Political Confusion

Don't blame me, I voted for Kang.

Dave, you're absolutely right about the counter-intuitive nature of my position. We can save the argument about the two-party system being an inherently right, natural, or inevitable status quo for later; for now, the bottom line is that you play your hand. If you throw your chips and run away crying, nothing gets done. I think it was Benjamin Disraeli who said, "'Tis better to rage with the machine, than to rage against thy'n self". But this is a wasteful, unwieldy, exhaust belching, machine pieced together with parts from many different decades. In short, the Democratic party is a beat-up '76 Lincoln Town Car with two different colored doors.

In my opinion, it's time to molt, to shed the flaky, ugly exoskeleton that couldn't win a losing contest with the Chicago Cubs. Think of it as new growth after a forest fire, or like "creative destruction" in the business world. Rapid defections in political parties happen overnight- after twenty years of sub rosa machinations. The DC apparatus is a lost cause. So we are waiting in the shadows, ready to jump out and bludgeon the DNC/DLC to death at the precise moment the GOP finally steals enough rope to hang itself. But fear not my friend, for you will be on the protected list when my people enslave devout Christians to build temples to Dionysius and till the marijuana fields.

Essentially, I believe what I believe, and the Democratic party believes in...something, I guess. You guys, on the other hand, believe what you're told to believe. Which is why so many pro-choice Republicans, and so many whose instincts run counter to our foreign policy toe the line anyway. Your party loyalty requires you to cope with an enormous amount of cognitive dissonance, which inevitably backs you into untenable positions. Hence, long term advantage. I've gotta run, but I promise you a more comprehensive response (read: an actual answer to your question) in the near future.

posted by Gabe @ 3:21 PM