The Republican primaries remind me of my chickens. We have three roosters and eight hens. The roosters all have their own personalities. Alex, a medium sized Orpington, crows often and loves jumping on the hens. Red is a medium-large (heavier set) Orpington with a quiet, but somewhat dominant air about him. Flamingo, who hurt his foot as a chick and stood on one leg for a week, is a tall white rooster and an addict for scratch. I see Red like Mitt Romney, rich, conceited, nose in the air. Alex is like Newt Gingrich, loud, stupid, bad track record and can’t keep his junk in his pants. Flamingo is Ron Paul, the gadfly of the group. Santorum and Perry (or PArry as Colbert says) are just fodder, a couple of hens.
What I have noticed is that flocks with one rooster have no political issues; the rooster can do pretty much whatever he wants. Flocks with two roosters have one dominant and one submissive, the dominant one doing pretty much what he wants and beating up on the submissive one if he gets out of line. With three roosters things get interesting. For example, if Alex tries to mate with a female both Flamingo and Red charge at him and jump on him knocking him off before he is finished. If Flamingo tries to mate with a female then Red and Alex charge at him and most times try to knock him off. If Red tries to mate with a female then Alex and Flamingo charge at him squawking, and knock him off about half the time. This paradigm works not only for multiple Republican primary candidates attacking the apparent front-runner, but for political parties as well.
With the single political party, the group think is Orwellian – Nazi’s. With two political parties, the dominant party does what it wants and the submissive party gets beat up for trying to do the same thing that the dominant party is doing – Republicans and Democrats. With three parties, things become interesting. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the Tea Party is a valid third party. In my way of thinking, a third party is paramount to not having parties, which would be the optimum solution. The monopoly of the two parties on the ITEMS of discussion limit the discourse of the political landscape. The Committee on Presidential Debates, for example, is run by one Democrat pundit and on Republican pundit. Before this committee came into existence the League of Women Voter’s actually handled the presidential debates, and it should go back to their independent control. There is no political debate on whether we should do something, that’s already been decided by think tanks like the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) or Political Action groups like AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) or ATC (American Turkish Council). The debate is on who would be best sitting in the chair while those policies are carried out, and that is not a debate.
As far as the roosters go, we have discussed which one(s) we should put on the table, but I am beginning to think that it’s good to have them keeping each other in check, much like the three branches of our American government are supposed to do. Unfortunately for our political future, I am more convinced every day that the United States of America is already lost. In order for there to be any hope for people living here we must start over, beginning with the states. Ron Paul is the best choice for President, but he’s not perfect. Maybe with a progressive VP like Dennis Kucinich America might have a chance to bounce when we hit the cold, hard concrete after our 110 story free fall – the same speed at which WTC 1, 2 and 7 came down. Why hasn’t there been a REAL investigation of that by the way?
Stuck-N-Reality 