Process Problems Redux

A commenter to my original post is confused as to how all the issues I raised with respect to the election process are connected. Since I didn’t make the original post painfully obvious for the comprehension impaired, I’ll dumb this down even further. The election code is written in such a fashion to empower and benefit the Republican and Democratic parties. It is not written to benefit voters, candidates, or anyone else but the parties. You, the individual voter, are pretty much irrelevant when the code is written. What is important is maintaining the stranglehold on politics enjoyed by the two major parties. If you follow this concept all the way through to the bitter end, it will belatedly occur to you that any provision that privileges the parties in the process is on a level with all the other provisions that privilege the parties.

So, in our particular instance, the GOP gets to run the selection process for the replacement candidate for CD22. Who does this benefit? The GOP. The GOP can make this process as convoluted, obscure, and secretive as they want and it’s exactly the same as every other section of the election code that gives the parties special treatment when it comes to ballot access. I mean, really, let’s think about ballot access. The state of Texas, in its less than infinite wisdom, automatically grants a place on the ballot to the winners of the party primaries. The state even lends the parties equipment so they can run the primaries. Hell, I worked the primary and my check came from Harris County, so the state is paying for the poll workers. In short, the state is colluding with private organizations to determine who gets on the ballot. If you’re not a member of one of those organizations, the state makes it exponentially more difficult for you to get on the ballot in the fall. How is this process fair and democratic? It’s not, and it’s essentially the same as the process for determining the CD22 candidate. The party will decide who’s going to get to play and is going to try like hell to make life difficult for everybody else.

It’s especially funny to me when the comments on the process come from somebody who claims to be a lifelong Republican, but has no idea what the party executive committees are. Didn’t get real involved in the party, did you, buddy? Casting a ballot twice a year doesn’t make you a member of the party faithful. It makes you no more special than anyone else who votes. You want the party to give a baboon’s behind about you, get more involved in the party. Otherwise, you’re just another one of the people who the party and politicians pay lip service to and ignore once the elections are finished. That may hurt, but it’s the way things are. The people involved in a substantive way with the party are the ones determining the direction of the party, not the random schmucks who just show up and vote.

If you want things to change, you need to do the hard work of making it happen. Figure out a better solution and get it implemented. Whining about the way things are going way too late to affect the process doesn’t really qualify on either count. It might help your argument if you display some idea of what the current process is, though.

Oh, yeah, I almost forgot: fuckity fuck fuck fuckity fuck. This apparently makes my whole argument more juvenile in whatever bizarro-world some people live in. In fact, that makes this post 5 times as juvenile as the original post! Five times the profanity, five time the juvenilia! Who says we can’t do fan service? Yes, we try hard to please at YPS. It’s just that we’re not trying to please you. Keep it in mind next time you feel obligated to comment on my word choice, mmkay? I could make the argument that an inability to look past the word choice to focus on the substance of the argument is a greater sign of intellectual immaturity than using the word fuck. However, that could be construed as petty and not nearly as amusing to me as gratuitous profanity right now. Assweasel! Check back in a day or two and see if pettiness has scored a surprise comeback. In the meantime...



Blogger ACR said...

You didn't seem to comprehend my question when you read it. You stated that anyone who was silent when Kinky (or OTG for that matter) faced barriers to the ballot should not comment on the opaque selection process for TX22.

Presumably, a person who did speak up when Kinky faced barriers to the ballot retains the right to comment on the opaque selection process.

I don't see the logic in your position. When you read my comment, your comprehension led you to believe I wanted you to restate that there are barriers to the ballot. That is inaccurate. I want you to explain why some people retain the right to speak out about the opaque selection process and why others don't.

Yes, I notice that you can ratchet up your juvenile behavior, too. That, along with your poor reading comprehension skills, makes you a less effective writer.

3:56 PM  
Blogger T said...


The point is simple and apparently goes right past you. If you have spent the majority of your life supporting the way the major parties have co-opted the process to their benefit, it's a little bit late to bitch now when it produces a result that makes you unhappy. There is no principled position that I am aware of that can reconcile these two facts. If you have one, articulate it and explain why one means of controlling the ballot is somehow different and more moral than controlling the ballot the other way. There is no fundamental difference in the degree of control the parties try to exert over the process. Yeah, I tend to think all the people that are whining now after a lifetime of supporting the process need to sit down and shut up. The issue is one of ballot access, which is why I commented at length about it. The parties have controlled ballot access so long through a process that seems entirely reasonable to people like you that when the brutal reality of just how much the parties do control hits you in the face, you get mad. If that's the case, you need to think long and hard about your support of the process as it is in all aspects, not just the current candidate selection process.

As far as a right goes, you have the right to do whatever you want. What you don't have is a convincing argument or any real reason that I can see for getting upset.

10:31 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home