Why Ordinary People Vote Republican and Extreme party Lines

By Cheri, The Non-PC News Girl

Let's face it, Republicans in our time are the party for those people who have money. They are the wall-street party. They are the haves. They're not for those who have some savings in the bank or even for those who barely make six-figures. They are for those who make several six figures, millionaires and beyond.

The GOP's (grand old party) core aim is to maintain an outdated social status of those who were born into wealth and for everyone else to fend for themselves. They are the party of the haves, and they don't care for the have-nots. 

Strong-armed by use of money, the GOP are against spending programs that assist the low-income, sick and old, like social security and Medicare; unemployment and retirement benefits; and healthcare. It's ironic considering it was the party of Abraham Lincoln who, as we all know, was on the side of the down-trodden during the civil war. (Is he still turning in his grave?)

They are for tax cuts for the wealthy (despite that they are proven to pay less tax than a middle-class earner--the few that are left); for separatism; secret societies; and ensuring the existence of the military industrial complex (please see my article to come about the MIC). 

So why then do ordinary people without bank vote Republican? I live in Florida where 17% of the population is elderly and live off social security, and yet many vote Republican. It's a red, Republican state. Why would they when if the people they vote for had it their way, they'd take away their livelihood and sustenance? Why do so many people who get food stamps, disability or unemployment turn to the right?

There are two key reasons: religion and abortion. Each election, the Grand Old Party pull out their abortion card and pick the religious strings of Christians. America is, whether we like it or not, a Christian nation and many people have strong views against abortion. We hear election after election how they will overturn Roe v Wade. It's a hot topic, and one that gets them elected over and again. This is despite the fact that nothing is ever done about it once they are elected.

Other items on the Republican ticket are geared to those who are conservative and family-oriented, and those on the hard right who believe homosexuality is wrong and other antiquated beliefs. For people who have similar beliefs, regardless of their income, they are sucked in, as if the left do not have family values. And while they are entitled to their views, bigotry does cross party lines.

The way I see it, the people who make up the Republican party have successfully pulled the wool over the eyes of their slaves--we the people. They supervise us and we do all the work for them, and yet many of us have been brainwashed into believing they are our equals. (Like abused kids believing mommy and daddy really does care about them.)

I'm not saying the Democrats are all that different, but at least that party tries or makes the appearance to help people. (Emphasis on tries.) This, however, as of the last congressional and presidential elections, has become more questionable. As an Independent voter, I look at the Democrats as a caricature of itself to the far, far left. Like the Republican party, this party is too extreme in its views, voting and conditions. The middle, more common ground politicians are harder and harder to come by.

As an Independent, I believe the majority of politicians, regardless of party line, come from money and represent their backers when in office. They are disconnected from the common person. Both sides are paid off and both sides have put the country in debt. I personally vote split-ticket and am not for either party, but I am against Republicans more often.

When you think about it, there is often some type of political crisis manufactured by Republican greed that is hidden under the umbrella of economic hardship to the country. In 2013, it was shutting the government down because they didn't get their way on healthcare, like whiney brats throwing a tantrum. They used the "economic-harm-to-the-country" excuse as a political tool and allowed the Tea Party--a very small group of wealthy people--to take control of our country.

Even now that the shutdown is over and the Republicans finally yelled uncle, the country only goes back to its normal dysfunction. And hovering close by is the issue of paying our debts and the restructuring of "Obamacare." Are we in fear of another tantrum if they don't get their way? (It really comes down to this?)

We cannot continue to just forgive and forget. They hold our country hostage, and the damage they cause slowly trickles down in the weeks and months after a "perceived crisis." Already, Standards and Poors estimates government squabbles has cost our economy $24 billion (in 2015), and as it stands, an estimated 800,000 to a 1 million jobs lost in the past few years alone.

More so, people who are not wealthy need to wake up when it comes to voting Republican. They do not care about you! They are more concerned about not having towels in their publicly-paid-for gyms that the people pay for and how many jets they own than the lack of middle-class jobs, our industry that has moved to china so we all buy cheaper and cheaply made products and the dying out of the American dream for everyone. In short, greed comes first.

There are some Republicans who are on the fringe of the right--like a thumb closest to the left hand--that care, but they tend to do what the pinky wants. And what it wants is what's best for wall-street and corporations. Now we have a wall-street president--insane!

What would happen if Republicans ultimately got their way? If you were laid-off and weren't given help with unemployment, housing and food? Would you like to live in a shacktown or homeless encampment like people did during the Great Depression? If you got sick, had no health insurance and couldn't afford the outrageous hospital fees, would you need to just go home and die? (I suppose as long as you did it away from them it would be okay.)

To them, there should be no help with housing! No help with food! No help with education! No help with healthcare! You need to work for what you have and if you can't for whatever reason, such as no jobs, well it's not your problem. This is a capitalistic society and those are not socialist values. ("That's just the way it is, sorry," says the Republican wiping his sweat with the towel you paid for.)

Are these really the people you want representing you?

Write true, write ethical and write right.

Let's Get High; The Feds Say It's OK (Updated)

Updated: I first wrote this article in 2013 (nearly 10 years after California first began to legalize the use of cannabis for medicinal use) regarding the decision of the U.S. Justice Department to not go after states that are using marijuana for both medicinal and recreational use. Since, much has changed in those states that have legalized its use and have become a testing ground for the nation.

By Cheri, The Non-PC News Girl

For more than decade, there has been a strong push by several progressive states to legalize marijuana, beginning in California around 2005 for the legalization of cannabis for medicinal use. Afterward, in 2012, Colorado lead the way for the legalization for cannabis for recreational use, soon followed by Washington State and others. 

As states continue to adapt the legalization of cannabis for either medicinal use or recreational use and both, a multi-billion dollar industry has grown and states have been raking in hefty tax benefits. States on the verge of bankruptcy (like California) have been generating incredible tax revenues from its sale alone, and there have been large increases in the number of people moving to these states. 

Affects caused by the legalization of marijuana in these states are beginning to show, from a larger use of cannabis and other drugs to increased housing prices and to a higher overall cost-of-living. In Colorado, for instance, after both medicinal and recreational marijuana use became legal in 2012, the population exploded by 101,000 people in a 12-month period from July 2013 to July 2014, according to an article by Aldo Svaldi, a writer for The Denver Post. That's an increase of 1.89%, which doubled the national 0.79% average in that time period. 

The state estimates it will continue to see the same population increase again in 2015 to 2016, although data is not yet out to verify this. This increase was much larger than what was expected by the state's demographers and is the first time these numbers have increased so dramatically since the "tech boom" at the turn of the millennium. 


With these incredible profits booming and more ways in which to use cannabis such as in textiles, rope and paper on the way, there is no end in site to what money can be made by the sale and use of marijuana. As more states join in the legalization of marijuana medicinally, state tax gains continue to grow while the impact on the overall cost-of-living in these states increase, and not always for the better. 

For those not involved in the production, sale or use of cannabis, they find it more difficult to get jobs and find affordable housing, and housing itself is in demand. Tent cities and homelessness, largely by people coming into large cities like Denver expecting to find work and affordable housing with the lure of being able to use marijuana legally, but instead finding a lack has caused some to become homeless. 

"I grew up in Brooklyn New York and I'm used to the smell of urine in public areas such as the subway," said one woman, "but during a recent visit to Denver, I was overwhelmed by its smell and shocked by the number of homeless and tent cities. I can think of no other reason for this than the legalization of pot."

Marijuana was classified as a type one substance in 1970 during the Nixon administration at the beginning of the "war on drugs." A type one substance is extremely harmful and carries with it harsh penalties. While those laws have become less stringent, it's still in effect today on a federal level, even as more states legalize the drug. 

Thus far, the feds involvement with states legalizing pot, weed, blunts, grass, Mary Jane, bud, ganja, dope, cannabis, skunk, chronic, green, hash, herb or whatever name it goes by has been to allow the states to oversee its enforcement. In Colorado, people 21 years of age and older are allowed to use pot for recreational use, and therefore there is the need to enforce it for those under that age, for example. Yet recent studies show that since its legalization in Colorado, people 12 and older have increased their consumption of the drug at a higher than average rate, with a larger increase of those smoking pot monthly going to daily use. 

When legalization began, California, Washington and Colorado passed state laws allowing for medicinal use of this all-natural substance that is known to help stop nausea, help decrease some forms of pain, prevent epileptic attacks and with many other conditions. However, getting the drug for medicinal purposes had become almost a joke with script doctors and cannabis shops popping up and raking in cash for anyone complaining of a back ache, much like the pill-mills in Florida. To stop this and essentially cut to the chase, allowing for recreational use takes out the middleman--the cannabis-mill doctors--and opens the market to making even more money and the states to garner even more taxes.

The only real holdback has been federal law that prohibits and criminalizes the possession of it. And while for now, the the U.S. Justice Department said it won't challenge state laws that not only legalize pot for medicinal purposes, but for recreational use as well will instead focus its enforcement on serious trafficking cases and child possession. However, there is still the open threat of the feds enforcing national law against all possession of marijuana.

Furthermore, as of 2013 when then U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder told the governors of Colorado and Washington that his department, for now, will not overturn state laws that has legalized recreational use of pot, the feds have held to that as of July 2017. (Whoopee! Fireworks!)

My opinion:

I see there are downfalls associated with legalizing weed, such as cost-of-living increases and housing shortages with higher costs for homes in states that allow for recreational use. I can see that these issues may become a catalyst for the feds to step in and regulate if not abolish the states' legalization of the drug if these states don't turn the situation around. Aware of these issues, Colorado, for instance, is already making efforts to shore up these problems with housing expansion that is more affordable, the creation of job growth through housing expansion and by providing incentives for companies to relocate to the state.

I see the country looking to Denver, CO as the proving ground that medical and recreational cannabis use can be good for the state and the people in the state who both have ties and have no ties to the industry. 

Because of the benefits this drug has for people who truly have conditions that it helps with, I believe we as society need to ensure that it remains available for that purpose. And in regard to its recreational use, I am somewhat tossed. I see the direct influence pot has as a gateway drug (let's not fool ourselves by saying this is not true since those of us who have used it growing up know it is and current studies show this). 

However, most people who get high on pot become calm and chill out. They don't become aggressive like those who drink too much and who use stimulants. And the same laws that apply to drinking and driving; prescription pills and driving; and sleeping and driving also apply to pot and driving. 

I also believe it will ultimately prove to have more benefits beyond what it's already known for as experiments and pubic studies are already showing. It is also a start to what I believe should come next in our society with regard to illegal activity--quartered-off zones for drugs and prostitution. 

By the feds turning a blind-eye to it, it also begs the question of what will come next? What will be the next substance that people will fight to legalize? Poppy flowers or coca leaves, for instance, since each are natural and each has medicinal uses. Arguments for the acceptance of their use in their natural form include use for pain, as certain poppy flowers have been used to treat for 1,000s of years, and for fatigue, sleepiness and alertness as coca leaves have been used for--naturally (in their natural unadulterated form).

Finally, this is also a great sign that the government is backing off control over us, our every move, even if just a little. I never thought I'd see it, and I'm sure glad I am--for now...  

Write true, write ethical and write fair.