've given it over to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to tell us how we should interact with one another. In many cases, we're now looking to President Barry to tell us when it's OK to make love.
This is a problem for a couple of reasons. One, take a look at most politicians. Many of them marry for their careers, have children for their careers and then carry out a charade that lasts for years in the name of their careers. What the hell do they know about what normal, work-a-day people need from love and affection? Given what we know about the Clintons, do you think their marriage is based on love of one another? Or profit? I'll give you three guesses and the first two don't count.
Yet we continue to trudge into the voting booth and pull the lever to put people in power whom we would never invite over to a backyard cookout, or invite to our kids weddings. We do this, and then we ignore them until the next election season.
And that is the problem with our politics.
We have bought into the lie that voting is our responsibility to our Democratic Republic and it goes no further. We vote, they rule, period end of story. The people that you put into office then take a look at razor-thin voter margins with low participation rates and claim a "mandate" that allows them to take policy proposals drafted by aides, influenced by their particular set of patronage and claim they are doing the "will of the people". And we allow it, because taking the time to write a letter or make a phone call or, horrors, run for office ourselves in today's hyper-charged environment detracts from our Saturdays watching college football.
And no, I'm not just pointing a finger at you, I'm guilty of this myself.
The result of our apathy and inaction however is a political system that is not only broken, it's hopelessly corrupt and totally unresponsive to the will of the people. It doesn't matter what the issue is, both sides will immediately seek to triangulate it in a manner that most benefits their political patrons. They then roll this out to their sycophant "activists" and "party regulars" who have been looped into the system through outright bribery, or an appeal to their sense of belonging to a special club. All of this is then packaged up neatly in a tidy bow by a compliant media who regurgitate material uncritically to those outside the circle.
The citizenry, if they're paying attention at all, take a peek at a sound byte, shake their heads at the idiocy of the "other side" and wonder who's going to be the next winner of The Voice. But they voted, they tell themselves, so they can bitch. Anyone who didn't just needs to shut the hell up. This is a ridiculous argument because there is no voting requirement tacked on to the First Amendment. I heard someone, although I cannot remember who (sorry!) suggest that voting is the easiest and least participatory thing in politics that you can do, and I agree.
It also makes you the angriest. Because you're moving along in your day to day life not winning or losing, you're just hanging on. And politics, like sports, gives you a chance to feel that you ARE winning at something, that your hum-drum life, being hollered at by the boss for your TPS report lacking a cover sheet, actually has some meaning when a team with which you have no actual affiliation wins. When someone is against your team, or (even worse) "for" the other team, you get viscerally angry because they are chipping away at your absolute sense of superiority. Your political party is no longer reflective of your political leanings, it's a core component of your identity and any threat to it is dealt with aggressively and (unfortunately in some cases) violently.
And round and round it goes.
The rest of that saying is "where it stops, nobody knows".
But I think we're now witnessing a self-perpetuating cycle. No calls for civility, or a cease in hostilities, is going to slow the political outrage train. We've gone so far off the rails that I think any and all hope of political reconciliation is gone. The progressive left's need to feel morally superior is only out-weighed by the alt-right's need to be outraged.
In retrospect, it's not surprising that the two sides have nominated two reprehensible human beings to be their standard bearers. The only surprise is that it's taken this long to get this low.
We know this but we continue to think that politics is a unifying force, a chance to walk into the ballot box and "do some good" by voting the "right way". It's activism without effort or consequence. You don't even have to do research any more because there are pay-to-play voter guides that arrive in your mailbox which tell you who the approved candidates are, depending on your party of choice that is.
Trudging out to a voting location on election day is the lowest form of political participation. It's a cop-out designed by a system whose sole purpose is the preservation of the system. Because it's so easy and, due mainly to voter fraud and gerrymandering, so meaningless today, it's cheapened what it means to be an activist as well.
