Jeff Messer is the host of a daily radio talk show on Asheville’s WPEK (880-AM, The Revolution) that airs from 3 to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. This column features posts from his daily blog.

•

The following was posted on June 11:

Back in early 2004, I had a conversation with a relative, as we looked ahead to the election. No one (at least not anyone with a passion for seeing some actual change happen) was excited about W part 2, and no one was excited about the Dem’s paler shade of pale, John Kerry.

After the election, and a few years later, I had another chat with the same person, looking ahead. W was declining fast, and everyone knew that 2008 was a chance to try and fix the epic mess and failures.

Growing tired of the same old game of the two party duopoly, I declared that it was high time there be a third party, AND a fourth party.

You can say you support the GOP because they are strong on defense. But look at 9/11 and the aftermath that played right into Bin Laden’s wildest dreams. You can say you like them because they are SO Christian, yet they clearly worship at the alter of money (which is somewhat called into question in the Bible). You can say that they are fiscally responsible, and that’s why you like them so much, but then again, they’ve been over-spending and massively wasteful for over 3 decades.

Hint: the Republican Party isn’t your party anymore if you believe in those things.

The Democrats are no dream either. They sell out to big business because they have to in order to have a fighting chance against he GOP. They claim to be all about defending peoples rights, but more often run from those fights or heavily compromise. They are weak. And most of them have spines weaker than gummy bears.

There are outliers in both parties, however. Ron Paul was always on the fringe of the GOP, and never fit in. Allan Grayson is legitimately left-wing radical, but the Dems often cross the street of politics to avoid being seen with him.

The duopoly has lead to making it impossible for a third party to be viable. The GOP and Dems are in a game of mutual benefit. They start with the football on the 50 yard line, toss the coin, then the winner of said coin toss move the ball a handful of yards in 3 downs, and punt. Where upon the other side runs it back to the 50-yard line, and proceed to move the ball a few yards, before also punting, where upon the other team runs it back to the 50, and the process repeats. And they call that progress.

The last thing these status quo do nothing establishmenteers want is some lunatic dropping back and sending a hail Mary pass to the end zone. God forbid they even try.

So, Rand Paul scares the right. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren scare the left. Why? Because they would actually try to score. And that’s counter productive to the needs of the standard-bearers of the two party system.

The Dems and the GOP learned back in 1992 with Ross Perot. And after he came that close to upsetting the balance, they made sure something like that could never happen again.

Bernie Sanders had to drop his Independent I to run as a Democrat, because the ability of a 3rd party candidate to make headway, and even get on all 50 state’s ballots is non-existent now days. To change the game, he’s having to play the game.

Rand Paul as well, to some extent. But he was already in the GOP. Though after his Patriot Act grandstanding, they are working hard to destroy him. His Libertarian streak is hurting his chance with the King makers of his party, who simply want Bush, and they’ll take Walker if Bush doesn’t pan out. They may let you think Cruz, Fiorina, Paul, Rubio, etc have a chance, but they are leading you on.

After Paul got destroyed by his own party in the past few weeks, I was taken back to that conversation a decade ago where I pointed out that the best way to fix things would be for the GOP to be broken up into two parties, followed by the same for the Democrats. The Tea Party uprising has only helped solidify this notion in my mind. It is now clear that the GOP are at least two parties feuding from within.

And Bernie Sanders insertion into the Democrat conversation shows that the same exists on the left.

So, what if Rand Paul walked away from the GOP and took his Tea time pals with him? It would be a crushing blow to the GOP, who need those ill-informed voters to help tip the scales ever so slightly.

But what if, in the aftermath of a Rand Paul walk out of the GOP, Bernie Sanders did the same on the left? Thus setting up a four way race for the White House in 2016?

Bush, Clinton, Paul and Sanders. All on the same debate stage. Leveling the playing field, and making the “establishment” have to work hard to just stay in it. And, no one would be able to count on aiming for the 50 percent-plus-one approach. They would have to fight and earn every vote.

And we the people would have a more honest debate, and a more honest representation of how the public thinks and feels about them.

Are they ready for that kind of honesty? Probably not.

Are we? I should hope so, but we’re a pretty lazy electorate.

Just one major election with a four party race and debate could and would forever alter the political process in America. If, and only if, we get behind it.

It would be well worth it, just to take a wrecking ball to the GOP and Democrats and the death grip they have on the process. We’re not going to be able to move forward or save this country if things stay the same.

Think about that.

The following was posted on June 23:

Reflections on Charleston and the last shots  of the Confederacy

 The governor of South Carolina said she wanted the Confederate flag to come down from the state capital grounds.

She had to sound reasonable, and appease those who will possibly freak out over such an affront to the lost Civil War they, nor anyone they have ever actual met, fought in.

All in all, she managed to deliver as perfect a speech as could be crafted to deal with both sides of the issue. However, it now has to get a 2/3 vote in the state legislature. So, far from done.

Is this massacre in a Black AME Church in Charleston, going to be the final shots of the Civil War. Finally?

And, why are we not asking exactly why it too THIS, and THIS LONG to get it done?

Why are politicians who spent years finding ways to support keeping it waving, now moving fast to take it down?

No one changes view that quickly. Not over a matter of less than a week. Disingenuous much?

2015 is a banner year for forcing the backward looking, and living people of ignorant America, to finally move forward with the rest of the civilized world.

We’re taking steps closer to recognizing same sex couples as equal in marriage.

The pope is making it official Catholic teaching that climate change must be addressed.

Health care for all in America may be inching closer, out of the chaos of the ObamaCare roll outs.

And when you look at that stuff, and see how shockingly fast-moving it has been in the past year or so, it doesn’t make the massive crowds who are cheering on Bernie Sanders (without being paid $50 to be there) seem so strange now, does it?

And the mainstream media are endlessly fumbling it all. Not sure which way to turn, and ragingly paranoid about what all their advertisers will think should they give Bernie too much air time, or spend too much time talking about how great the Pope is between Koch commercials.

We’ve seen them saying — with a straight face — that they are awed and curious about why there are not riots in Charleston after the massacre.

Answer: Roof was a racist. He was not a Cop! Or a racist cop.

Can the media be that stupid?

Also, the idiocy of debating, not the Confederate flag itself flying, but only that it was not lowered to half mast.

And this is how most people get their “news.”

As well, they just had no way of processing the level of power of forgiveness we saw coming from the families of the victims. I know I had a hard time with it, and we spent much time last Friday sharing thoughts on air about it.

All, in all, the take away I have is that we’re all better, smarter and more capable of dealing rationally with such matters than ANY of those who are elected to “represent” us, as well as the banal talking heads of the media who are pretending to be giving us “news.”

Is this a massive shift in our nation, and world?

Could be. I hope so. But you won’t hear it from anyone in charge or the decisions or the information.

The following was posted on June 19:

Terrorism v. media depiction of Charleston Massacre?  

Funny how so many on the right wing want to term the Charleston Church Massacre and Domestic terrorism hate crime as anything but those things.

Maybe it is their paranoid fear that when some white dude goes bonkers with a gun, and it is termed appropriately, that will lead to their gun rights being infringed upon.

First, I am here to say that those who think that their law-abiding status as gun owners is ever in any jeopardy: they are misinformed and buying the hate being sold by a group of opportunists who are happily working levers of power.

And to that point, I would like to add that I am not anti-gun. I’m anti-idiot, and by extension I’m anti-idiot with a gun. And in being such, I get it that there are many who benefit from idiots with guns carrying out evils such as we’ve just seen.

But let’s at least be honest about what this all is. It is Domestic Terroism.

And here’s the official legal definition:

18 USC Section 2331

 “Domestic Terrorism”

 A. Involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State.

 B. Appear intended to intimidate, influence, or affect the construct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

 C. Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the US.

Sure sounds like it fits the legal description, doesn’t it?