Skip to content

There! I Said It!

May 25, 2012

Can I admit to being disillusioned?  I shouldn’t be, of course.  To trust a politician is to invite disappointment.  Still, with the mountainous issues that clearly face us, such as:

  • Gargantuan debt
  • Stagnant economy
  • Stagnant populous
  • Ravenous wars
  • Corporate greed (yes, I know it exists)

And a bunch of other things that decades of misguided policy from both Republicans and Democrats that has driven us into the weeds of the furthest outfield.

We have radical problems that require radical solutions.  And what do we do?  We give Romney a clear field for the nomination.  As bad as the amateurish Obama is, Romney will just be Republican-lite business-as-usual.  Like the “stimulus” plan, which didn’t stimulate anything, just slowed the exodus off the cliff, Romney’s policies will do the same.  Red, white and blue Lemmings will still be plunging over the edge.  And the Republican’s who pay attention know this.

It just leaves an ashy taste in my mouth that people who have spent the last year ripping Romney into justified little tatters will now swing behind him and say “he’s the guy!”

Spending will be out of control with both nominees.  Romney may burn through it fractionally slower, but will it matter?

Ron Paul has sort-of dropped out.  He doesn’t want to spend the money to try for any states who haven’t voted yet.  Which bums me out.

I like Ron Paul.  I like turning most government back to the states.  I want our soldiers to come home.  I like non-interventional policy.  I really don’t know enough about the Fed to want it gone, truthfully, so I’ll leave that and the Gold standard in the till for later consideration. I’d prefer federal infrastructure to be maintained at the Federal level, so there are some issues we differ on.

Illegal aliens and the war on drugs have the same problem.  They are both far too big to be impacted by our efforts, so they need to be radically rethought.

I doubt Ron Paul will run as an independent, but if he did I’d vote for him over the two other bozos in the race.  And I wouldn’t feel guilty about it, either.  If the Republicans want my vote, they have to put up someone worthy of it.

Advertisements
3 Comments leave one →
  1. May 30, 2012 9:45 am

    You’re pretty much on target here, sir. While I certainly think Romney is a horrible choice for the GOP nominee, let alone for POTUS, I also can’t really say a second term for Obama gives me any greater confidence, based on his record thus far. To get out of our present mess and hopefully avoid future quagmires, we DO need some drastic changes–not just in our policies and politicians, but in our politics itself. As I keep harping every chance I get, nothing of note is going to change until we radically change–and by change I mean eliminate–the influence of outside money on our political system. So long as politicians are dependent on campaign donations to keep their jobs, and so long as money from corporations and wealthy donors is considered unrestrained free speech, and so long as corporations and special interests are free to lobby and even to write their own legislation (ALEC, anyone?), our government is not even remotely of, by, and for the people. It’s government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, for the wealthy. And we’re reaping the results of that sort of government right now.

    So frankly, I think the only hope is for a strong bipartisan populist backlash to reclaim our government–Occupy and the Tea Party are both decent starts, even if they’re confused/misguided on the Occupy side and misinformed/astroturfed on the Tea Party side. But we need that sort of momentum and consciousness to not just be the territory of the right- and left-hand fringes, we need it to extend into the middle as well if anything’s actually going to change. Then we need to stop voting along the lines of wedge issues, false fears and amplified divisions–we need to vote for people of both political stripes who will put the good of the whole nation ahead of their own, or those of their campaign donors. And we need to reject, as a people, the polarized and dysfunctional circus that passes for civil discourse these days.

    In other words, it’s utterly hopeless. Okay, I don’t always feel that way. But more often than not.

  2. May 30, 2012 6:28 pm

    Okay, see? We can agree wholeheartedly on some things.

    I’d like to see each candidate restricted to, say, 1 million dollars they have to raise from private donors. Let’s see what kind of choices they make when restricted to a tight budget.

    • May 31, 2012 8:55 am

      Unfortunately I think the only way to truly make it happen is with a real and viable public financing option. Limited budgets, yes, and perhaps some required donations of airtime on the part of the broadcast networks for commercials and/or debates. Leverage the Internet for the rest, since the majority of voters have access to it one way or another. Small individual donations are well and good, and should still be a part of things–candidates popular with great numbers of voters should have an edge, after all–but right now the bulk of a candidate’s warchest comes from corporations and a very small number of wealthy donors (who are typically quite vested in corporations anyway), all of whom are expecting (and generally getting) good returns on those investments. That’s what needs to change.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: