Chloe, MW, I loved reading both of your posts. I do agree that Obama must go. I do agree that Romney with the endorsement of other republicans made rules that displayed their intention to be rulers rather than governors. As odd as it may seem, I am on the side of both of you, because I see all of us here as real Americans struggling for what America means and was meant stand for.

Matter of fact, there were people here in America that eventually composed the Constitution that had vehement disagreements, it is what happens in revolutionary times. Eventually consensus of opinion will prevail, and majorities wil find ways to agree on something of principle.

As I posted on another thread this morning, for hundreds of years political parties struggled to become the superior party, now that struggle, because of two dominant parties, that struggle has digressed into desire to be THE PARTY. Consequences of that is that the adage "all politics is local," then is irrelavent.

It is unfortunate that change comes slowly. This immigration fight has been years and years developing. I liken this now to a flood. After the flood has begun we have to wait for the worst to happen before we can repair the damage. It is very evident that neither party, after nearly three decades, that neither party has any desire to curb immigation, legal or illegal. So, we need to overcome that while trying to overcome power brokers in both parties simltaneously. History says that it s not likely at all to happen in one election cycle. I have to accept realism. Thus for our purposes, we may have to watch it become worse (as a flood) while we return concensus of opinion to the common sense of our forefathers. Best we might achieve on immigration is NO AMNESTY on immigration, I pray for that daily.

We must become a democracy again controlled by voters, as the national debt has risen so has costs of running a campaign, on both sides. Ever wonder if that might be related. In terms of big money, big contributors it is significant if not related.

Chloe, I think it is about politics. I have friends that are advocates of either party, a few politicians of both parties show some sense that they are serving the public good. But, they get to Washington and it becomes a pressure cooker of having to serve the party ahead of the public or your re-election is nothing but a dream. Probably taught to both parties by Johnson.

Someone on this thread mentioned rising from the ashes. Because of scars left on many from wounds from either party, prejudices exist. It is America that has to rise from the ashes. A friend of mine, one a dem and one a rep, watched the Tea party develop. Neither the dem or rep was comfortable. We watched the Occupiers develop, neither the dem or the rep was comfortable. Both sides are consumed with self interest, it seemed.

The point made evident to me became that for a new wave to return control of common sense to America then the new wave would have to project little if any relationshhip to either major party. That probably means politicians that have never served under one political banner or the other unless that politcian is near mystical in crowd pleasing. We do not need one of those either, history would indicate that mystical people in politics beome dictaters.

All that said, I do not object to one of the existing parties becoming the new leadership if they will or can. However, because of the aformentioned prejudices, I do not beleive that can be achieved, prejudices will prevent consensus of opinion.

Your responses are anticipated cheerfully.