Back when the Tea Party began, I was thrilled. It was around the same time as Occupy Wall Street began, and at their roots, both groups wanted the same thing: Stop letting the Big Banks and Big Business do anything they want! No bailouts for businesses that screwed over the average guy! Let’s give government back to the people!
Finally! Consensus! Something might actually get done!
We all know how well that worked out. The Tea Party got co-opted by every right-wing issue out there (gun rights, abortion, religious extremism), none of which had anything to do with the real issue for which the Tea Party was formed. And the Occupy Wall Street became this generation’s hippie fest, with drumming and tie-dye and demands that we stop eating animals.
It’s almost as if the rich bankers and corporations that actually run this country had planned it that way. Hmmm.
But the underlying anger hasn’t gone away, and it manifests itself now in the “Bernie Trump Factor.”
When you speak to supporters of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, they say a lot of the same things about how terrible it is that government can be bought by the highest bidder. Both discuss how they “can’t be bought”.
Supporters for both exclaim, “He tells the truth!” — because neither Trump nor Sanders take public opinion polls or surveys to decide what their position on the issues should be.
And this rebellion on both sides is a good thing. It is indeed time that something is done about our country’s descent into oligarchy.
Of course, that’s about all these two have in common — on every other issue, they’re polar opposites. But the Bernie Trump Factor is the reason you have people on the left and people on the right jumping for joy for the outsider, the guy no one expected to do well.
We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it any more.
The marketplace should decide, except when it shouldn’t.
That seems to be the argument I get from the right (in the same way that “state’s rights should control except when they do things we disagree with”).
“Why should the signs in Lowe’s be in English and Spanish?” they yell. “Isn’t this America?” Well, yes, this is America, where the goal of business is to appeal to as many people as possible. Signs in Spanish help sell more goods. You know, capitalism at work and everything.
The latest ridiculous outrage is against Target, which suddenly said, “Hey! You know, if we don’t separate our kid’s toys by gender, we might sell a whole lot more.” Traditionalists on the right are now screaming about “political correctness” (which, by their definition, means “change I disagree with”) because the absolutely most horrible thing might happen with Target’s new policy: A girl that wants a boy toy won’t have to walk to a different aisle.
Overall, the more we break the stereotyping that goes along with raising kids, the better. Sure, more boys will still play with trucks and girls with dolls, but not always — and what’s wrong with boys playing with dolls (as the cartoon below says)? And why are “building toys” (such as legos) usually set aside just for boys? Last I checked, women drive cars, so why can’t girls play with toy cars?
Still, I don’t think Target’s point was to make a great social point or be politically correct. I think they were looking at the bottom line — what will make them more money? Selling toy cars to boys and girls just increases sales, no?
That damned free market!
And neither was Barack Obama.
Many of my liberal friends seem to be falling into two categories: Either Bernie Sanders is the savior we’ve all been waiting for, or he’s a fraud and real liberals should be supporting the Green Party candidate instead.*
The answer is between the two extremes.
Nobody is perfect. There’s plenty of stuff about Obama I disagreed with when he was running (and through his Presidency). But he was clearly the better choice of those who had the possibility of winning the election.
If you refuse to support the best candidate who can win because they are not pure enough, you’re going to end up disappointed a lot.
As I’ve said here many times, politics is the art of compromise. I’d rather compromise and get 50% of what I want than be stubborn and get 0%. If you don’t understand that, you will lose. Over and over again.
This is the main problem with the Tea Party extremists on the right — they cannot understand that reasonable people can differ with them, and as a result, our government gets very little done these days because they hold their breath until they turn blue instead of working to accomplish some of their goals. They may win the lower races, but they’re never going to win the Presidency.
The left’s version of the Tea Party is not much better. They demand purity, and thus throw their vote toward Ralph Nader or some other third party, which only helps those on the right win elections.
Some people are just blind followers. Their candidate (or religious leader or political viewpoint or favorite band or preferred sports team…) is perfect, and anyone who doesn’t see that is just plain wrong and must be insulted. It’s impossible to discuss the good and bad points with these people.
*Then there are my liberal friends who are supporting Hillary Clinton, but the attitude I get from them is more of a resigned “Well, I think she can win” vibe; I don’t sense a lot of enthusiasm there.
There are many bloggers out there vying for your attention, and most of them have a little “donate” button on the side so that they can continue to provide you with information and entertainment. Or maybe they’ll do kickstarter campaigns for people. Or sell ads on their blog.
It’s not a bad idea — and it’s nice when people who create things can get compensated for their work.
I don’t do that. (The ads you see here are placed by WordPress, because I’m not paying them to host this blog.)
Still, for the blogger, it’s nice to be appreciated — to know that the people who enjoy reading the blog understand the work that goes into it.
So if you’d like to thank me for my posts and show your support for this blog, how about a donation of, oh, about $6? In exchange, you get to download my latest novel “Bloodsuckers: A Vampire Runs for President.” There’s also a kindle version, a nook version, an ibook version, and a paperback if you prefer.
This is even better than just donating something. We both win! I get a few bucks in my next royalty check, and you get to read a fun adventure. (Come on, if you enjoy my writing here on the blog, you’re sure to enjoy the novel.)
You can click here to read the first few chapters and here to read reviews.
Thanks for your support!
Often, religious folks complain that atheists are “intolerant” towards their religion.
Strangely enough, these atheists seem to be only “intolerant” toward Christians. Why is that?
Well, Jews aren’t trying to pass laws banning bacon.
Muslims aren’t trying to pass laws forcing women to wear veils.
Amish aren’t trying to pass laws to make us give up electricity.
Wiccans aren’t trying to make us say “One Nation, under the Goddess.”
But some Christians want to ban all abortions, make gay marriage illegal, restrict contraception, edit history books, enforce prayer in schools, and all because of their religious beliefs.
So when atheists say “No” to them, that’s not intolerance. That’s fighting against tyranny. That’s standing up for what America was founded on — freedom to believe or not believe. To have a secular country.
All the atheist “fights” are defensive. Atheists are not doing a thing to prevent religious people from practicing their religion however they want to. They’re just trying to stop them from making us all do it.
EDITED for clarification: I mean legal and political fights, not arguments and debates.
