Rotten Choices

 

You go to a supermarket to buy a carton of milk. Once in the dairy aisle, you locate the shelves where the milk is and walk up to it.

Upon closer examination, you notice that there are only two types of milk, one which has been expired for two weeks and one which has been expired for four weeks.

You look around frantically to find milk that is still fresh but to no avail. The expired milk is all there is to choose from.

Out of these two choices, which one would you pick; the milk that has been expired for two weeks, or the milk which has been expired for four weeks?

Would you relent and choose the two-week expired milk since it’s a little fresher, even though it will still make you sick?

If you pick either one, you’ll get sick, or at least have a bad smell in your fridge.

Or would you not risk it and pick neither?

This analogy illustrates the choices facing Americans in the presidential election of 2012.
Like the two cartons of outdated milk, Americans only have two choices for president.

The two-week expired milk is Barack Obama and the four-week expired milk is Mitt Romney.

These are the only choices people have been offered by the powers-that-be.
Like the milk, both candidates are rotten choices, and whichever one gets picked will end up making America sick.

There are people on both sides of the political aisle who out of desperation have allowed themselves to fall for the “lesser evil” paradigm. They don’t like either candidate but will vote for the “less evil” one. Which candidate is the “less evil” one depends on the ideological spectrum to which the voter belongs.

For Republicans the “lesser evil” is Romney. For the Democrats it is Obama.

By allowing themselves to be suckered into this “lesser evil” nonsense, these people end up voting for evil regardless. After all, aren’t both candidates the lesser evil and a greater evil to each side? So both Romney and Obama actually end up cancelling each other out if you carefully look at this “lesser evil” mentality.

This sort of futile exercise in desperate wishful thinking and false optimism directs peoples’ energies into supporting bad choices which end up doing more harm than good.

Both Republicans and Democrats create the false illusion that there is a world of difference between the two parties. In order to convince the American electorate of this, they distract them with their stances on wedge issues like abortion, gun rights, religion, gay marriage, etc.

Both parties deliberately focus on these issues because they know that these issues bring out strong emotional responses in people. Politicians know that if they can highjack peoples’ emotions and exploit it for their own gain they go it made.

Appeal to emotion is a very powerful tactic which politicians have learned to use to get people to support, and vote for, them.

Another important reason why they focus on these wedge issues to garner support, is because that is where the greatest amount of difference in the Democrats and Republicans ideology lies. 

As a matter of fact, their opposing views on these key wedge issues comprise virtually all the difference between both parties.

But examine the Republican and Democratic stance on any foreign policy and key economic issues (which are the most important to the country) and both sides are surprisingly unanimous.

Both parties view the US as the greatest country in the world. Both parties think that the US must be #1 in all things. Both parties support war, foreign intervention, bombings, regime changes, Israeli genocide against Palestinians and the domination of both friend and ally for America’s military and economic benefit, by hook or crook.

Both parties also favor big capital and big corporate interests instead of the general population. This is why BOTH parties were complicit in bailing out with huge sums of taxpayer money the Wall St. criminal banks as well as inept car manufacturers. It is why none of the financial criminals have faced any prosecution or jail time.

So in reality, there is no significant difference between the two political parties. But they sure spend a lot of time fooling the US electorate into thinking that there is by calling peoples' attention to the few minuscule issues where there are disagreements.

If anyone looks at American history objectively, then they will find a litany of dispossession and repression of the average citizen and the protection and coddling of wealthy interests by successive governments, regardless of their political stripes.
This dysfunctional tradition continues to this day and seems likely to go on.

Both parties hold the average voter in contempt. Both Romney and Obama stand there and lie and manipulate people with the crudest exaggerations and outright lies imaginable.

They do so because they know that most people are too lazy to fact-check anything they say. Again, bringing out wedge issues to stir the emotions comes in handy in order to sedate the people from finding out the facts.

And it unfortunately seems to work, since people still seem to want to support both of these rotten parties.

Romney and Obama lie and manipulate in order to distract people from, and cover up, the simple fact that neither of them has any plan, let alone vision, to fix anything. This is because they don’t want to fix anything. Indeed, they cannot fix it.

The job of Obama, Romney and their successors is one: to keep the current political and socioeconomic system in place, because this system benefits them and their friends. Their money and careers were made in this current political, social and economic system, so why the hell would they want change? Real change goes against their interests.

