I am annoyed with Democrats and Republicans

This post may be offensive to some of my followers, but I appreciate your comments should you disagree. As an Independent voter who left the Republican Party in 2006, but did not choose to rejoin the Democratic Party, I want our leaders to solve our problems and work together. We have gotten progressively worse with partisanship and that is not good, as we are attempting to solve problems with party rhetoric and not data and or common sense. Both sides are to blame, but I find more fault with my more recent former party given their support by a more active misinformation base parading as a mainstream news network.

 

Like many people, I do not fit into a nice compartment. I am fiscally conservative and socially progressive. I have these beliefs we need to pay for things and every citizen has equal rights and opportunity. Per Teddy Roosevelt, they need a ‘square deal” and like his cousin Franklin, they need a “fair deal.” I guess I want our leaders to be better stewards than they have come to be with our money and rights. What many have failed to realize is my rights are just important as yours, and vice versa. The right to do something does not include the right to squelch another person’s rights. Think about this last sentence, as folks advocating religious freedom laws seem to miss the subtlety of this point.

 

Using a recent example, I cite the approval of our new Supreme Court Justice, Neil Gorsuch. This man was not perfect, but he seemed to have a pretty good set of experiences. Yes, he is more conservative than I would prefer, but he was nominated by a Conservative president. That is how this works. My question to Democrats is Gorsuch more horrible in their minds than the next few in consideration? Why force the Republicans hand in blowing up the 60 vote rule? I fault the GOP as well for blowing up this rule, as we now could get a more extreme person on the Court. And, that is not what this Court needs in m view. So, between the two actions, we have thrown future stewardship out the window.

 

Another recent example is the effort that fortunately failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Republicans decided to work without Democrats to do this and their party bickering caused it to fail. It also failed because it was a horribly crafted and rushed bill. Since most Americans want to keep Obamacare, but improve it, why did the GOP waste time and not work with Democrats to fix it? The President even blamed Democrats for this bill’s failure, yet they weren’t even at the table. That is a shame.

 

Stewardship is an important word to define what is lacking. We need our leaders to be better stewards of our country than they have become. Both parties do not lay claim to all of the good ideas and both can lay claim to some bad ones. So, why not set all the rhetoric aside, study real data and real causes, and come up with informed, bipartisan solutions through civil discourse. Right now, in my view, our Congress and President’s inability to do this are a threat to national security. Please be better stewards. We need you to be.

Comments

Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 17, 2017 - 10:07pm
I am annoyed with Democrats and Republicans
 
Oh my! He's annoyed. My oh my, that will make them sit up and pay attention in Washington. 
Bill H. Added Apr 18, 2017 - 12:57am
Keith, I am totally with your view. I think there are less and less of us with these views than there were 30 years ago. As I have stated many times, I think "technology" has taken it's toll. The ability to instantly communicate has overshadowed the ability to take the time to think and reason.
Most people no longer seek wisdom, as they are now constantly plundered with opinions.
 
Dino Manalis Added Apr 18, 2017 - 9:21am
I'm annoyed, too, partisan bickering is making matters even worse!  Politics have to be set aside and we should come together to find reasonable solutions!
Cliff M. Added Apr 18, 2017 - 10:04am
Keith, I walk in similar shoes. A small segment continues to benefit from the gridlock.The politics has become tribal.The welfare of the majority is of little concern to those in power.
Keith Wilson Added Apr 18, 2017 - 10:08am
Many thanks for the comments. Jeffry, your comment is important as we need to be more than annoyed. This is why I endeavor to write my US and State congressional representatives and senators and am active in writing in to the newspaper and other blogs. My thrust is to focus on the issue and less on the politics, but do so in a civil manner. I invite everyone to reach out to their representatives and let them know we are interested and care in what they decide. Best wishes all, Keith
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 18, 2017 - 10:27am
Keith. You missed it. Annoyance and letter writing is utterly meaningless to the presstitutes and congresscritters. They only bother to pretend they are interested in your opinion when they have their hands out. Please tell us you know this.
Bill H. Added Apr 18, 2017 - 11:21am
 
I live in a city where 4 out of the 5 city council member's election campaigns were financed by a local developer. One of the ex-mayors is the major real estate agent in town, who had previously pushed a re-zoning bill thru that pretty much allowed a large area of now single-family home areas to be rezoned to allow high-density condominium construction. 3 of the 4 city council members who's campaigns were financed by the developer have interest (or own) businesses that are related to construction.
I think you can figure out how things work in this city, and how the city council members are going to vote when it comes to redeveloping many areas of the city.
Our voices are virtually meaningless and our city council members have no clue why most of the residents are becoming so vocal about all of the cloned boxes being built all around town. They actually believe that this practice is great for our city, even with the obvious increase in traffic, overcrowding of schools, impact on utilities and infrastructure, increase in crime levels, and loss of what open space is left.
This is pretty much the universal example of how government works from a city council all of the way up to the top of our countries government. 
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 18, 2017 - 11:34am
Let me guess Bill H. - you're in Shittatle. 
Bill H. Added Apr 18, 2017 - 11:40am
Not even close!
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 18, 2017 - 12:17pm
LOL, they are in the middle of a very similar situation. One supposes it's the same everywhere.
Mike Haluska Added Apr 18, 2017 - 12:46pm
Keith - what else is new?
 
By the way, your statement:
 
"Since most Americans want to keep Obamacare, but improve it, why did the GOP waste time and not work with Democrats to fix it?"
 
is only valid for those getting subsidized health care - those of us actually paying out of pocket want NOTHING to do with this pyramid scheme.   
 
Bill H. Added Apr 18, 2017 - 12:50pm
 
Pretty much.
I have friends near LA, Denver, Pittsburgh, and Houston that I converse with on a regular basis. I get the same stories from them lately. That is pretty much what it is all about these days to become a politician.
Even though politics at the city and country level are supposed to be "non-partisan", one can certainly judge their party loyalty by their actions.
Keith Wilson Added Apr 18, 2017 - 3:32pm
Thanks for all the comments. No doubt, we have way too much money in politics at all levels. It is worse now with Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions by the SCOTUS. I have seen what happens at the local level as described by Bill H. Yet, we must still try to get our voices heard in some capacity, whether it is by email, letter, phone call, marching, protest or town hall. I agree that our opinions don't count as much as they should, but we still have to voice them. And, voice them again. And, vote.
 
The other thing we must do is get folks to pay attention to more legitimate news sources - mainstream news is often too-biased, too conflicted or too shallow and some sources are not news at all. On this last point, per the World Economic Forum, the greatest risk to our planet over the next ten years is our global water crisis - yet outside of a report yesterday on PBS Newshour, it is not discussed enough in the news and is not discussed at all by our politicians.
John Minehan Added Apr 18, 2017 - 4:19pm
"Like many people, I do not fit into a nice compartment. I am fiscally conservative and socially progressive."
 
That is probably a fair statement of the most common political view today . . . which is not represented by either major party.
 
There is something wrong with that.
wsucram15 Added Apr 18, 2017 - 9:16pm
Keith..I think you will find, there are lots of us out there, its kind of weird.  People try to be "liberal" but scream in opposition of policies that they should be in favor of..also many liberals are not in favor of the Democratic party right now.  I dont see them fixing things either, they are using a independent liberal to try and muster support. 
People want change...period.  I dont think some of them understand government when they say that but its whatever, they want a change in the power structure.
I also dont think either party fairly represents the "people". I just dont...I have sen a few representatives that do, some Republicans and some Democrats.  But for the most part, they really dont have an ear for the people except at election time.  Now those are opinions..John..lol
But go out there, make calls, get involved..its a learning experience, no matter what you believe in or whom you support.
John G Added Apr 19, 2017 - 1:48am
I am fiscally conservative
 
In other words, you don't understand modern economies and are unaware of, or can't comprehend the paradox of thrift.
You think that the private sector provides money to the government.
You think that deficit spending is per se bad.
You think that government debt will have to be 'paid off' by future generations.
 
Believing these myths makes you a useful idiot of the ruling class.
Bill Kamps Added Apr 19, 2017 - 6:57am
Keith, the political parties dont represent the people.  The political parties play the left and right voters against each other, so as to distract us from the fact that they aren't doing their jobs.  They work together to keep out third parties and anyone else that would challenge the status quo, meantime telling us how they "fight" for our interests.
 
The differences between the parties are small. Witness Trump's "change of mind" on various issues once elected President.  While he came in claiming to be ready to do things differently, once inside Washington he fell in line with everyone else.  NATO is now good, the Chinese are now good, lobbyists are now good, etc.  It didnt take long.  He now is doing what all recent Presidents have done, developing his spin to "prove" he is doing a great job.
 
All we can do is make our way the best we can, while the politicians do what they always do, feather their own nests, and those of their friends.  You can be annoyed, write letters, or do whatever, it wont matter.
Keith Wilson Added Apr 19, 2017 - 9:32am
Thanks for the additional comments. I would advocate a couple of things we can do to show our displeasure with both parties who are not listening and choosing not to work together. It is interesting that the current Speaker of the House is choosing to work primarily with his party leadership to do things, which accomplishes little as 60 votes are needed in the Senate to pass whatever comes out of the house.  His predecessor was only able to accomplish big things (which were too few) when he worked across the aisle with Dems and more moderate Reps.
 
I would advocate that people continue the trend and cease being members of either major political party, making both minority parties. And, then active petitions need to be set forth in each state to make it easier for unaffiliated candidates to get on the ballots. Right now, the two parties make it difficult to do so. Being unaffiliated needs to become the "party" of choice since it is apparent that the extreme sides of both parties do not value compromise and working together.
 
Another key goal is to add a 28th amendment to the Constitution to limit the role of money in politics. Right now, an elected official spends almost half their time fundraising for their party. We are paying them to ask us for money.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 19, 2017 - 9:54am
Keith, its sad to see you're so heavily invested in an utterly failed system to not see everything you propose is ineffective.
 
To think that the recipients of contributions, rides on corporate jets and paid for junkets are going to vote to end it I want to know what strain of cannabis you're using. 
 
The time for the things you advocate is past. Get a copy of John Ross's "Unintended Consequences" wherein the last 220 pages of lies the only rational solution.  
Bill H. Added Apr 19, 2017 - 10:55am
Until we eliminate the ability for corporations and special interests to finance campaigns, I am afraid we will continue to get the piss-poor quality of candidates that we are seeing in both parties. We are certainly seeing how Big Insurance, Big Oil, and Big Data have influenced our present "leader" in the short period that he has been in office.
Bill Kamps Added Apr 19, 2017 - 1:12pm
I dont see how we eliminate the control that the rich and well connected have on governments.  They have always controlled things, and if you change the form of government, you just change  which  group of rich and well connected are in charge.  Whether it is kings, dictators, or corporations, the middle class or poor have never run things.
 
We can complain all we want, or we can just get on with our lives, and do the best we can. Our situation now is better than the king/serf model, where we would have all been born as serfs, and died as them as well.
William Hill Added Apr 19, 2017 - 4:35pm
Ah, Keith, we are kindred spirits. I, also, changed affliations, only from Democratic to Undeclared (couldn't go Independent in California, that's a registered political party here that belies it's name). I, also, could not bring myself to join the opposition party. A pox on both their houses, both have gone to bed with Big Money and the extreme factions of their parties. I smiled at your reference to the Roosevelts, they are the only two presidents I hold in esteem - Teddy for busting the monopolies and regulating capitalistic avarice, and Franklin for instituting policies and programs designed to protect the middle and under-classes. I call myself a Progressive (ala the Roosevelts) which, contrary to popular misconception, is not the same as Liberal. Progressives are fiscally conservative and socially liberal, in the middle, encompassing the best of both the Left and the Right. To bad the Bull Moose party no longer exists. And to bad there are no longer any true Statesmen among our politicians - men and women who put the interests of America (all of its individual citizens) above party affiliation and personal profit from the monied PACs.
George N Romey Added Apr 19, 2017 - 5:41pm
Both of these parties play the role dictated to them by their big money donors. Anyone that thinks that the right "D" or right "R" will make life better for ordinary Americans is a fool.
John G Added Apr 20, 2017 - 4:14am
Progressives are fiscally conservative
No they are not. Progressives do not want unemployment.
You are a classic liberal, sucking the cock of capitalism.
Progressives are socialists.
John Minehan Added Apr 20, 2017 - 9:27am
"I dont see how we eliminate the control that the rich and well connected have on governments.  They have always controlled things, and if you change the form of government, you just change  which  group of rich and well connected are in charge.  Whether it is kings, dictators, or corporations, the middle class or poor have never run things."
 
The mere existence of the (near) universal franchise is about as good a check as you can get.
 
The risk of that is always a caudillo who fires the popular imagination, like: Peron; or Chavez; or even Trump.
 
Moneyed interests (with something to lose) are (we hope) the check on that.  
J. Riddle Added Apr 20, 2017 - 11:45am
"Why force the Republicans hand in blowing up the 60 vote rule?"
 
No one forced them to do so. They always had the option of choosing someone else; they decided confirming Gorsuch was more important than keeping around the rule. Trump would have had to pick a pretty moderate candidate to get any Democratic support after Repubs refused, for a year, to even consider Obama's last nominee. He didn't. It is what it is. Getting rid of the filibuster in this matter is a step in the right direction, even if Gorsuch is a step in a very, very wrong direction. An even better step would be to get rid of the filibuster on regular legislation. But that would requite a supermajority.
 
"Another recent example is the effort that fortunately failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Republicans decided to work without Democrats to do this and their party bickering caused it to fail. It also failed because it was a horribly crafted and rushed bill. Since most Americans want to keep Obamacare, but improve it, why did the GOP waste time and not work with Democrats to fix it? The President even blamed Democrats for this bill’s failure, yet they weren’t even at the table."
 
Republicans have spent 7 years running on repealing the ACA. Politically, they'd hemmed themselves in on the issue but as a practical matter, they'd never bothered to come up with an alternative. Obamacare had been the Repub alternative to Clintoncare in the '90s (which, itself, was a Repub bill). So with years to concoct an alternative, they had done nothing; the anti-Obamacare rhetoric was never about anything more than telling their voters they were going to undo that awful think that black fellow did. No Democrat was going to go along with a repeal and Repubs refuse to work with Democrats on anything because they know that if they do, that will be the top story on Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, etc., where they'll be portrayed as RINO turncoats (and then they'll be primaried in the districts they've gerrymandered for themselves).
 
None of this has anything to do with good public service but until the right-wing Rage Machine goes away, that's what we have.
Keith Wilson Added Apr 20, 2017 - 3:08pm
Thanks for the additional comments. With respect to the ACA, I agree totally that the GOP has spent seven years naysaying the law and voting to repeal. To not have a legitimate plan now to replace it is poor form. But, it goes beyond this. The GOP actually sabatoged the law by largely defunding risk payments to insurers stiffing them of money owed for taking on adverse selection. This is one of the reasons premiums went up and insurers left some states. As an example, because of Congress, Humana is owed $591 million. 
 
On the flip side, I hate to see the Democrats do what the Republicans did. I would rather see them take the argument to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and improve the ACA. I would rather see them push the envelope on infrastructure spending which the  President said he supports. The GOP is in such a disarray, they won't pass much of anything. Ryan has forgotten how Boehner got the few things he passed done - working with the Dems. 
 
I understand the frustrations of many about Washington and state and local politics. We need to get them working together whenever they can. This "I am going to take my sand toys home because you won't play with me" BS needs to stop. And, we need to use whatever legitimate means to get them to stop.
 
George N Romey Added Apr 20, 2017 - 4:15pm
The repeal of ACA has nothing to do with health insurance or the cost of health insurance. It has everything to do with the tax assessed on incomes of $250K plus to pay for some provisions of the program. 
John G Added Apr 21, 2017 - 2:11am
We need to get them working together whenever they can.
They are working together to fuck you on behalf of the ruling class.