Days of Change

Polarization | November 29, 2016

I was looking through my Amazon Prime and saw one of the “free” streaming shows was the 1990’s sitcom “Hearts Afire.” It was heavy-handed and overly talky, much like Linda Bloodworth-Thomason’s other show, “Designing Women.” However, it reminded me of a time in the early 1990’s when people could argue in good faith and not worry about the other side trying to destroy civilization or let people die.

Some of the good feelings were due to the fact that no one was getting everything they wanted. Bill Clinton won the presidency, but Ross Perot was the man who was responsible for Bush’s defeat. In 1994, Newt Gingrich led a Republican win of Congress, which actually brought positive change for a while.

Not surprisingly, I blame George Soros for bringing polarization into American politics. Almost 20 years ago, a group called Move On wanted Congress to censure Bill Clinton and “move on” without Impeachment hearings. It was a compromise where he would still get a slap on the wrist, but not go through a process that would damage his legacy. It didn’t work, and Clinton remained president anyway.

Then the 2000 Election happened.

Much like the 2016 election, the media speculated that George W. Bush would win the popular vote, but wouldn’t get enough states for the Electoral vote. They ended up dead wrong. The defeat was bitter for Democrats because it was the first time the Republicans had the White House and the Congress (at least most of the first term) in more than a generation. Plus, it was really close. This time, the third party candidate, Ralph Nader, lost the election for the Democrats.

This is where Soros came in. His money turned Move On from a grass roots organization to an AstroTurf arm of globalism. The Electoral College makes it difficult to buy a president, so Soros and Move On dumped money into statewide elections, thinking they could choose who counted and certified votes. Worse than that, Soros funded Media Matters, whose sole purpose is to counter anything even slightly conservative in the media, along with the specific war on Fox News.

Unfortunately, the right has also gotten in on the act. Because Democrats like government, almost anything Bill Clinton did was a positive. Conservatives want smaller, and possibly more efficient, government. The problem is that shrinking government is hard and often involves a lot of legal hurdles because of the complicated system used to enact them. So conservatives have been disappointed since at least the late 80’s.

For me, the fact that Republicans run two branches, but the president is legislatively incompetent, means that I am on two sides. Side one thinks everything Trump does is wrong. The other ascribes God-like wisdom to every action. Someday, I hope people start using their brains again.

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized

%d bloggers like this: