two party system

Hillary’s Health – Tim Kaine’s Gain!

Posted on by Helena

Confusing parties… The UK ‘Conservative Party’ is more closely aligned with the US Liberal Democrat party. A recent row arose in the UK about providing more arms to the Saudi’s in their ‘coalition’ against Yemen. Of course, we all know it is an ethnic cleansing genocidal war, not a coalition. But apparently, Boris Johnson who is a representative of the UK ‘Conservative Party’ is arguing that despite Amnesty International and the UN declaring war crimes committed by the Saudi’s in Yemen, there is no evidence to support that allegation and therefore he encourages ramping up arms sales to them. Much like the Clintonite/Obama/McCain agenda.

Political parties used to have clear definitive lines of values and beliefs. But more recently those lines have shifted to be inclusive of more ambitious definitions including liberal Republican, progressive democrat, socialist democrat, conservative union, labour, liberal labour, and even liberal democrat – which seems an oxymoron – or just a moron…

That being said, the muddiness of the US Republican and Democrat parties has reached breaking point. The lines have been pushed to the point of spicing up a steak – add a little salt, pinch of pepper, turmeric, basil, cloves, garlic, Rosemary, lemon, etc… and voila!

While a VP has historically little impact on the election results, Tim Kaine, Hillary’s VP pick has some interesting stances and allegations. For example:

*Kaine adamantly opposed the War on Iraq. Hillary was a strident backer.

*Kaine opposed reduction of military and veteran benefits. Clinton advocated for ‘redeployment and caps on troops’, and a reduction in military spending.

*Kaine criticized the No child Left Behind Act. Hillary supported it.

*Kaine supported coal. Clinton opposed it.

*In order to balance the Virginia budget, Kaine put through budget cuts that required higher tuition for public universities. Hillary wants free public university education.

What Kaine did accomplish was winning previous Republican strongholds in his run for Governor. How? Same way Hillary is luring and baiting, by speaking their tongue, their language, like a lobbyist compromising on one issue in order to push through a dozen others. This crossover would be the fate of Republicans today as their loyalty would seem to have wavered and waned, their value system grayed, and their reputation shallowed.

While most of the Republican’s jumping ship are retired, their reasoning is more hypocritical – and sometimes strangely devious with the Bush’s leading the pack. They continually defend the ‘good ole boys network’, and anyone outside the club is not welcome.

So why Kaine? Why would Soros/Hillary pick Kaine? He walks the walk, talks the talk and appears squeaky clean. Perhaps his Google history has been scrubbed. And while events did occur during his tenures as mayor, lieutenant governor and governor, whether those events can truly be attributed to him – is rather vague. During his term as mayor the homicide rate fell 55%… because ‘Kaine supported Project Exile’… he didn’t draft it, he didn’t oversee it, he didn’t have anything to do with it and yet, he is credited with that ‘success’.

What has he actually accomplished? “As Governor, Kaine successfully protected 400,000 acres of conservation land’. In reality, the conservation was done by The Virginia Outdoors Foundation, which worked to protect the land two years before Kaine was even elected Governor… During the Great Recession, Kaine’s tenure was marked by the fact that Virginia’s unemployment did not drop as much as the national average. There is no reason given, just that he happened to sit at his desk during this time frame. In fact, outside of an executive order banning smoking in public places, it would appear that Kaine’s entire tenure has been that he ‘supported’ something someone else actually did.

And yet – Soros picked him for Hillary’s VP.

Why? It may be that Hillary was played as the puppet, the democrat with the most notoriety able to wreak the most havoc on a Republican election. And maybe, she is the mask to usher in Tim Kaine. While she courts the Republicans with her feminism and hawkish ideals, her health could very well be a more significant factor on the stage of Act II. Given that nothing is decided without known and unknown motives, Kaine’s placement as Hillary’s VP is certainly not accidental or misguided. If Hillary were to win the election before her health completely failed her, Kaine could invoke her as unfit to lead and succeed as President.

His policies are not progressive – they are liberal and in line with Obama, a stance that would not win an election today. To be sure, his appointment should be scrutinized given it was most definitely a Soros decision and Clinton’s health would not appear to be a conspiracy but a definitive fact.

Trump’s Perfect VP – Paul Ryan

Posted on by Helena

What if, there were no parties? What if, the Trump phenomena was to eliminate the party lines, the division, the divisiveness? What if, Trump’s VP pick were Paul Ryan? What if, the 45 minute meeting was simply to put that offer on the table?

One of the major differences between a politician and a businessman is the politician wants to surround himself with ‘yes men’, whereas the businessman wants to surround himself with ‘personalities whose strengths complement their weaknesses’. Paul Ryan embodies the extreme opposite of Trump, and together they could be a powerhouse.

The Democrat and Republican parties have both been disintegrating for years. Lines are crossed, and new definitions arise; Liberal Republican, Conservative Democrat, Progressive, Socialist, Centrist, Libertarian, on and on until there really isn’t a definition or distinction at all. Routinely, a politician changes party affiliation in order to secure an election. It is so accepted that we don’t even notice or care.

So what’s the point?

And maybe that’s the Trump phenomena. The media likens his stance as ‘not republican’, ‘not conservative’, not affiliated, and yet maybe that’s the entire principle behind the revolution. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, are all sick and tired of politicians. But what’s the alternative? A waitress? A horse trainer? A photographer? While we complain and lambaste, we fail to offer a solution. And while I am not endorsing Trump, I am observing, watching, and listening.

What would it mean to have a ‘no party’ system? A system of just platforms – as in this is where I stand on issues A through Z. It would eliminate the media being able to demonize a candidate for not conforming to a standard of definitions that don’t exist and instead allow us to learn about the stances.  And it would allow everyone to vote – a US Constitutional Right!

Hillary routinely refers to herself as a Progressive and yet can not define what that means. Bernie routinely defines himself as a Socialist, and yet those that support him have no idea what that means.  Despite these malformations of the Democrat Party, they both run under that platform.  It’s a farce.

To make it even more complicated, a hundred years ago a Republican held all the values of a Democrat and visa-versa. President Lincoln was a Whig, then a Republican, then a Unionist. Thomas Jefferson belonged to the Democratic-Republican Party. What the Hey?

But haven’t we been moving in the ‘no-party’ direction for decades? Today, 43% identify as Independents, meaning ‘no party affiliation’. And while the Washington Post would have us believe that the Independent affiliation is a myth because most lean toward a particular candidate, they have missed the point. The point is that there is no ‘affiliation’ per se, the point is that people are choosing a candidate based on the candidate and not their affiliation.

Even the notion of ‘leaning’ toward one affiliation is valueless because the lean could change at any given point in time depending on who is running.

To make the election more ridiculous is to deny the 43% the right to vote because they haven’t declared themselves Democrat or Republican. But denying that right to vote would be a violation of the US Constitution which is ‘the law of the land’ and supersedes states abridging that right. In fact, the Constitution states that if a state abridges that right then the state shall pretty much be precluded from having countable votes at all!  Veddy Interestink!

That would include; Arizona, California, New York, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, etc… And it would mean that these states, their governors, and their senators are violating the US Constitution by making a law that abridges the right of “everyone” to vote. But then the basic laws of the Constitution are violated by our government continually without repercussion: requirements of declaring war for military intervention, adopting Sharia law, right to privacy, and of course, the right to bear arms.

That being said, the politicians of our states have corrupted the system, have crossed the lines of the Constitution and the defined lines of what constitutes a Democrat or Republican in the absolute sense.

So – we are back to Trump. A businessman who is most definitely imperfect, but who may have the savvy to sway Paul Ryan into his camp and give him the VP nomination. That sets up Ryan for a Presidential bid in 4 or 8 years, and secures his future. It gives Trump the integrity nominee value and creates a closer conservative base with a young face. But more importantly, it creates a powerful union that is not bent on chaos and destruction and divisiveness.

And maybe, just maybe we’ll lose the Democrat and Republican titles given they have little meaning left and are a farce at best.

FYI:   In Europe there 13 different legally recognized parties…In Australia there are 15… In China there are 9 recognized and 4 repressed… In the US there are 2 recognized with 1 repressed – the majority party or Independent. So which countries are free?