>>The NY Times is not partisan IMO. It is sometimes portrayed that way by those who don't like unfawning coverage.
>
>Mike, how about yourself? Are you not a 'non partisan', by chance?

This will sound funny to most I'm sure, but I consider myself to be non-partisan. I will explain.

I have equal loathing for both parties depending on the issue at hand. For the most part I find all politicians to be lying, power hungry, elitist know-it-alls who are one step above reality stars on the fame-whore ladder.

Politics has become such an insiders game that one must sell their votes to the highest bidders at all levels to achieve elected status. Even the occasional revolution provides only a small window of opportunity for a disruption in the day-to-day grind before the machine assimilates them into the party fold or spits them out without funding their re-election bid.

Is there any doubt as to why I do not want these people to have any more power than they already exert over us? The process of government has become such a vacuum of thought under a microscope of press that the great leaders among us rarely choose to participate. Instead they choose to pursue a career in the private sector where their lives are not under constant surveillance.

The overwhelming power of the government must be constrained. The very idea of America as a free-market, capitalist, representative republic has been eroded for nearly 100 years with little change in direction and even less chance of retraction. I agree with Obama that the time for change is now, the problem is his idea of change is to continue the process away from our foundation at greater speed.