If a president came along who was honest, selfless, caring, and truly wanted to help the bottom 99% of the people, he would not live to see their one-hundredth day in office.

Watching Romney and Obama take cheap shots at one another, it is plain to see how they are trying to avoid the real issues. They constantly fill peoples’ heads about “change,” and “different way,” or how one candidate has failed and how that one will make everything better.

This is just a bunch of PR rhetoric and tired-old hyperbole which we hear at every election, but which never translates into anything.

Why do the candidates not talk about foreign policy, or allow it to be questioned or challenged? I have never heard Obama or Romney talk in-depth about the wars, the outrageous military spending, and other international diplomatic embarrassments and the self-evident hypocrisy which are the hallmarks of US foreign policy, even in the wake of the on-going US failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. No one dares question or criticize these failures.

It’s as if the topic of US foreign policy is strictly off-limits to the general public; it cannot be questioned because it is beyond the understanding of the average American. This is the feeling that I get.

As arrogant and condescending as the US government’s refusal to engage the public on foreign policy is, nevertheless it sort of makes sense for the simple reason that Americans are quite ignorant of their own history, so how are they expected to understand the history of another nation?

This sad situation was deliberately created by a dumbed-down education system which teaches US students nothing of other countries and cultures. This ensures that Americans will not sympathize and relate to people in another part of the world, see others as “evil terrorists” per the US government/media propaganda, and thereby allowing the US government to bomb with impunity.

Another important reason why foreign policy is not openly discussed is that many Americans will become disgusted at the evil and mayhem that has been done in their name, and would demand an immediate change.

This is something which the war profiteers and their whores in congress greatly fear, for it would mean the loss of immense profits for the former and loss of campaign dollars for the latter. War is a very profitable racket, and the powers-that-be do not want anyone to derail their war-making gravy train.

The pathetic US mass media has totally abdicated any shred of journalistic integrity and now serves as a cheer leader for US wars of aggression and foreign meddling. This is another major reason why Americans do not talk about foreign policy and remain ignorant of their government’s homicidal policies.

Americans are told to vote. They are told it is their civic responsibility, and that if they do not vote, then they cannot complain.

But there is no logic in this argument. The opposite is actually true. If people vote, and vote in a bad leader who ends up screwing everything up, then they do not have a right to complain since they voted that candidate in. They should have known better! They should have done their homework before casting their vote.

Those who did not vote, have all the right to complain since they are not responsible for the leader’s irresponsible actions.

This all comes down to what a vote really is.

The common view on voting is that the citizen gives the candidate the approval and the authority to act on their behalf to fulfill the promises he made.

The elected representative in return for a person’s vote is supposed to do what that person wants.

But it is clear that this is not the case judging by the constant stream of broken promises from both parties over the decades.

But there is another way to look at the act of voting which explains this discrepancy.
By voting for a candidate, you CEDE the authority to make decisions for yourself according to your best interests, to the candidate. That candidate then makes decisions which they think are best.

You basically give up the right to think for yourself and give the candidate the right and authority to think for you. The candidate will do what they want, and any promises they made to the voter are annulled, because by voting the voter gave up their right of decision and thought to the president. This is just a power of attorney that the entire country gives to one person.

Seeing the act of voting in this way puts it in a much less glamorous light.

This is the intent in the corrupt and surreal American electoral system. The vote therefore becomes nothing but a veil which the political criminal class needs to give their crimes and transgressions the veneer of popular support.

This also traps the populace when they get angry at the person they elected who ends up making a mess. That candidate can then say “You gave me your vote, so you are responsible.”

This is a spectacular con on the American electorate. But this con can be easily neutralized if Americans educate themselves about the candidates’ backgrounds and where they stand on issues. A healthy dose of skepticism also would be welcome.

Like the absence of the alternative fresh milk at the supermarket, the US electoral system precludes any true opposition party from challenging the two-party status-quo of Democrat vs. Republican.

People are mistakenly led to believe that these two parties are the best, and only ones competent of making decisions, and that whatever their errors, anyone else would be much worse and therefore unacceptable as a contender.

This is electoral terrorism which forces people to make bad choices election cycle after election cycle.

And in case the voting rabble decide that they will not buy the fake Democrat vs. Republican paradigm, then the powers-that-be start scaring them by both direct and subtle threats of taking away their government carrots, like Medicare, Medicaid, social security.
But these threats are empty and are employed to intimidate people into voting against their best interests and for the two establishment business parties.

