So the needless government shutdown of 2013 is over... who's to blame and why should we care?

Things have been pretty quiet here at the Third Party lately. But eyes have been on Washington and the general "Business As Usual" choices being made by those in office. Observing the descent into this recent government shutdown and the distractions thrown at the media in order to keep us all guessing has been very frustrating. So I am going to clear a little of this up right here and now, and actually call for some very specific action.

While at one time, the founders of this organization harbored the notion of forming a viable political alternative to the dominant parties, one which was based on reason and empathy rather than partisan dogma, it did not seem as though mainstream Americans were ready to jump on board this particular revolution. We therefore veered toward the goal of education and enlightenment, changing perspectives when possible and attempting to foster a new base of thoughtful, reasoned and educated voters. The fact that the Tea Party influence so heavily flushed through Congress in the last election cycle is evidence that our work here did not go far enough. Bearing that in mind, we are opening a Facebook page to act as our live discussion board, while keeping this site alive for commentary pieces (in this blog) and general information on the home page. It is seriously underfunded, so please do not expect frequent updates. However, change only happens when individuals act in support. And that being said, I am going to move along into the clear issues of why our government was shut down and what to do about it now.

Wayback Machine

Just for fun, here is a look back at August of 2000:

http://web.archive.org/web/20000816061446/http://www.3rdparty.org/bbs/

A lot of the issues were the same 12 years ago. Some topics are perhaps even hotter now, and not surprisingly so.

With tonight kicking off the debate season, it will be interesting to see how Romney and Obama address these old issues (or skirt around them).

Republicans Proving Narrow Vision Is Main Objective

When Mitt Romney chose Paul Ryan as his running mate for the 2012 election, presumable to push fiscal issues to the forefront of the discussion, it was a move that cements the objective of the Republican Party as narrowing its interests to serve the wealthiest Americans and big corporations rather than the broad umbrella that the party had previously been trying to claim.

By choosing a VP who's primary distinguishing characteristic in Congress has been pushing a budget that would attempt deficit reduction by displacing the bulk of tax burden disproportionately onto the poor and the backs of the working class, Romney has also proven himself unable to connect with the needs of common citizens. While it is true that Ryan has a vocal fan base among Conservatives, it is unlikely that the campaign season will progress without this choice being more harmful to the ticket than helpful. Headway that had been made four years ago in the way of diversity has now been completely undone. While Sarah Palin had no place on a legitimate ticket, and her legacy in terms of prominent female Presidential hopefuls has been less than promising within the Republican's ever-more Conservative universe, there is no question that at least broader options were being considered last time around. But the reality is, the only non-male and non-white hopefuls are far-Right crackpots or some other type of crackpot that still somehow appeals to the Tea Party contingent. Beyond that, where most sensible Republican people live, these (large) groups are unable to gain enough traction or make a big enough splash within their own party.

With the Republican Party edging every further Right with each election cycle, there is a strong chance it will marginalize itself enough to finally make a real third party option a reality within a few years. The pre-Reagan party that existed with a sense of caution about the current iteration's obsessions would stand a much greater chance of popular embrace these days. The biggest problem with the current party is that it not only embraces, but passionately embraces many of the positions that are actually responsible for having caused most of the problems we are facing today.

Without the spine to acknowledge that the loudmouths in the Tea Party are not tuned into any sort of fiscal or social reality, the Republican leadership is allowing the party to become nothing more than a fringe group. Unfortunately, it is a fringe group that still wields a large amount of political clout and way too much power in Washington. The sooner that the citizens of this country wake up and realize it is no longer the party that they think it is, the sooner the Republican Party can either be reclaimed or recognized as the special interest coalition it is and replaced by something more representative of the greater masses. From Lincoln to Eisenhower, former Republican Presidents are rolling over in their graves, restless and waiting.

Reminiscing About Our Origins

I was just reading an old interview with co-founder Kevin Makice that was part of the Media Giraffe Project. It reminded me of why we had gotten this beast off the ground in the first place: to change the way that people talk about politics.

Kevin had it spot on. We have to get away from labels; defining people before we know who they are or why they believe what they believe will only limit our ability to communicate effectively. We are all something other than Liberal or Conservative, Republican or Democrat, Right or Left. We all have a history that defines who we are and the way we see the world.

By getting past these limiting views, these essentially meaningless terms with which all things political are defined, perhaps we will be able to find common ground between us and see a way to work together.

Church and State Revisited

A Political Essay by Jeffrey E. Poehlmann

Originally published by 3rdparty.org on February 25, 2001

[Note: the President referred to in this essay is G. W. Bush, whose administration had been actively working to direct funds to religiously affiliated organizations and away from secular organizations that had been providing similar services.]

"Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together." -- JAMES MADISON

God has never been elected to serve in Washington, but some feel He should be there anyway. By affixing his signature to an executive order to create the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, President G.W. Bush has offered his opening statement on the debate.

Setting Priorities in Education

A Political Essay by Jeffrey E. Poehlmann

Originally published by 3rdparty.org on March 31, 1999

[Note: the fact that this essay is over a decade old and the issue is still so current speaks volumes about the lack of positive change afforded by a Congress more interested in its internal interests than those of the society it is meant to serve. The abject failure of "No Child Left Behind" and the increasing focus on testing rather than learning has only further marginalized at-risk students and created more division within the educational system.]

There is no question that the success of a society's future hinges upon the education of its children. A strong, defined and state supported educational system can be used for good or ill, for it determines the direction of future leaders. What we look toward today is not a fascist system of state defined moral lessons and approved scientific or religious thinking. Rather, we search for a way to incorporate state controls over structure and quality without impinging upon freedom of thought and diversity of opinion. In order to ensure that our educational system sets international standards and best prepares today's children to face their (and our) tomorrows, we must instill federal guidelines that hold states in accountability for the implementation of regional public school standards.

Left Wanting a Voice for the Everyman

A Political Essay by Jeffrey E. Poehlmann

Originally published by 3rdparty.org on January 1, 1999

A recent convening of "conservatives" in the Phoenix dessert on what many are calling an annual examination of their identity has left me asking myself an old question: Why do we label our politicians, ourselves, as conservative or liberal rather than humanitarian? Is not the purpose of government in this country to help and protect the citizens of this country? Surely the United States of America is beyond reproach when accused of the political infighting, power struggles and oppression of all opposition that marred monarchies and empires of centuries past or the dictatorial regimes of thoseless significant countries we relegate to the Third World. So why is it that our system has become in recent years so completely polarized in its struggle between the two dominant political parties to the point where a virtual coup has been attempted? Is it to protect the American People, as the proponents of this movement would have us believe, though the vast majority of the American People have spoken out in its opposition, or is this really just one more example (albeit a modern one) of the sort of political infighting and backstabbing that has brought down rulers through the ages? "Beware the ides of March," I say. It is time for the common man's voice to return to the seat of our leaders.