Autographed Letter Signed

A Mostly Center-Right Place For Those With Irritable Obama Syndrome and Diversity Fatigue

Thursday Stitch n’ Bitch: The Declaration of Independents January 14, 2010

Official Tea Party Movement Symbol

The year 2010 is an anxious time for all, especially Republicans and conservatives. Obama is breaking promises, and there will be plenty of angry folks this year seeking “hopenchange” again but not in the form of a light skinned guy named Barry.   Like many Republicans I am looking forward to kicking some donkey butt in the 2010 elections.  Or at least I thought I was like many Republicans or conservatives or independents…Which is it?  Anyway after a long exchange on my Facebook page with some Tea Party Patriots, I was told that I am an uninformed Republican voter. Who was duped by the Democrats once and now I am being duped by Republicans.  “Third Party is the only way to go”, they said.

And it’s not going to happen either! The elites and the radicals have highjacked our country and they WILL NOT give it back by us dumb ass SHEOPLE voting in a bunch of corrupt REPUBLICANS!”…But if a good candidate were to decide to run on a 3rd party ticket, I would vote for him or her over the other two even if he/she lost and all of you gave me shit over it. I voted for Perot 2x, but not a 3rd party since because there was no strong runner. WE NEED NEW BLOOD! A WASHINGTON OUTSIDER! THAT ISN’T BOUGHT OR FINANCED BY ANYONE BUT THE PEOPLE!”

“I’m going to be the odd man out here. We have a Marxist because of the 2 party system as it currently operates. Nobody can deny it. The GOP is ‘almost ‘ as corrupt as the Democrats.And if the polls hold on the question of a “Tea Party” having a candidate in a three way race, the TP is smoking the GOP. So just who is splitting the vote. AS for… See More me I am not voting for Republicans. I may vote for a conservative who is a Republican- maybe.”

I just lost all respect for Palin. F*ck the two party system! It sucks major ass! Parties are un-American. We’re not supposed to have them. Parties are for democracies. We’re not a democracy. We’re a republic. Parties have no place in republics. In a republic, politicians are supposed to be non-partisan aka independent. Republicans and Democrats are BOTH taking us down the wrong path. I only align myself with the Constitution!”

Afrocity is not so sure about a third party movement...even if it were a Tea Party

Yes, Obama failed many particularly those who voted for him.

Bush failed many as well. Let’s not lie about that granted it is not fair for the liberals to continue to use “Bush’s fault” as an excuse for everything under the sun.

But does this all mean that we adopt a third party?Because for the last 9 years we have elected flawed leaders  to our nation’s highest office?

The independents seem to think so.

First let’s take a look at what Obama promised and did not deliver. Does it have more to do with him and his character than the Democratic Party in itself? The answer is yes and no. The Democrats chose the wrong nominee as the Republicans did in 2000.  Every party is capable of the bait and switch described by Karl Rove in this article in the Wall Street Journal:

JANUARY 13, 2010,

The President’s Bait-and-Switch Operation

Which campaign promises has he kept?

By Karl Rove

“Americans learned last year that President Obama discards campaign promises like most people discard used Kleenex. Among the pledges he cast aside were reducing the deficit, reining in federal spending, not allowing lobbyists to work in his administration, increasing taxes only on those who make more than $250,000, and opposing “government-run health care” because it is “extreme.”
This year, Mr. Obama is picking up where he left off.
Consider presidential signing statements. Since Andrew Jackson, presidents of both parties have told Congress that while they are signing a bill into law, they intend to ignore specific provisions because they involve unconstitutional restrictions on the executive branch or are otherwise problematic.

A president’s power to do this springs from his oath of office, through which each new chief executive promises to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.”
Because of Washington’s hyperpartisan atmosphere, President George W. Bush drew heated criticism from Democrats for his signing statements. Among his toughest critics was Barack Obama, who in a questionnaire for the Boston Globe in 2007 accused Mr. Bush of “clear abuse” in using signing statements “to avoid enforcing certain provisions . . . the President does not like.” He promised not to use signing statements to “nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law.”
Yet Mr. Obama started issuing signing statements shortly after taking office. Democratic Reps. Barney Frank and David Obey called him out on it in a letter to the White House complaining that they were “chagrined” that Mr. Obama was issuing signing statements.
Recently, the Obama administration admitted that after receiving the letter from Messrs. Frank and Obey, it stopped the practice. But the president still has aides examine each bill to identify provisions the administration will disregard. It’s just that Team Obama isn’t telling Congress which provisions it is ignoring. It’s right for him to defend the office of the presidency. The problem is that he is doing it in a way that violates his own standards of transparency and accountability.

It was always puzzling to me as to why any logical person would believe anything that oozed from Barack Obama’s mouth.  His previous record and experience never proved anything beyond his reputation for securing one position and shortly thereafter  running for another position of higher profile before accomplishing anything of real importance. Liberals often love to brand Sarah Palin as a quitter because she resigned as Alaska’s governor before her term was finished.  No one recalls that Obama was only the Senator of Illinois for a short time before he ran for POTUS.  While a valid argument could be waged that Obama’s actions do not exactly constitute quitting , still closer attention should be paid to the motives behind his leaving his Illinois senate seat after accomplishing nothing.  Sarah left office to unburden the people of Alaska with a lame duck and ever growing law suits against the state by greedy mean-spirits and opportunists.  Obama ran for president because…. Oh I forgot, Michelle Obama supplied us with that answer:

“Barack is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign to enter this messy thing called politics.”

According to Webster, the definition of deign is: condescend: do something that one considers to be below one’s dignity.  Oh gee thanks Barry.  You see we should be thankful that  God sent Barack Obama to us. Now we can be delivered unto the Promised Land. That was Obama’s motive, to give us the gift of his wisdom. To get in our faces.

"Back of Bus" cartoon by Erin Bonsteel from "American Thinker"

Karl Rove continues:

“This hypocrisy has not gotten much attention. But another act of duplicity has. During his campaign, Mr. Obama pledged that any negotiations on health-care legislation would be broadcast on C-SPAN, “so the American people can see what the choices are,” and not conducted behind closed doors. “Such public negotiations,” he said, were “the antidote” to “overcoming the special interests and the lobbyists who . . . will resist anything that we try to do.”

Internet publisher Andrew Breitbart collected videotape of Mr. Obama making the same promise eight different times in 2007 and 2008—evidence that this was not a hasty or ill-considered pledge. It was supposed to epitomize the “change” that was at the core of the Obama campaign.

Now, however, the final negotiations on health-care reform are being conducted behind closed doors and there’s no formal legislative conference between the House and Senate, which would guarantee Republicans at least a few seats at the table. This bill is not only being written in secrecy, it is being written by an anonymous group of Democrats. We can therefore throw Mr. Obama’s commitment to bipartisanship onto his mountain of broken promises…”

Here is the video by Breitbart that Karl Rove alludes to:

I am less surprised by the die hard liberals who fell for Obama’s crap than I am by voters who characterize themselves as “independents”.

In 2008,  I helplessly watched as my independent voter friends emerged one by one from Obamabot pods covered in a Kool Aid purple slimy substance.  There are some pretty intelligent thinkers among the independent voting block. Their modes of inquiry into the lives of and motives of presidential candidates are legendary.

So why did they fall for Barack Obama?

And why exactly should Afrocity follow them to the promised tea party land?

I want no misunderstanding here. I admire those who actively participate in the Tea Party Movement. Voices need to be heard. I am amused by it. I love the patriotism that Americans are displaying. Am I politically or emotionally committed to the movement…No.  I am not exactly sure if we need a third party.  I saw what Ralph Nader did for the 2000 presidential election.  In theory,  a multi-party system is very American. George Washington hated political parties. In reality, they can also screw up some really great elections and in 2012, I do not want our country to end up with a second term for Barack Obama. Thus I do not quite understand why some anti-Obama voters would want to support third party candidates during the 2010 and 2012 elections. Aren’t we playing right into the liberals hands?

Autographed Letter Signed,

AFROCITY




Advertisements
 

25 Responses to “Thursday Stitch n’ Bitch: The Declaration of Independents”

  1. manbearpig68 Says:

    So far in my lifetime, I haven’t seen anything good come out of a third party. Ross Perot had the best run but not nearly enough support. There’s a lot of good people that the party’s could support but they make the wrong choice like you said. Sara Palin would be a great choice and she is an outsider. She really could satisfy people on a lot of fronts if everybody would open their eyes.

    • liontooth Says:

      Keep in mind that Perot flaked out during the 92 election season. Didn’t he withdraw, and reenter? I remember he claimed Bush’s team had pictures of Perot’s daughter or some weird crap.

      The thing I’m not seeing with a 3rd party or the Republicans is where is the candidate or the solutions? Get those FIRST, then worry about the party issue. At this point, the only reason Republicans/a Third Party will gain is because the Dems are driving people away. Not a good strategy, relying on your opponents weakness while you have zero strenghts.
      Will you indulge me while I predict that another tax season will come and go while the republicans don’t take advantage of it. Guess what people, the government isn’t giving you a gift (tax refund), that’s money that was yours to begin with that they have been holding on to, INTEREST FREE!

      Palin at this point seems to be the only opposition candidate. I have no respect for Romney. For someone who is supposed to be a financial genius, where the hell has he been? He should be at the forefront outlining solutions. Thompson and Guiliani wimped out in 2008, I can’t see them accomplishing anything.

  2. RealChange Says:

    Come on, voting the republicans back into office is counterproductive. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting something to be different is unrealistic. Now, if Hillary and Sarah and any other kick ass women want to start a 3rd party or hijack the current ones, then I’m on board. Not doing something different will insure the corrupt will stay in power. It’s time to start building a true people’s party. We have to start somewhere. IMHO. Thanks for the forum Afrocity.

  3. Intense political feelings cut two ways concerning 3rd parties: voting for what Left or Right rates as a “purer” 3rd party; or voting most usefully against the other major party, by boosting the large party at least somewhat acceptable.

    So both major parties stand to gain and lose from political intensity ramping up, and we cannot say yet how these factors will balance.

    3rd-party advocates drastically underestimate the ease of reforming a major party-in-being versus creating a new one from scratch. Rallies and mailing lists are not a functioning party structure. Note the perennial enthusiasm since the 1960s for the American Independent Party, the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, the Peace and Freedom Party — to name just some better known attempts. Each major party stands to gain from a new third-party movement — on the other side.

    Historically, the major real results in the 20th Century are that strong 3rd-party impulses previously have split the Republican vote: in 1912, resulting in Woodrow Wilson for 8 years; and in 1992, resulting in Bill Clinton for 8 years.

  4. McJenny50 Says:

    As a Conservative/Republican I can see nothing good coming out of a third party. It would split the C/R vote between them and end up giving a win to a liberal. C’s and R’s need to come to a meeting of the minds and re-form the Republican Party, taking it back to its roots without getting too rigid. I think the GOP has become too moderate in its thinking – look at Collins, Snowe, and yes, McCain.

    • Tea Party For America Says:

      Jenny you are an example of sheople who vote on party lines. Ross Perot would have saved this country but morons could not get it together.

      • manbearpig68 Says:

        Why are you calling Jenny an example of sheople? That’s a ridiculous accusation! She didn’t say anything about the way she votes..All she stated was that she was a conservative republican. You do not know how she votes.

  5. yttik Says:

    I’m with you, Afrocity. I think we need to face reality, this is a two party system we’re living in. Trying to create a third party is just taking the same people and eventually winding up with the same problems.

    Personally I’d like to see both parties transformed from the inside out and one way to begin is to elect more women. It’s about creating balance. Whether people admit it or not, women bring a different perspective to the table. When there are enough of them, the whole dynamic changes.

  6. BaldManMoody Says:

    Afrocity sorry to put another blog out there on this one. Just shocked that you are having this convo with regards to national election, when I have been battling my friends over at the American Missive with regards to the Mass Senatorial election. I intend to vote for Joseph Kennedy (no relation to Ted) as I don’t support either the Dems or Republicans and have voted this way across all Presidential elections I have had the opportunity to vote in.

  7. BaldManMoody Says:

    BTW, Where is theblackcommenter? I haven’t seen him in forever – I believe you referred to him as ElderJ?

  8. NSangoma Says:

    ~
    George Washington hated political parties.
    http://www.bookerrising.net/2010/01/afrocity-op-ed-declaration-of.html

    Purportedly, Washington caught his death coming back from the quarters on a cold wet night.

    I bet she was someone nice, nicer than a nutter-butter like you.
    `

  9. Afrocity, we sometimes see people like your Facebook correspondent on the Smart Girl Politics site. A good rule of thumb is to ignore anyone who types lots of words in all caps, especially if one of those words is “sheople.” Generally speaking, they’re more interested in bludgeoning you into agreement than they are in productive discourse.

    There are plenty of third party skeptics and dedicated Republican voters who participate in the tea party movement. While there’s a strong anti-incumbent sentiment, they are not necessarily anti-two party system. Unfortunately, as you’ve seen, there’s also an unhinged fringe as vicious as any lefty troll.

  10. How about this, we find a good Republican vote that person in and then work on destroying the party system once Obama is out of the White House. I have no problem with political parties I just think we need a whole ton of them and that party affiliation should not be on the ballot. I also believe in term limits for everyone, with the Presidency and seats in the Senate should be limited to one six year term with the House seats being one four year term.

    I have a couple other ideas for trying to fix the political system, and if I started my own party this is where I would start:

    http://letterstoadyingdream.wordpress.com/2009/10/08/fixing-the-mess-in-washington/

    It might not be perfect but we need to start someplace. Yeah I know shameless plug…

  11. Holly Says:

    I agree, a third party would be detrimental to Conservatives. To me, that is what is truly interesting. As Conservatives/ Republicans we are always told by Liberals/Democrats that we are completely partisan and blindly vote, but in actuality that is not true and we see that with the emergence of third parties. Third parties always take away from the Republican party because, I believe, we are the most critical party along the line of substance and this critique extends beyond Democrats and rests heavily upon our own party.

    If people vote third party just to vote third party, Obama’s agenda will continue.

    • BaldManMoody Says:

      Ralph Nader took away from Republicans? i will agree that it is a general trend but not always taking away from Republicans. I think Libertarians take away from both sides due to their lack of a social conservative outlook and their fiscally conservative policies for the most part.

  12. ZionFulfilled Says:

    If you ever read Judge Clarence Thomas’ book, My Grandfather’s Son, he talks about hunting snakes. He hunted two of them, the water moccassin and the rattler. Both are poisonous. The rattler can be heard by its potential victim, but the water moccassin is not only quiet in its attack, but it still kills the victim just the same. The Democrats and Republicans have had their chance to solve America’s problems, they haven’t and they can’t. A new voice needs to be heard in Washington. I am tired of behaving as a schizophrenic in the voting booth. Hey, the Democrats didn’t do it, so I’m going to vote in the Republicans. Uh, oh, the Republicans can’t solve my problems, so now I’ll vote in the Democrats who couldn’t seem to get it right in the first place.

    • True but until we can destroy the party system and the power they have you can only look for people that are the closest to your ideals, vote for them and hope the party doesn’t destroy it. Not that they will do what is right, chances are they will not in the end but even though the lesser of two evils is still evil you at least need to try to mitigate the evil.

  13. Great post! It is possible to be independent, but your facebook friend is falling into the same trap as before–thinking a ‘party’ will help them.

    We have to remain independent–in THOUGHT, I mean–party registration is really irrelevant. If you are registered R keep your eyes open for a good D candidate, and vice versa. Having a registration does not cut off your ability to listen and think. Forget about the Tea Partiers–they are struggling in a very deep pool and there are many sharks around.

    BTW–here is a guy running sans party for the house in the 15th district of PA: http://towneforcongress.com/

    Anybody considering running for office in ’10 or ’12 should take a look at his ideas. He is the real deal.

  14. Hey there, Afrocity! Are you free Sunday night? Wanna bust some Federal Reserve butt? Me too! http://sonicninjakitty.wordpress.com/2010/01/16/tune-in-sunday-night/ I hope you can join 🙂

  15. Dracir Says:

    I wish that Americans could get away from the idea that your vote is “wasted” if you don’t vote for one of the 2 main parties. The entire point of YOUR vote is that it is YOUR idea of who should represent you. To vote otherwise is simply to vote for what somebody else thinks is best for you. I cannot accept that.

    The evils of both parties are so great now that voting for the “lesser of two evils” doesn’t make any difference. You’re going to get screwed either way. It will just be a different screw depending on who’s in power. However, it WILL be bad.

    Sometimes, I think I’m the only person in the entire country who recognizes that the party who is not in power manages to say what they think the rest of us want to hear, so we can vote them back in.

    On a different note…
    When Obama spoke of “American arrogance” during his apology tour in Europe, he clearly was thinking of himself. The proof is in the fact that we cannot shame this idiot with almsot daily VIDEO proof of the lies he told in order to get elected. In a perfect world, he’d be thrown out of office and jailed.

  16. Dracir also Says:

    I don’t mean for my previous post to indicate that I will only consider 3rd party candidates. I am a black conservative, who would like to see politics more closely resemble the principles and guidelines of our Constitution. If the Republicans field a candidate I feel I can trust and whose principles are in line with mine, I’ll certainly vote for him or her.

    Historically, the only 3rd party candidate I voted for was Perot. However, in almost EVERY election cycle, I am offended and highly pissed at both parties using tricks to try to make it as difficult as possible to even vote for the 3rd party candidate.

    The things we do in this country, especially in politics, should be honest, ethical and fair. I say to all parties, “field a candidate who can honestly defeat all comers. Don’t use tricks or browbeating to get your guy or gal in.”

  17. Rose Says:

    You’ll like this from HillBuzz:
    The greatest weapon Democrats have — and we keep telling you people this in hopes some day you will finally listen — is that Republicans love finding any excuse they can to sit their fat, lazy butts at home on election day. “He’s not Republican enough”, “He’s not a real conservative”, “He posed nude and I am a Christian woman and I find that scandalous”, “My cat told me to stay home and fart a lot all day instead of voting, and my cat is boss of me”. Are we really exaggerating with any of these? It’s what Republicans do, because in addition to the concern trolls (people who go online specifically to demoralize Republicans from voting) and the Eeyores (Republicans who unwittingly demoralize other Republicans by consistently posting negative, pessimistic remarks online or in emails to friends), we believe there’s a third set of operatives out there, probably on the DNC payroll somehow, called “purists” who demoralize Republicans and inhibit election day turnout by claiming everyone is “not Republican enough” or “not good enough to vote for”.

    …We’ve said before that when Scott Brown wins on January 19th, it will be like that first Death Star being obliterated in Star Wars. It’s going to be a critical and fatal blow to the DNC. They will limp along, but the first major victory for what will be seen as The American Resistance will in retrospect be recorded as Scott Brown’s win of “the Kennedy Seat”, where he took it back for the people.

    The second Death Star explosion will happen in 2012, when Republicans win back the White House and Sarah Palin becomes president. We wanted Hillary Clinton to be our first female president, but the DNC prevented that. For this, they have our permanent scorn and perpetual promise: we will endeavor always to defeat you, until the Liberals are driven from Washington like the snakes from Ireland.

    America is too important for us to just sit back and watch these dangerous idiots destroy it.

    We’ll be damned if we hold our tongue against Martha Coakley when she’s abusing reporters the way she is, degrading the voters of Massachusetts, and behaving like Michelle Obama in public.

    THAT’S why we are so angry at this woman (Martha Coakley), and why we are so revved up to help Scott Brown.

    We have had enough of this garbage and are just NOT GOING TO TAKE ANY MORE…. http://hillbuzz.org/2010/01/15/question-of-the-day-why-are-you-so-angry-at-martha-coakley/


Comments are closed.