The elites will not take these carrots away, because they rely on these carrots to keep the voting populace docile, scared and quiet.

The electoral laws in the US have been deliberately rigged by the Republicans and the Democrats to prevent any other candidate from challenging them. A 3 ^rd party candidate must have 15% support in EACH state to get on the ballot. Even then, the Republican and Democratic control of the presidential debates prevents the any 3^rd party candidate from offering their point of view.

Now get this: even if a 3 ^rd party candidate gets on the ballot of enough states to be considered as a choice for president in the voting booth, people still cannot vote for them if they live in a state in which that 3^rd party candidate did not get the 15% of support to allow them on the ballot!

To add insult to injury, or more accurately more injury to injury, Americans cannot vote beyond their designated district. This prevents people from voting for a 3 ^rd party candidate who is on the ballot in the next state over, but not on the ballot in the voter’s state of residence.

This cuts the 3 ^rd party candidate off from a huge source of support.

Let’s look at this by example:

John lives in North Dakota. He wants to vote for a 3^rd party candidate for president. Unfortunately, the 3^rd party candidate did not get enough support to get on the ballot in N. Dakota. But fortunately, that 3^rd party candidate did get on the ballot in South Dakota.
John wants to travel to South Dakota to cast his vote for the 3^rd party presidential candidate there. But unfortunately, the election law does not allow him to vote outside his local designated area, let alone outside his state. Therefore, John cannot vote for a 3^rd party candidate.

In this way, the 3 ^rd party candidate ends up losing a lot of votes, which creates the false image that they have no support and that the only parties which are “viable” are the democrats and republicans.

Yeah, you could write the candidate in, but that still does not make the process anymore fair. When it comes to voting for president, Americans should be able to vote for them ANYWHERE in America. This would undoubtedly create a lot more support for 3 ^rd party candidates if people were allowed to cross state lines to vote for them, in case the voter’s home state does not have the 3^rd party candidate on the ballot.

But should this one day become reality, the good-old Electoral College, which is the group of unelected party representatives in each state, has the final say on who becomes president.

If the people end up electing the "wrong" candidate, the Electoral College can nullify the decision by giving their vote for the establishment party candidate, effectively going against the wishes of the majority of the state’s electorate.

This is an unfair system which betrays any real democracy. Its proponents and defenders excuse any criticism of it by stating that it prevents the people from electing a monster.

Well, if this was the intent of the Electoral College, then that institution has failed a long time ago, for it has ushered in monster after monster into the oval office.

The real reason for the existence of the Electoral College is to make sure that the people do not end up electing a president who is not friendly to private banking and corporate interests.  And wouldn’t you have it, all the Electoral College representatives are either Republican or Democrat...

Add to that the whole sinister technology of electronic voting, and the chance for fraud that it creates, and you got another firewall in the corrupt US electoral system which prevents the “wrong” candidate from winning. The ruling financial/corporate oligarchy truly has all the bases covered!

Another sad fact concerns the true support which the president-elect actually has.

The fact is that a lot of Americans do not vote at all, actually over 40% of them.  So if, say, out of 100 million eligible voters, only 52 million vote, and out of that 52 million only 30% elect the winner, it means that the elected president's percentage of support is in the low double-digits. That president does not actually represent the country, far from it

That is why things keep on getting worse. These candidates don't owe the majority of the people anything and only have to worry about pleasing the small percentage which voted them in.

Too bad that the US electoral system does not have the same law of frequency as Europe does, where a minimum of 52% of all eligible voters have to vote, and one party has to get a certain amount of votes or else there is a run-off election. If there is also no majority winner, then coalitions are formed. This results in a system more attuned to the concerns of the average citizen, since clear majorities or compromises are sought.

But just like that proverbial milk in the supermarket, both the republican and democratic candidates stink, are spoiled, and way past their shelf life.

This November, use common sense and avoid buying spoiled milk.

Remember, if you vote for Romney or Obama, the chaos the cause, and the blood they spill will be on YOUR hands.

Reflections on the American Empire

It is a fact of history that countries do not become wealthy world powers by just having lofty principles such as freedom, democracy and free elections. 

There are many countries in the world today that also have lofty principles and actually live them out, in some cases even more so than the US, yet they have not, and probably will never attain such high degree of political, economic and military might. 

