Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Obama Wins a Second Term: Now What?


By Ron Holland.

[My yellow highlights--RW]

I'm certainly glad the election is finally over. While I have loved politics my entire life, this presidential election has gone on for over three years, including the GOP primaries, and I've had my fill of meaningless slogans and counter-slogans, lies and counter-lies. I had to quit watching political news the last few weeks, as I thought I would become physically sick if I watched any more establishment political "experts" give their required opinions and propaganda bites.

The 2012 presidential election has been like a ballgame hyped and built up over three years. We are programed to cheer and act out our sheep-like roles in partisan politics when, like the game, unless we have money bet on the outcome the actual winner will have absolutely no impact on our lives.

This was destined to be a close, statistically tied election, as get out the vote efforts included repetitive harping on its life-changing importance and the evils of the opposition candidates and party. The bottom line is that voting percentages generate credibility for the failed American political system.

"There's not a dime's worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican parties." George Wallace, 1966 Alabama governor and presidential candidate.

Note it now takes 71 cents to equal the purchasing power of a dime in 1966 – if you believe the false inflation statistics out of Washington. Actually, I could buy a soft drink for a dime in 1966 whereas today it is closer to $1.50. Check house prices even with the pullback or college tuition if you want an accurate inflation estimate.

It is reasonable to expect from Obama's second term more of the same as the first four years. The two main US political parties promote nearly identical policies; nothing will change from earlier Bush and Clinton administration policies. Of course, there will be a burst of optimism from Democrats and the usual rallying cries for everybody to come together to meet the challenges of the moment. This is just the usual garbage fed to the voting public after every presidential election.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but both presidents and the representatives we reelect to Congress only represent the powerful banking and economic interests that control the federal government and use it to further their power elite agenda. Real, productive citizens can only look to their government representatives to solve minor bureaucratic issues on lost checks, eligibility for this program or that or to listen only to their complaints and agenda.

In reality, the Senate and House of Representatives by necessity – except in the case of those few with actual philosophical convictions on the right or the left – only represent and govern based on the financial handouts and doors opened by powerful interests. This is the only way they can be reelected.

Why Romney Lost

Romney lost for two main reasons: First, as he correctly noted during the campaign, 47 percent of American families are dependent on government handouts and they voted for what was in their own best interests. Democracy is mob rule and the 47 percent, although with the best of intentions, are still only a mob out to get what they can from others who have earned or produced the wealth in the private sector.

"There are 47 percent who are with [Obama], who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it." – Mitt Romney

Still, there is a positive outcome with this depressing statistic. First, many government employees and those on the dole understand the problems of bureaucracy far better than Americans in the private sector because they are caught in the government trap themselves. They often have the courage to even vote against their best interests because they see what it has done to them personally.

Every TSA agent and government employee in non-essential services outside of the armed forces, real police and fire protection and real teachers – not the hundreds of thousands of unionized, make-work employees who use the system – are simply parasites.

Second, the GOP leadership antagonized the 10 percent of the Republican Party electorate who supported Ron Paul for President. Of course, the establishment is still deathly scared of the Ron Paul movement and their harsh treatment and the subsequent blowback on November 6 guarantees any discussion here will be verboten and seldom mentioned for obvious reasons. While some voted for Romney, a few – as the returns show – voted third-party and many like me just sat home on election day disgusted at the entire political charade. Romney lost because he needed a majority of this 10 percent to win yet those controlling his campaign simply threw this voting block away because it threatened powerful central banking, neocon and moneyed interests supporting the GOP.

While Romney would have made a better president than Obama in at least his rhetoric, as he pays lip service to conservative Republican values, in reality his neocon controllers would probably have made him a disaster in foreign policy.

And so over the next four years the people will be provoked and buy more guns they will never have the courage to use to defend themselves against an all-powerful government. The GOP will raise more money using faux social issues and an agenda they never really have any interest in standing up for. Obama will be painted as an evil, Muslim-born in God-knows-where socialist when in actuality he has no more power than Romney would have had to restore the America we loved and respected.

The game will go on until the time is up for our nation. In the meantime, austerity measures will dramatically increase, benefits and promises will be lost by the poor and remaining middle class citizens who really need them and taxes will rise, as will the risk of gold and wealth confiscation. Obama will be blamed, just as Romney would have been blamed had he been elected president, for this is how our regulatory/debt democracy works today in the 21st century. A failed system of central bank control leading a failed economy, a failing currency and a controlled system totally divorced from control or limitation by the citizens of America.

The Solution is to Change the Political Structure

The solution is a return to a limited, decentralized confederation form of government like our first legitimate American government, the Articles of Confederation. One that is responsible to the people and ultimately controlled by the voters with the iron-clad political tools of initiative and referendum like exists in Switzerland today, where voters have the right to reject legislation and laws or enact laws outside the power of controlled legislative, judiciary and executive branches of government. Until we return to the Articles of Confederation, America and our liberties are doomed to extinction by the hidden control of international banking and economic elites.

After the election you can expect appeals from "so-called" conservatives or libertarians wanting your hard-earned money to support this or that cause. They will claim time is running out, the next election is the most important in your lifetime, etc. Time is not running out; it ran out long ago, and voting for either party or most candidates is just an exercise in futility supporting the corrupt system that rules over you. We are serfs and mere subjects to a system and few understand or even recognize the control over us.

Read the rest here.

5 comments:

  1. "The solution is a return to a limited, decentralized confederation form of government like our first legitimate American government, the Articles of Confederation. One that is responsible to the people and ultimately controlled by the voters with the iron-clad political tools of initiative and referendum like exists in Switzerland today, where voters have the right to reject legislation and laws or enact laws outside the power of controlled legislative, judiciary and executive branches of government."

    That doesn't exactly jive with RW's quote from Ayn Rand a week ago: "Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Perhaps your Get Out Of Voting efforts were successful, Robert. Voter turnout was way down, below 2004 in most states.

    http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/11/07/significant-drop-in-voter-turnout-down-as-much-as-14-percent-in-some-states/

    Is Obama the first president to get re-elected with less votes than he got the first time around?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The solution is to split up the U.S. into new separate areas with free ability for self-determination(a clean slate). My bet is you could give free market types some of the least desireable real estate and in a decade they would make it the place to be due to no or low taxes, scant regulation, scant govt. Of course then the
    statist areas remaining would find a reason to co-opt or attack it. And over time the new place would wind up being taken over by progressive statists, who like roaches seem to find their way most everywhere that is free, and works well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. While you're being at least partly cynical, I tend to agree that the future of a dis-united states of American might be the best for everyone.

      Delete
  4. I wrote this last night, but the numbers haven't really changed that much.

    Ron Paul voters won when one looks at the primary votes and compares them to how close the races were in the swing states. Keeping in mind that Paul was at least just as likely to draw from apathetic non-voters, Democrats, and Independents as he is Republicans, his votes would be even more valuable in a close swing state general election than the typical GOP primary candidate, not to mention how many supporters Paul had who refused to participate in a GOP primary. Here are the numbers he received in primary states, which does not include how well he did in caucus states like Nevada or Minnesota that both ended up being relatively close races, too.


    http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/candidates/302

    MI: 115,911
    NH: 56,872
    IA: 26,036 * caucus state
    PA: 106,148
    NC: 108,217
    OH: 113,256
    VA: 107,451
    WI: 87,858
    FL: 117,461


    How valuable would these votes have been to the GOP?

    As I write this, Romney is losing Florida by roughly fifty-five thousand votes, roughly fifty-one thousand votes in Virginia, around eighty thousand votes in Ohio, one hundred and seventeen thousand votes in WI, and Romney is losing by relatively small numbers in other swing states.

    There will be a lot of second guessing done to Mitt Romney by talk
    radio, neo-cons, and Foxnews types, but how many will bring up the way the party treated Ron Paul, his ideas, and his followers throughout the entire race, but especially at the GOP convention?

    ReplyDelete