Tree-Hugging Dirt Worship

February 25, 2012

Candidate Promises Beheadings

Filed under: Soapbox — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — paragardener @ 5:06 pm

February 28 is a voting day here in Michigan. Checking out my ballot on, I see I have the choice of Republicans for President, one person running for one school board position, and an up/down vote on later electing a committee to revise the Detroit City Charter (replace the old, broken charter with a new, broken charter?). I’m going to vote Ron Paul for President for the completely trivial reasons that he wants to stop waging imperial wars all over the planet, remove us from the grip of bank-created debt-based play money, and also to restore some semblance of civil liberties to the citizens. So, mentally file me under “naive first-time voter fooled by cynical false promise to legalize marijuana” while you fantasize that Obama is really going to show his true colors if given a second term. Whatever. The only choice on Tuesday is between Republicans, why not check the box that indicates “I enjoy my remaining degree of freedom”?

In the general election, there is more choice. Did you know that there is a Green Tea party? Its members include, and perhaps consist entirely of, Roseanne Barr, candidate for President of the United States and Prime Minister of Israel. She declared on Mother’s Day 2010, with this speech. She declares patriarchal politics obsolete and calls forth Divine Matriarchy, saying that “Patriarchy is impotent, and qualitatively unable to solve even the simplest problems in the Cosmos, such as picking up its own socks, or placing a carton of milk back in the refrigerator after drinking directly out of it.”

Her three-part plan:

1) Outlaw war, including the War on Drugs (legalize cannabis.)

2) More women in government. Government loans to poor women to start businesses.

3) Outlaw bullshit.

Part #3 turns out to involve some enforcement difficulties, but Barr is the tough lady we need to see this program through:

Barr is recognized as a Green Party candidate for President. Her campaign page is available here — as of writing time, there is a bizarre prayer against the warlord Kony splashed across the top, but there are some good essays and news bits farther down.

Back to Ron Paul — the practical person’s protest vote. Many are afraid that, if elected, Paul would allow for abortions to be all but banned and the South to become resegregated. You know what I’m afraid of? Ron Paul would be inaugurated promising great change, but then find it strangely difficult to implement basic executive perogatives, like shutting down Guantanamo Bay prison or calling Justice Department dogs off of the medical marijuana community. I mean, truly, look at the difference between what Obama promised and was able to achieve. Paul himself was politically unable, as a Representative, to cast a principled vote of “Nay” against the pointless, brutal, and illegal invasion of Afghanistan (his staff threatened to quit.) So, what would it matter if he were President? He’d simply become the prisoner-in-chief of a prison nation.

That’s why I favor the more ironical candidates.



  1. Yeah, fine. But I–as a woman–could never, ever vote for an unabashed, unashamed misogynist like Paul. In the first place he’s a freaking Ob Gyn! And you know what the mainstream ObGyn’s are like. He’s also a racist. Yeah, I know Obama is horrid, but that doesn’t drive me to vote for some fuckwad like Paul. Where did I go wrong raising you? I thought you respected women. sigh.

    Comment by estraven — February 25, 2012 @ 5:59 pm

    • May I suggest, for you, “Vermin Supreme” as R for pres? I think that writing him in would accurately reflect your position on Republicans.
      I mangled my explanation for voting Paul a bit. Basically, the media are still reporting his numbers, making him a little more attractive as a protest vote than the truly awesome loser candidates like Barr (so not a Republican) and Supreme. People see the Paul voters as against the empire and police state, so that is all I’m trying to broadcast. Oh, if people think it’s a vote for cannabis, that’s okay too. Remember, it’s about the message, because once inaugurated and in action, any of these candidates will turn to impotent jelly unable to effectively oppose the military-prison-Wall Street octopus.

      Comment by paragardener — February 26, 2012 @ 12:53 am

      • Without putting too fine a point on it, opposing the octopus is my goal in voting. While traditionalist throwbacks oppose even contraceptive use, forward-thinking octopus operatives dream of a future with Chinese-style control of family size, or forced sterilizations for troubled mothers. That stuff is (Goddess I hope) not on the table right now, but let’s concentrate wealth and power and access to information a bit more and see what happens.

        Comment by paragardener — February 26, 2012 @ 2:03 am

  2. I wrote a bit about Roseanne and what she means for the Party here:
    …if anyone cares.

    Comment by kitchenmudge — February 29, 2012 @ 7:05 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at