America Should Eliminate Partisan Politics

People who know me might say I have a difficult time admitting I don't know the answer. And they'd be right. I've been known to argue with Alex Trebek while watching Jeopardy. I stubbornly refuse to ask for directions when it's clear to everyone but me I'm lost. I've even argued with a person who tried to point out to me that I gave them too much change in a financial transaction. I don't like being wrong and I have a difficult time saying, "I don't know," when someone asks a question.

That's why it's not easy for me to tell the readers of this article, that I just don't understand politics. Oh, I'll be the first person to criticize politicians from any level of government if I think they're doing something stupid, unethical, illegal or just wrong for their constituents, but perhaps my criticism is based on ignorance.

Having spent most of my adult life in an apathetic fog of denial with regard to politics, my ignorance may be justified. Unfortunately, apathy is not synonymous with being brain-dead. I still perused the newspapers, watched the talking heads on the news and paid attention to what was happening in the world around me. Furthermore, I've spent the last four or five years studying to learn the system that legislates our actions, governs our country and represents America to the rest of the world. Without knowledge, how could I possibly criticize and take steps to correct what doesn't seem right with the political process?

The more I learn, the more confused I become by politics. First of all, politicians disgust, insult and embarrass me! They say what the voter wants to hear to get elected, and then immediately start doing whatever they need to in order to gain power, influence and money. Although my optimistic nature forces me to believe there are a few that are in it for the good of the people, recent events seem to indicate differently.

Once again, when asked what political party I support. I must sheepishly respond, "I don't know." As far as I'm concerned political partisanship stifles individuality and prevents unique ideas from being heard or considered as possible answers to complicated issues. In order for a candidate for public office to get elected, they must increasingly rely on financing and the support and influence of the political party they represent. If they do or say anything that goes against the Party's official propaganda and rhetoric, they lose that support and influence. Are they working in the best interest of the people they represent?

It seems to me that this works the same way, regardless of partisanship. We have the Democratic Party and The Republican Party. We also offer the Green Party, Independent Party, American Reform Party, Libertarian Party and many others that are trying to make a difference. To see a list of active political parties go to http://www.greyhawkes.com/ps/parties.html Ask Ross Perot or Ralph Nader how much power and influence these parties offer. To give credit where credit is due, Nader has been credited by some for taking just enough votes in the 2000 Presidential Elections to ensure the Republicans defeated the Democrats.

Nonetheless, our country has been divided into red states and blue states. There is no mention of green or even white states on Election Day. What happened to The United States? Are we not one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all, or are those simply the words of some 18th century public relations team? Why are titles and symbols designed to divide our great nation accepted by Americans? Is it possible that we allow them to segregate and hobble us in this manner because we are constantly told anything else would be politically incorrect? I really don't know!

Why only half of all Americans should be represented in Washington, depending on which party is in the White House or which party controls the Senate is a mystery to me. Why the Supreme Court can be knocked off balance by whether a Democrat or Republican occupies the Oval Office when a Justice dies or retires also baffles me. If a nominee for the high court is a conservative or Republican, why must they automatically be contested by anyone who is liberally minded or a Democrat? If a person lives in a blue state but subscribes to a political philosophy associated more with a red state, can they be socially and professionally ostracized, or possibly even forced out of the state? Will the next Civil War be fought not because of injustices based on the color of ones skin, but because of injustices based on the color of ones political geographic location?

When I decided to actively involve myself in the way The United States of America was being governed, I promised myself to start with an open mind. Several years later, I am still frequently queried as to my political affiliation and I still don't know how to reply. Why can't there be a political party just for people like me? It could be called the "Let's Use Common Sense to Eliminate Poverty, Political Back Scratching, Ethical Misconduct and World Leader Penis Envy, While Working in Unison to Promote Global Harmony and Intercultural Understanding and Tolerance" Party (LUCSEPPBSEMWLPEAWWIUPGHIUT). The GOP would have nothing on us, when it comes to acronyms anyway.

I personally think George W. Bush is a dangerous and pitiful choice for President. If it weren't for financial privilege, political connections, corporate corruption, and a bunch of oil-rich Middle Eastern good ol' boys, I suspect he'd be spending his days sipping warm mugs of draft beer in Malone, Texas and telling lies about his heroic adventures in the Texas Air National Guard, while his liver gradually succumbed to psoriasis due to acute alcoholism. On the other hand, I think another Republican, Ronald Reagan was a fine President. Despite his under-handed dealings with regard to the Iran-Contra fiasco and how his actions at that time may very well have contributed to our problems in the Middle East today, his Presidency left me feeling proud of America. Unemployment was down, fuel prices were low, and Americans, as a nation, held their heads high and walked proudly throughout the world. I also think Democrats FDR, Jimmy Carter and John F. Kennedy were great Presidents for various reasons, as well as Republicans Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt. Does this make me a wishy-washy flip-flopper?

Perhaps LUCSEPPBSEMWLPEAWWIUPGHIUT wouldn't attract the support of the people with the power, money and political savvy needed to wage a successful campaign for political office in America. Maybe with a fun little ad campaign and a catchy little jingle the name would catch on. I seriously suspect however, that there are a great number of working class Americans that would subscribe to the political philosophy that its name promotes. And, if they weren't convinced by the status quo that they must support either a Democrat or Republican government, they could do what the founding fathers did: Unite and work together as one voice saying, "That isn't right and we need to change it."

I continue to say to anyone who will listen that there are more of us than there are of them and all we need to do is get together. In person, people claim to agree with me, despite many of them saying, "We can't do anything about that. We don't have any clout. That's just the way it's done." I counter their defeatist attitudes to the point that I sound like a soap box preacher. I convince them that a better America, indeed a better World, can be attained if all the people that think it can't be done, organize, roll up their sleeves and work diligently to that end.

If the LUCSEPPBSEMWLPEAWWIUPGHIUT Party doesn't catch on and flow from the lips of concerned American's, I'm open to suggestions. We could take the same ideals and apply them to something like the Apathetic Reformation Party (ARP), where membership is comprised of individuals recovering from apathy who just don't understand partisan politics.