The downside of parasite politics

[HydrogenBond]

I sort of inventing a new term, political parasite, to describe the situation where a contrary approach is used primarily for the sake of political advantage. For example, in a two party system, if one of the parties come up with an idea, good or bad, if the other party goes along, it makes them "look", like they are the follower. The one with the idea "looks" like the leader. To avoid this "weak looking" appearance, the opposition takes a contrary position. It doesn't matter if this contrary position is right or wrong, simply taking it it will create the "illusion" of being a leader instead of a follower.

 

President Bush, for right or wrong, shows leadership in that he is not afraid to take the initiative. But by doing so, he has become the ideal host for political parasites. It doesn't matter his position, the political parasites will do the opposite to create the illusion of leadership. Without a host the political parasites have no real life of their own.

 

This has created a problem with respect to Iraqi policy. If Bush wants troops in Iraq, the political parasite will say no troops in Iraq. If the Bush wants to help form a new democracy, the political parasite says let them so their own thing. If Bush wants to treat terrorists as soldiers, the poliitcal parasite says, they must be treated like civilians, etc. If it is good against evil, with US goodm then the political parasite must assume thagt US must be evil.

 

What this political game has done, is perpetuate and strengthen the opposition within Iraq. I don't think the terrorists know this is a game, but assume they are in alliance with the political parasites, since they appear to have the same philosophy. The terrorists are also parasites and need a host country to occupy before they can come to life.

 

The media is another version of the political parasite. They have little life of their own, i.e.. sterile imaginations. They need a host before they can pretend to come to life. Once the host creates a position, they use this as food so they can create the illusion of leadership.

[Freddy]

Yes, blame the Democrats for Bush's problems in Iraq. We have been in country almost 4 years and just now Bush admits mistakes have been made. With 3,000 US soldiers KIA and a trillion dollars later I do not feel safer because the bulk of my country's army is in Iraq. Bush should have finished the job in Afghanistan and fought the global war on terror by focusing on al-Qaeda/bin Laden and not on Saddam and Iraq. That is what those who are opposed to Bush and his war have been saying for almost 4 years. If Bush had a correct strategy and was showing leadership the American people would be supporting Bush. Over 60% are against this war in Iraq.

[LaurieAG]

I sort of inventing a new term, political parasite, to describe the situation where a contrary approach is used primarily for the sake of political advantage.

 

HydrogenBond, are you talking about the war on drugs? Afghanistan now produces 6,000 tons of opium and supplies 90% of the worlds heroin. If you control the supply you control the addicts.