This is not a political site. This is an anti-political site. Our purpose is to advance civil society and the freedom philosophy and perhaps have a little fun while we're at it.

11/4/09

Political Indigestion


You can always tell in advance which side thinks they will lose a nearby election by the way they distance themselves from the results before the votes are even cast. The political doctors must have thought the dosage on our gullibility pills was increased recently if they thought we would swallow the reports from the White House that the President wasn't going to watch for the results of the elections in Virginia, New Jersey and New York last night.

The idea that he had only a passing interest in the political climate is as preposterous as Al Madoff Gore's passing interest in the value of his "green" investments in the global climate scam. He (Obama) had no time in the last week or so to decide what he is going to do in Afghanistan because he was in New Jersey campaigning for one of the Goldman Sachs "combine" - not to be confused with the "Illinois combine" of John Kass fame- Jon Corzine. Jon will soon be moving out of Dumbthwacket, where a long list of big government/small achievement politicians have rested their empty heads in the past.

But the point isn't about Corzine or any of the rest of the people who got elected or unelected yesterday, but whether or not we can draw any conclusions about where the country is headed on government run health insurance or trillion dollar deficits or "scrap and trade" buddy list enrichment schemes.

An Op/Ed I perused in my morning paper, penned by a columnist named Ruth Marcus, was titled "Take Election Analyses With A Grain of Salt". I read her stuff from time to time in the "on The Left" section of the Investors Business Daily to make sure I'm not crazy to oppose leftist dogma but I use a slightly higher dosage of sodium when I do, usually a shaker-full. I have concluded that I'm not crazy, at least about that. In her column she cautions not to "over interpret" the results during the "orgy of analysis" that is sure to follow the losses on the left. I am not inclined to participate in orgies, but I guess I'm guilty now that I felt this topic worthy of comment. She goes on to make her case that all might still be well with the leftward lurch, but I'll leave it to you to decide if your salt intake needs adjustment.

In any case, it's my opinion that the Tea Partiers, those rational citizens of both parties and no parties, have decided to visit the polls for their own reasons, and marked an X in the "I have electoral indigestion" box.

It all leads me to conclude that the coming elections in this country will be different than the past now that both parties have shown that they cannot be trusted to run things while we root for political personalities or stay fixated on sports results and the like. The way we select candidates to stand for election and the way we decide who serves will change in the same way that we receive our news did. That is to say, radically. It's an age of instant communications with e-mail, facebook, twitter, web pages and self published columnists like myself. That is, not one columnist with many readers, but many columnists with a few readers, which we share with one another, if and when they make sense.

It is now apparent that the consequences of the status quo in that process have become such a danger to our liberty that they threaten to become a disaster instead of merely a distraction. I have several ideas concerning what that process might look like and I plan on sharing them soon. I bet you can hardly wait.

No comments: