Republicrats and Demicans, it's all a one-party system...

I've read a few political posts on here again, and this put me back in my usual politics-minded zone.  So, I'll try to explain what is wrong with America and why Obama is ruining the country even more; keep in mind, this is from the point of view of an outsider, and thus, in my non-humble opinion, a neutral observer.  

The otherwise repulsive character, Dolores Umbridge, said a few lines in "Order of the Phoenix" that fit politics perfectly.  "Without progress there will be stagnation and decay. Then again, progress for progress’s sake must be discouraged, for our tried and tested traditions often require no tinkering. A balance, then, between old and new, between permanence and change, between tradition and innovation, because some changes will be for the better, while others come, in the fullness of time, to be recognized as errors of judgment. Meanwhile, some old habits will be retained, and rightly so, whereas others, outmoded and outworn, must be abandoned. Let us move forward, then, into a new era of openness, effectiveness, and accountability, intent on preserving what ought to be preserved, perfecting what needs to be perfected, and pruning wherever we find practices that ought to be prohibited."

Some of these practices that ought to be pruned are... well... the primary bones of contention between Democrats and Republicans, especially in the cultural/social arena.  First off, gay marriage.  I am against any and all discrimination.  However, marriage is an ancient institution, and before this century, each marriage consisted of precisely one man and one or more women.  I feel that the benefits available to married couples should also be available to homosexual couples.  However, the means of bringing about such benefits in the context of a long-term committed relationship should be recognisably different for married and homosexual couples.  The term "marriage" and the centuries-old traditions existing within this ceremony should not be used.  How about the term "conjugal union", or something else?  Just not the M-word.  That's a special word, and a special ceremony.  Let's keep it that way.

Contraception.  How could this even be a bone of contention?  Insurance plans should cover family planning (abortion is NOT family planning, it's Plan C).  No exceptions—the Democrats have this one right.   "Contraception is ... not okay. It's a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.  [Sex] is supposed to be within marriage... for purposes that are ... procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen…This is special and it needs to be seen as special."  So now Rick the Dick is telling Americans what they should THINK about sex... Wittle Wicky, do you bewieve that wife begins at ewection, too?  Abortion.  No electives.  For situations likely to cause medical or psychiatric harm to mother, father, or child; also for conception arising as a result of sexual assault.  Republicans have it right.  Abstinence-only sex ed.  How could this even be a problem?  People have a right to know about their bodies.  Comprehensive sexual education must be mandatory.  Democrats get this one.

The worst problem Democrats have is this damn idea of handouts.  Many wealthy people are wealthy because they have worked hard and attained success.  If this motivator is removed by the Powers that Be in the form of taxes, this will mean that America will lose the one thing guaranteed to put smart, potentially successful people on the right track—money.  Would be terrible to see modern-day Newtons and Hawkings and Torvalds and Murdochs wasting their life away in back alleys drinking wine coolers and smoking dagga.  My biggest problem, aside from the individual mandate of Obamacare, which is a PENALTY and not a TAX, (nothing against Obamacare, just hate the Individual mandate) is unemployment insurance.  Get this: a drug-dependent individual, unemployABLE, is paid insurance for the unemployED.  Even worse: underage female of low income status and low education is impregnated, disowned, and ends up single, possibly also dependent on drugs, and living alone.  Every additional rugape she brings into the world is worth money to her, so she ends up nothing but a brat-bearing machine, while the intelligent yuppie couple on the other side of town have one intelligent child.  The one smart kid will bear another smart kid, while each of the stupid brats will hook up with an equally stupid partner and bear five or six stupid children.  I mean, the basic concept of unemployment assistance is sound—but drug tests should be introduced and subsidies for children eliminated.