Let it Burn

Well the two democratic candidates met and battled last night. Say what you want about who won or lost or how badly. The fact of the matter is that this debate would never have even happened if it were not for Rush Limbaugh's 'Operation Chaos'.

For those not up-to-date on political goings on, since the apparent conclusion of the Republican nomination process, Rush Limbaugh has been urging his listeners to register as Democrats and vote in that primary. The intent is to bolster Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign against the then Senator Obama-mania juggernaut.

The plan has been an apparent success. Sen. Clinton is still 'alive' in the primary and each week a new skeleton comes dancing out of Sen. Obama's closet. (aside: No one has this many kooks and thugs as friends unless they share the sentiments.) This would not be happening if the Clinton war machine was not in the fight. Be honest folks, the Clintons have a dirty tricks task force that makes Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon look like cubscouts (and Hillary ran this 'plumbers unit' when Bill was in office).

At the same time, Sen. Clinton is spinning herself into oblivion as well. Who recalls running from sniper fire when it has never happened? Ok, if she had often landed under sniper fire and this was one of the few times she hadn't I'd understand. Any takers on that bet? On the other hand, it gave Dick Cheney fodder for a good joke.

The results of Operation Chaos are surely paying off for Mr. Limbaugh. But is it a good tactic? Take your pick -- good can be defined as effective or as right. On the measure of effective -- duh. Whether or not it is right -- I would say no. I firmly believe that a party primary should always be a closed affair. The primary is where the party choses who will represent it in the general election. Thus, only party members should be allowed to vote in the primary.

However, Rush may be taking the 'two wrongs make a right' approach here. You see, Democrats have been messing with the Republican primary for quite some time. In fact, this cycle the Democrats where successful. How else do you explain the fact that the Republican nominee is a man whose policy positions (until the past two months) are more liberal than most Republican voters?

Frankly, I'm getting tired of the whole mess. I'd love to say "A pox on both your houses" and find a real third party. Unfortunately we don't really have one. The Libertarians tried to run there guy in the Republican primary (Ron Paul). The Green Party is marginalized, but at least their candidate and members have the cajones to stand up for their beliefs rather than vote for a more 'viable' candidate. (You know what defines a 'viable' candidate -- someone people vote for!!!)

For some time, both parties have been pursuing a 'big tent' strategy -- telling everyone "Oh, we're for you." If you try to please everyone, you wind up please no one and accomplishing nothing. I for one think the American political process would be a lot healthier if we had 4 or 5 parties that stand up for their policy positions. This doesn't mean they never compromise, just that they don't sell out a set of stated core values. Until then, the Democrat's are tearing their house apart. I say let it burn.