Consider this: Yesterday 100 "sheroes" (Really Huffington Post?) stripped down into their pre-apple Eve outfits and held mirrors over their heads in "protest" of....what? The so-called "war on women?" In the Middle East there are the Yazidi women who are taking up arms and fighting against ISIS insurgents who would round them up, gang rape them, and sell them into sex slavery. In Pakistan their "Kim Kardashian" was just strangled by her brother in a so-called "honor killing" which drew cheers and praise from many Pakistanis. In America, 100 women in the buff holding up mirrors because they might have been, possibly, body shamed at some point. (ignoring the fact that the most egregious forms of body shaming often come from other women)
This does not give men a pass. In fact, the so-called "bro" culture needs to be placed on the ash-heap of history to be burned beside Lee Greenwood's "Proud to be an American" dirge. Here's an idea men: Don't sexually assault women. Full stop. Just because a woman is dancing with you, or speaking with you, or dresses and acts suggestively, doesn't mean that she wants a night of hot, sweaty sexual relations with you, or to even be groped by you. She probably just wants to be noticed which, in a way, is kind of sad.
The problem is that we've allowed the boundaries of personal relationships to be argued within the political realm. We've given it over to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to tell us how we should interact with one another. In many cases, we're now looking to President Barry to tell us when it's OK to make love.
This is a problem for a couple of reasons. One, take a look at most politicians. Many of them marry for their careers, have children for their careers and then carry out a charade that lasts for years in the name of their careers. What the hell do they know about what normal, work-a-day people need from love and affection? Given what we know about the Clintons, do you think their marriage is based on love of one another? Or profit? I'll give you three guesses and the first two don't count.
Yet we continue to trudge into the voting booth and pull the lever to put people in power whom we would never invite over to a backyard cookout, or invite to our kids weddings. We do this, and then we ignore them until the next election season.
And that is the problem with our politics.
We have bought into the lie that voting is our responsibility to our Democratic Republic and it goes no further. We vote, they rule, period end of story. The people that you put into office then take a look at razor-thin voter margins with low participation rates and claim a "mandate" that allows them to take policy proposals drafted by aides, influenced by their particular set of patronage and claim they are doing the "will of the people". And we allow it, because taking the time to write a letter or make a phone call or, horrors, run for office ourselves in today's hyper-charged environment detracts from our Saturdays watching college football.
And no, I'm not just pointing a finger at you, I'm guilty of this myself.
The result of our apathy and inaction however is a political system that is not only broken, it's hopelessly corrupt and totally unresponsive to the will of the people. It doesn't matter what the issue is, both sides will immediately seek to triangulate it in a manner that most benefits their political patrons. They then roll this out to their sycophant "activists" and "party regulars" who have been looped into the system through outright bribery, or an appeal to their sense of belonging to a special club. All of this is then packaged up neatly in a tidy bow by a compliant media who regurgitate material uncritically to those outside the circle.
The citizenry, if they're paying attention at all, take a peek at a sound byte, shake their heads at the idiocy of the "other side" and wonder who's going to be the next winner of The Voice. But they voted, they tell themselves, so they can bitch. Anyone who didn't just needs to shut the hell up. This is a ridiculous argument because there is no voting requirement tacked on to the First Amendment. I heard someone, although I cannot remember who (sorry!) suggest that voting is the easiest and least participatory thing in politics that you can do, and I agree.
It also makes you the angriest. Because you're moving along in your day to day life not winning or losing, you're just hanging on. And politics, like sports, gives you a chance to feel that you ARE winning at something, that your hum-drum life, being hollered at by the boss for your TPS report lacking a cover sheet, actually has some meaning when a team with which you have no actual affiliation wins. When someone is against your team, or (even worse) "for" the other team, you get viscerally angry because they are chipping away at your absolute sense of superiority. Your political party is no longer reflective of your political leanings, it's a core component of your identity and any threat to it is dealt with aggressively and (unfortunately in some cases) violently.
And round and round it goes.
The rest of that saying is "where it stops, nobody knows".
But I think we're now witnessing a self-perpetuating cycle. No calls for civility, or a cease in hostilities, is going to slow the political outrage train. We've gone so far off the rails that I think any and all hope of political reconciliation is gone. The progressive left's need to feel morally superior is only out-weighed by the alt-right's need to be outraged.
In retrospect, it's not surprising that the two sides have nominated two reprehensible human beings to be their standard bearers. The only surprise is that it's taken this long to get this low.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)