Topic: Political Literature
Ron Yin/Yang Paul Is A Third Leg For Sure. How lots of bad metaphors add up to a vote for the third leg of this political season.by Scott from Oregon
(Libertarian)
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
The yin/yang of a two party system has always been fine by me. One party wants government to do more, one party wants it to do less. The result achieves some sort of reasonable balance- like a boy on a bongo board (in theory, that is).
The problem has become that the Republican Party players have climbed the fence and are more apt to play like the Dem kids of the Democratic Party. (That’s like sliding up on the teeter-totter until your feet are in your totter’s face. That’s just a teeter, folks, and one should admit that.)
The push-me-pull-me is gone. The stasis of conflicting desires eradicated by a convenient ideological parallel that claims the federal government as the decider of the nation.
There is no more log-jam in Washington, though they all talk of “partisanship” being the reason nothing ever gets done.
I say hogwash.
Too much is still getting done. Way too much. The two parties have agreed to both ride the rapids with your money and leave you high and dry. They have ganged up on you and given you less privacy and personal freedom. They have taken away more and more of your right to steer your own course. What they haven’t done in quite a long time, is simply remove themselves from the equation.
And in walks Ron Paul like the third leg of a stool. From an outside vantage point, this third leg seems very necessary to balance what has been going on. A third force, pulling the whole system back on firmer ground.
In math, vectors can be used to demonstrate force of pull. Pulling from a third direction will move an object in a sideways direction against two other forces. In this election cycle, sideways is where we need to be headed. Away from the teeter that pretends to totter. Away from the idea that the federal government is the only venue available for solving problems, and that we need to choose between two similarly slanted views to solve those problems.
A third solution can simply be, “get the problematic “solvers” out of the way.
Now why didn’t we all think of that?
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 11 thumbs so far
2007 Scott from Oregon, all rights reserved.
Published: Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Last modified: Wednesday, December 26, 2007
The views expressed in this
article are those of Scott from Oregon only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Scott from Oregon is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Richard Wicks
Date: 2007-12-26 19:46:14
"One party wants government to do more, one party wants it to do less."
Which party wants the government to do less?
Last I checked, the Federal Government had grown by 30% under the "Republican" legislative, executive, and judicial branch - was currently nation building in TWO nations, and had added about 4 trillion dollars to the national debt?
There's no yin and yang, it's just yin, yin, and more yin, and MORE yin...
Who believes we have a 2 party system anymore when both parties just CLAIM they're different and do the same exact things when in office?
The truth is that one party wants to expand foreign interventionism, and the other wants to expand domestic interventionism. We have basically been reduced to the National Socialists vs. the International Socialists and I don't want any kind of Socialism - so I will vote for Paul.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2007 Scott from Oregon, all rights reserved.