So clearly there must be more to America’s might than just a simple elementary school explanation of ‘America is great because it is free and democratic.’

The chief aim of the US is simply to dominate the world, period. Everything that the US says and does in the world is done with this ultimate aim in mind. The US government’s rhetoric about human rights, democracy promotion, free elections and fighting “terrorism,” is just convenient and fraudulent PR rhetoric to cover up their economic and military expansionism by hook or crook. 

The US uses these reasons to meddle in, and gain control of other nations, whether through a manufactured color revolution, supporting thugs and calling them freedom fighters (as was the case with Libya and now Syria), or making up fake threats to scare the world into acquiescence, if not outright approval, of another invasion of a nation that poses no threat but has valuable natural resources or other benefits which the US wants but cannot get because the government of that nation refuses to take orders from the empire.

In a TOP SECRET policy document written in February 1948, by the head of the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff, George Kennan, he states:

“We have about 50 per cent of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3 per cent of its population. … Our real task in the coming period is to maintain this position of disparity. … To do so we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming. … We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford the luxury of altruism. … We should cease to talk about vague, unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we will have to deal in straight power concepts.”

When one considers the path of American foreign policy since the late 19^th century starting with the Spanish-American War until today, the vast amount of America’s power and wealth was built by subjugation and imperial pursuits. To amass and retain the gratuitous amount of political, military and economic power that America has today requires ruthless, clandestine and illegal tactics.

 Overthrowing inconvenient leaders and governments, fixing elections, assassinations, support of brutal dictators and regimes, bribery and threats of military force are just some of the tactics that the United States has employed in pursuit of power and wealth worldwide. If the United States stuck to its founding principles to the letter since 1789 then it would have never become as powerful as it has.

The United States has since the post WWII period managed to fix the world economy to its benefit. By coming out of WWII unscathed and wealthier than ever, the US was in a position to force other countries to go along with its interests. This created a system of client states from which the US was, and is, able to extract goods using dollars which were also made into the sole currency accepted for all oil purchases. Any country that needed to buy oil had to have dollars. 

This created an unnaturally high demand for the dollar, which gained great value. This value enabled the U.S. to reach a high standard of living not found in even the most industrialized Western European nations. It also allowed the US to run up debts multiple times greater than the entire size of its economy.

Another facet of US wealth is the military industrial Complex, which is the biggest weapons dealer on earth and one of the most lucrative industries supporting the American system worldwide. It seems that the U.S. learned more lessons from the Nazis than they care to admit. They might have detested and fought Hitler and his regime but there can be no doubt that the U.S. political and military establishments secretly admired the man’s methods and quickly saw that the armaments/war business is a cash cow. 

From then on, the U.S. has been constantly getting involved in one conflict or another or stirring up problems, creating non-existent threats and provoking unrest worldwide in order to feed the military industrial machine with hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars. The consequences have been disastrous but have also served to fuel the MIC by creating new threats and contingencies as groups and peoples retaliate against the arrogant and belligerent policies of the U.S.

The U.S. does not tolerate any government, leader or movement which refuses to follow the American free market system. It does not matter whether those movements are progressive, democratic and have the overwhelming support of the populace. The U.S. economy and the unnaturally high living standard requires that as many nations as possible become faithful adherents to the US free market neo liberal model. This turns them into debt slaves by forcing them to borrow money from the IMF and the World Bank in order to meet predefined criteria which most of the time are destructive and cause more economic problems than they fix. 

These economic ‘shock therapy’ policies extort billions of dollars in interest payments on the loans made to client nations. The IMF and World Bank deliberately loan out more money than these countries need so the interest payments will be higher. These interest payments fuel the US economy. It all amounts to a global plantation system where nations are forced to pay tribute to the U.S. It is a tax on the world.

The survival and growth of the U.S. global empire’s wealth and power is the prime motivating factor for U.S. interventions, not to spread democracy and freedom. If the U.S. was motivated by freedom and democracy it could start with its allies such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Pakistan. Anyone who believes that the U.S. would spend hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq and risk the lives of its soldiers for purely altruistic reasons without seeking any material or strategic reward is either a liar or is totally ignorant of world history and geopolitics. 

No empire or world power has ever had the good of the people at heart when they went to war and occupied other nations. Are we to believe that the U.S. is the sole exception to this consistent rule after 5,000 years of history?  

