self-interest?

I read this:

Kim Gandy of the National Organization for Women called McCain's choosing Palin "a cynical effort to appeal to disappointed Hillary Clinton voters and get them to vote, ultimately, against their own self-interest."

I want to make this perfectly clear: Kim Gandy does not know what is in my best interest. If she did, National Organization for Women wouldn't be this pathetic weren't-you-someone-in-nineteen-seventy-something? sort of organization, would it? It would be strong, and we would have had a woman in the White House years ago.

Update your reality, Kim. (And all you other Democrats out there sneering because the dumb voters aren't acting according to their own self-interest.)

I do not need anyone's condescending chivalry. What I do need is access to accurate information. This is the real key to social class in America today. Without access to reliable information, nobody can make good choices*.

So if all these "concerned" liberals care about fixing the world so much, why don't we start with the flow of information we've got (or not got) going in this country**?

I am getting tired of people like NOW, the liberals, and the Democratic party talking down to me, on their misguided assumption that I am a stupid, ignorant child who doesn't know what's good for me and I won't eat my spinach because I'm just a brat.

The fact is, those groups haven't been delivering anything I can use.

Oh, sure, if all their rhetoric magically came true, that would be good. If Hillary had won, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. People actually trust Hillary (which is why her voters are so largely non-transferable: there is an inherent problem in trying to force a woman to make her voters trust the one who stole the election from her.)

But the party is not dedicated to making Hillary's vision come true, are they? They are dedicated to eradicating and destroying that vision. (And the latest form of coercion is to beat Hillary up every time her followers refuse to vote for her battering scumbag ex-boyfriend, the Democratic Party***)

But not all Democrats are self-serving. Some are just incompetent. Even if they intended to deliver all that stuff they talk about, they can't. It's not safe to trust them to get anything done. They don't seem to know how.

In short, it is the Democratic party that needs a little lesson in self-interest.

So if anyone out there knows anyone from NOW or the Democratic party or any of those other liberal groups, pass this on: if those guys ever get tired of their dropping membership and all those empty chairs at their meetings, we can tell 'em what they are doing wrong.

Like why women don't want to be associated with the word 'feminist'. Or why working class people prefer the openly pro-rich Republican party to the Democrats.

From now on, if what is on offer isn't based on the assumption of equality - that we are all capable of knowing what we want and we are all qualified to make our own choices about how best to get what we want - then I'm not buying whatever it is that is being sold.

Oh, and by the way, it is the absence of trust (not stupidity) that is making people revert to more primitive rules of behavior.
_______________________________________
* Some people are born into well-connected networks which route them into the schools (like the ones Obama and his wife attended) which feed into the best universities. Others don't have that access. This is how social classes are formed in today's America. It is the antithesis of merit, because questions like whether or not you get into the right kindergarten (which is determined by interview and letters of recommendation, and of course whether you have thirty grand a year) can play a determining role in your fate.

But most Americans don't seriously mind their social status. I don't. I am content with being what I am - I don't aspire to be a world leader and neither does anyone else I know. What we do want is to know that those in charge will govern reasonably well, so that hard-working Americans are allowed to live in reasonable security (as opposed to sweatshops and dust bowls) and Gilded Age greed doesn't cause the entire global structure to collapse into a new dark ages (political), a new Great Depression (economic) or total oblivion (environmental). Is that really so much to ask?

**How about a newspaper that we could really trust? You build it - we'll come. We really will.

*** hey, if she's "the psycho ex-girlfriend of the party", that means the party is the ex-boyfriend. No?

Great use of language there, eh? Now the Democrats can try to explain why anyone would want to vote for the rhetorical monster they've created.

Oh, and don't think *I* am getting over this any time soon. That psycho ex-girlfriend crap? That didn't do much to establish trust.