I grew up thinking that I was conservative and that, someday, I would affiliate myself with the Republican Party. I am still a conservative individual, but upon closer reflection, find myself at odds with both the Republican’s and Democrat’s.

Political Party’s in the United States are not mandated. In the vision of the Founding Fathers there were no political parties. Rather, there would be several groups that would keep everyone in check as the process to run the government started and was maintained. However, it quickly became apparent that, as a means of enforcing the Constitution, people would segregate into larger central groups (party’s) and would then vote in blocks in that manner. As a result, the United States has, pretty consistently, had two dominant political parties that have run things.

Currently, those parties are the Democrats and the Republicans.

If you are of a more liberal persuasion than most of the people you live around, chances are you lean more toward the Democrats. If you are more conservative than the people you are around, you probably lean more toward the Republicans.

Since I am in Utah and am an active member of the LDS faith, I get the impression that many people believe that the God ordained political party, and the one we as a religion should follow, is the Republican Party. At church this past Sunday I heard a man, who immigrated to the United States, begin to talk about Party affiliation before abruptly changing direction and talking about something else.

However, the LDS faith does not have a political party nor does the faith, in general, affiliate itself with one party over another.

The problem with the two political parties is that they are so similar to each other that neither is significantly different from the other. Sure, people who are actively involved in the Democratic Party are more likely to be pro-choice, pro-same sex marriage, and pro-big government; while people on the Republican side are more likely to be pro-life, pro-guns, and pro-moral values. It’s the way things work – but in neither case is that true of the members of the party.

In fact, neither party actually has to exist. Neither party has to remain in force or in power. And neither party has a monopoly on governance in the United States. Nor is either party a better choice for seats in Congress or as President or as Judiciaries. The difference is that, right now, we have these two dominant parties that claim their party is better than the other one. Or that we will be better off if you vote for one party over the other.

Sure, I am like a lot of other people and think that Bill Clinton was a bad president; I am unlike a lot of my peers in thinking that G.W. is not only a bad president, but also one of the worst presidents this country has ever had. What is the proof for either? Both men represent the different parties, and yet, they will both have served two terms. Where teen pregnancy numbers rose during Bill Clinton’s presidency; the cost of gas, consumer goods, the number of depressions, and the money spent on unnecessary military actions have risen, considerably, in G.W.’s terms in office. Where there are protections for the American people in a declared war, we fight an undeclared war which, in part, does not allow the same economic protections.

In recent history, the worst political offenders seem to come out of the moral right. Nixon had to resign his office rather than chance going in front of a Democratically controlled congress with an impeachment for Watergate. Ford was not a lot better. Jimmy Carter has done more for… what? since leaving office, he was a one-term president, as was G.W.’s daddy who declared, “Read my lips. No new taxes,” and then proceeded to raise taxes on the American people.

The most admired president in recent history was Ronald Reagan. People, in general, really liked Kennedy – and recently, noting the death of Bobby Kennedy during a presidential primary he would’ve won, has brought media ire down on HRC’s head. Is HRC a better choice than McCain or Obama? Not really. Is McCain a better choice because of party affiliation? Nope. Nor, honestly, is Obama. Now, one of these people might be more effective than the others, and my cards are on Obama because he will either do a remarkable job or he will be a one term president that will fall into the annals of history with all those other ineffective one-term presidents, but he offends me less than HRC or McCain. And, truth told, voting for him goes against what has become the norm.

Regardless, we are a two party nation. Not this election (it’s really too late), but in the near future, it is not impossible to see a new political party rise up in protest against the same-old, same-old that has been going on for far too long. G.W. divides this nation. We are polarized; and McCain divides the nation; and HRC will divide the nation. We need not only a leader, but also a party that will unite the nation behind them… and at present that isn’t happening.

I don’t expect a lot. Which is sad, because our Senators and Congressmen are paid a king’s ransom to, effectively, screw over the constituents and allow things like BIG OIL to continue price gouging. What we need is a new party, a new way of thinking, and a new set of candidates that will help restore some semblance of trust and faith in the system and the way it was meant to work; because, right now, it ain’t working.

John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West

Real Heroes Fly