The Party of the Rich

There is a great sort of three card monte that the Bush Republicans have been playing with those who wish to be rich, or aspire to hold onto their wealth. Its been this idea that the GOP is the party of the rich

Certainly, the conservative philosophy plays to this theme at least in some respects - and its worthwhile to note that for many of the top income earning brackets taxes are a serious issue.

Libertarianism requires a real independent streak in you. The two party system in America usually does a good job of responding to the lobbyist's concerns and the type of legislative actions that occur often result in composite position legislature. Big bills composed of many little parts that oppose each other. The two party system usually provides for a fun sort of game of good cop, bad cop. A game that if, you are a true libertarian you don't play. There is a popular radio talk show host who boasts loud and long that he's for this fair tax system, and self identifies as a libertarian. You have to be careful with startups, they go through a phase where they turn evil to get what they need - the libertarian party is riddled with shills for the GOP and this talk show host, especially. He's in fact taking big checks from a major Pro-Media consolidation group, and he's been taking money under the table from the GOP to make sure that the Fair Tax issue remains dead. He's even written a book about it. But he's out there to shill for the GOP, who really doesn't want the complicate system removed, because their corporate interests don't want it removed.

Although libertarianism has obvious appeal, we'll likely see two parties to choose from this year. The GOP (party number one) and the Dems ( party two).

The first party wants to be identified as "the male" party. "Tough" in the world. "Conservative". They spend a lot of time trying to tag the second party as the "Female" and "liberal". During their last stint in power, the first party, spent more money advertising the white house positions on matters, than any other administration in history. They invented "pre-emptive warfare" and made advertisements asking the American people to support them. Then they went out and invaded other countries, with the cameras rolling.

The second party is sort of low key. They've been involved in wars, but its been kind of a war bond thing, you know? Meatless Tuesdays. Rosie the Riveter. Sure, those wars were the ones that we won. But we didn't have to invent "pre-emptive first strike". The only reason we fought them was that some hostile country hit us and we had to hit back.

The first party waves the flag, red white and blue. They want you to wave the flag too. They get you to sign loyalty oaths to their candidate, so you can attend the rally and not ask un-patriotic questions.

The second party is a bit more chaotic, and free-market with that kind of thing. People often complain that the party is disorganized in that fashion. They listen to the blogosphere. They end up letting you ask whatever questions you want to as.

The first party really wants you to know that they're the party of the rich. So much so that they're willing to pay you to believe it. They'll give you flashy tax cuts and gas tax holidays. They take positions like "we're not going to talk to hostile countries", no diplomacy - just American military might. The whole cuban missile crisis thing to them would've ended differently. They would have taken on those rotten commies and taught them a lesson.

The second party isn't always going to pay you off to get you to vote their way. They're made up of people that honestly, are sort of policy wonks .. they spend time managing where their money is going. No gas tax holiday (at least if Clinton is not elected), but you will likely get something like a new manhattan project to free us from Mideast Oil dependency. This party doesn't have to rely on big corporate donations to drive their platforms during election years, it gets alot of money from small donors. The cuban missile crisis thing ended, for them, as a negotiated sort of stand-off. There was not big military maneuver that corrected iffy foreign policy.

Now, that second party - did incur some pretty expensive long distance telephone bills to the Kremlin. I'm kind of miffed about that. They should've used the internet. Oh wait. Never mind, this was the party that +invented+ the internet 10 years later.

Normally you can find out where the truly wealthy people are hanging out by following around people like Warren Buffett.

Uncle Buffy is not just the richest man in the world. He's the smartest investor in the world. The party of the rich, is that party that gives you the most bang for the buck. Not the one that tries to shuffle money under the table to you as long as you stay quiet. One of the reasons Uncle Buffy is so freakin' rich is that he spends a fair amount of his time asking questions like, what is my money really doing for me? My having invested nearly all of my money into a venture - echoes this type of activity.

Of course, if your idea of a smart investment strategy is just to dump money into a 401k, don't worry. Thats fine. You don't have to pay taxes on it. Good for you.

But the Democrats are the party of the Rich. You see this at parties, also - where you have the real wealthy people you meet, being by and large fairly liberal in their outlook and not too worried about a 10 cent tax cut here and there. Their concern is more along the lines of where that 200 billion dollars that gets drained out of America and into some desert country - will be going . They have a more christian outlook than the other party, more forgiving and tolerant -and more willing, if you will .. to 'enter the kingdom on the back of a donkey'.

Be wary of people who feel like they have to tell you about their patriotism all the time. Its probably like being good in bed - if they have to tell you they're good in bed. .. You know the rest, don't you?