 It is naïve and wrong to think so.

Self-Betrayal

For a while now, I have been following the campaign of Elizabeth Warren for the Massachusetts senate seat.

From the beginning, I was impressed by her in-depth knowledge of how badly the US populace has been getting robbed by big corporations and the government which puts private interest first.

She was a breath of fresh air and seemed genuinely concerned about what is going on to the average working person in America.

Then unfortunately, this happened:

Pure betrayal!

Elizabeth Warren, for all her rhetoric and clear understanding of what ails this country, has decided to join forces with the same criminals which are ruining it. 

She has decided to embrace a despicable president with blood on his hands, who is committing acts of terror against his own citizens as well as other nations, most notably against Iran and Syria.

Elizabeth Warren seems to be too popular and outspoken for the US governing 2-party oligarchy to just kick to the side and ignore. She also is a threat which cannot be easily threatened or demonized. There also does not seem to be any dirt on her which the governing elites can use to derail her election campaign.

So instead, they decided to co-opt her onto the democratic side of the one business party family. They promised her support and endorsements and have conned her into thinking that they will help further her agenda of putting the American people first. 

Sadly, she accepted their fake proposals and allowed herself to be bought off and her courageous and enlightened ideas compromised. Whether Elizabeth Warren realizes it or not, she is now OWNED by the stale and evil US political establishment which has caused the misery against which she spoke out about.

She can only now go with the flow of what the political elites in this country want, or else her career will come to an abrupt end.

She has sold out her principles and is now one with the rotten Democratic Party collective. She has been neutralized and is no longer a threat to the ruling oligarchy. This is why Obummer even brought her into the fold in the first place last year as the head of the consumer advocate office.

Just to give an example of the nefarious and hypocritical forces with which she has allied herself with, read the excerpts below from the Wikipedia article regarding the 2012 Democratic National Convention which is to be held in Charlotte, NC, in September:

“Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren will speak on economic policy…”

And this:

“The Democratic Party announced in February 2011 that it would not accept corporate donations to fund the convention. This decision was made to increase the party's populist appeal and create distance from Bank of America and the financial industry.”

And finally this to wrap it all up:

“Corporate sponsors can make in-kind donations such as transportation, as well as host parties. They can also donate to a non-profit called "New American City, Inc.", which is run by the directors of the convention host committee. Donors to this group include Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Duke Energy. 

The Party's convention funds are stored in a Bank of America account. The convention also has a $10 million line of credit available from Duke Energy.”

So much for Obummer and the Democrats “distancing” themselves from the bankster rapists and corporate hucksters in order to appear more “populist.” 

In short, the Democratic Party will create the false perception that they care more about people than big banks and big corporations, while the whole time being solidly dependent on these liars and swindlers. 

This dishonesty and hypocrisy truly shows the stunning level of contempt which the political establishment in this country, on both sides, has for the average voter.

I used to root for Elizabeth Warren. I watched her You Tube videos, read her articles and even donated $15 to her campaign. But it was all for naught. 

She is being exploited by Obummer and the democrats to cajole the angry liberal/democratic crowds, who have been cheated by them, back into the Democratic Party's cold and bony embrace just in time for the election.

This is why I shall no longer support Elizabeth Warren, and no longer care whether she wins or loses the election. She has decided, for whatever half-baked reason, to ally herself with the same socially and economically destructive forces which she has opposed.

She should have run as an independent candidate. Not doing so was a serious mistake which compromised her integrity.

This is betrayal pure and simple. 

Even if she lost the election, she would still be admired for remaining true to her principles. If she ends up winning, she will actually lose because the pro-corporate Democratic Party establishment will not allow her pro-people ideas to become reality.

So go ahead and vote for her, but it will not make any damn difference. 

Those who know the truth and are against the rape of this country and the world by the war-profiteers, financial hucksters and their bought political whores, cannot allow themselves to be duped and co-opted by these well-meaning personalities who attach themselves to the establishment political parties and their front groups. 

Do not be naïve to think that these people will change anything from the inside. That is not possible right now. If anyone tries to truly change anything from the inside, they will be neutralized in the most direct way by the power-elites. I leave it up to your imagination to figure out what this way is. 

Therefore, we must affect the much needed change in the most direct way we can as well.

And once again, I leave it up to your imagination to figure out what this way is.