Is it highly unusual for a President to address *gasp*... Children!?

Ascertaining a subject for the next blog entry, and the Republican's complete inability to pick-and-choose their battles wisely, has weighed heavily on a certain mind for the past two weeks. Then, the always-reliable Punisher shot light bulbs out with a machine gun, and the bullet shells surrounded my feet like a pit full of snakes surrounds a lone hopeless rabbit; the Republican's complete inability to pick-and-choose their battles wisely is the only suitable subject !

President Soetoro's upcoming address to children on September 8th, 2009 is the latest example of the Republican's inability to pick-and-choose their battles wisely. The Republicans' rhetoric suggests that, a President addressing children is highly unusual! Despite the reality that Bush 43, Bill Clinton, Bush 41, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter have all previously addressed children, Soetoro's address is exceptionally unusual. The best part? His address concerns the importance of education.

The alarming concern over suspiciously-worded content by parents in "work sheets" is understandable, and the Department of Education deserves calls. But, to keep children home altogether when one of the most historical (for both good and bad reasons) Presidents in United States history wants to elucidate education's importance is precisely the crime that right-wing Looney tunes are convicting Barry Soetoro and the current administration of: indoctrination and brain-washing.

But, the indoctrination is not the problem. The problem is that President Soetero addressing children is a war the Republicans shouldn't be fighting. Republicans already have enough mountain-size issues with maintaining integrity and a respectable image, and picking this unnecessary, silly and very partisan battle over the President of the United States addressing children on education isn't beneficial to their cause at all. In fact, more people will continue to lose any present and future faith in Republicans, and/or do exactly what a certain former College Republicans chapter President did: leave the party altogether.

Undoubtedly, the irony of a former College Republicans chapter President criticizing and dismissing the inconsistency, behavior and tactics of Republican Party spills quicker than the intestines of an individual slit and ripped open from throat to belly button. But, the seeds of criticism and dismissal were first planted and flourishing months before President Soetoro and Vice President Hair plugs trumped John McCain and the female Republican Soetoro. I publicized my arrant dubiety in his comical and utterly bromidic (Carter and Reagan also pimped "Change") rhetoric during 2008, and continue enunciating my opposition towards his policies, general demeanor and condescending attitude. But, the volume of my disdain and criticism for the Republican Party is increasing.

I resigned as a Republican for two equally important reasons. I am far more interested in consistency, rather than blind partisanship. Consistency is absent in both the Republican and Democrat parties, who sustain a phony "war," and are practically one and the same nowadays. Supporters of the two parties are even worse, as they criticize the opposition for something, and later do the same exact thing they lambasted opponents for! An incident in Salisbury, Maryland is a prime example of the inconsistency. A smiling ass hat of an individual hung an effigy of Frank Kratovil outside of the government building in Salisbury, but has yet to be largely scolded by most of those who share his disdain. The ass hat and those of a like mind were likely the same family values wankers who bitched and complained about the numerous Sarah Palin effigy hangings in 2008. Although I do not endorse hanging effigies of anyone, I am not offended by the hanging of neither Palin nor Kratovil. I am offended, however, by hypocrisy and inconsistency.

The hypocrisy and inconsistency of the Republican Party, coupled with their evident love affair with Democrats (unbeknownst to gullible partisan hacks), is precisely why I consider "libertarian" a far more apt umbrella for my views of the government, the constitution, individual rights and liberty. As a libertarian, I am far more concerned with consistency, principles and liberty than a continuous partisan pissing contest.

libertarian [lib-er-tair-ee-uhn]
–noun

1. Freedom, Liberty, Minimal Government.
2. a person who advocates liberty, especially with regard to thought or conduct.
3. a person who maintains the doctrine of free will
4. Not a conservative or liberal in the modern sense.
5. A former Republican who grew larger balls and decided to say fuck the establishment.

(sources: Dictionary.com, Urban Dictionary)

The importance of consistency is matched only by my pride. I was completely embarrassed with my affiliation to the Republican Party, whose relevancy is currently heading the way of the Whigs and the Federalists. I, logistically and in good faith, was absolutely incapable of justifying the Republicans' asinine strategy, imbecilic rhetoric and inability to pick-and-choose battles throughout the past winter and spring. Moreover, I realized that a lot of my views completely conflict with the religious Right, who has a fascist stranglehold on the party. The continuous blend of religious views and politics is a proven recipe for disaster, fascism and embarrassment. To equate God with one's party, and to assume one possesses the mental, emotional and intellectual capabilities to determine what a Higher Power "wants" and "expects" in the first place is incredibly egotistical and a grand overestimation of one's capabilities as a mere human being. Therefore, to defend such inadequacy, preposterousness and overbearing religious suffocation requires lying through my teeth... and lying to myself.

And falsehood is morality's supreme sin.