SK | September 2 2012 | Thanks, A.L.
I honestly don’t think it matters who wins the election. Like all elections in the modern era, real choices are never provided. The politicians and the media concentrate on “faux issues” designed to create the appearance of an intense debate, meanwhile the pressing issues of our times are decided by connected elites behind closed doors. On these issues, the politicians are in complete agreement. The system is rigged to ensure that only corporate tools can rise to the level of “Actor in Chief.”
Take any issue of substance. Try to spot the difference of opinion between Obama and Romney: trade policy, the unaccountable Federal Reserve, the gulag prison system, the war on drugs, military spending, NSA surveillance, the destruction of civil liberties, banking regulations, gerrymandering, the role of international banking institutions like the World Bank and the IMF, Israel, energy policy, the wars, drone strikes… the list goes on I can assure you.
If you’re an intellectually enslaved partisan, you’re already probably reaching at straws, trying to justify your position choosing the “lesser of two evils.” The differences between the two parties on these issues is barely visible, and yet we somehow feel justified picking sides. Even judicial appointments, the final plea for party unity, has lost its credibility. They are not looking out for you.
To quote Ralph Nader:
“What is the breaking point? The criminal war of aggression in Iraq? The escalation of the war in Afghanistan? Forty-five thousand people dying a year because they can’t afford health insurance? The hollowing out of communities and the movement of jobs to fascist and communist regimes oveseas that know how to put the workers in their place? There is no breaking point. And when there is no breaking point, you do not have a moral compass.”
I won’t be voting for either major party, but I have to accept that one of them will win the presidential election. So who should I prefer? Part of me wants Romney to win. The left might find new energy with which to oppose him in the event of crippling austerity measures (which are likely to happen either way). Still, pitting the parties against each other to try and preserve what little freedoms we have left has never really worked in the past, and it’s a bit foolish to think it’ll work now.
Another part of me hopes Obama wins. He deserves to win. He deserves to watch the country’s economy disintegrate below his feet. As the floor beneath him falls away, he’ll stare into the 10th circle of hell, a special place reserved for bankers and politicians who enable their destructive deeds. He’ll be forced to accept history’s universal condemnation for his barbarous acts.
If your intention was to turn the United States into an Orwellian police state, you could not do a better job than President Obama. He has claimed the power to kill American citizens simply because he accuses them of being terrorists. There is no judicial review, no possibility of parole, you will not see a lawyer or your family again. For a mere “belligerent act,” you can be detained indefinitely in a cell, forgotten, never again to see the light of day.
In classic dictator fashion, he has attempted to expand the reach of the empire by engaging in undeclared wars without the permission of the people (congress). And we haven’t even touched on his unwillingness to enforce the law with regard to the criminal banking class. However, if you attempt to expose the power elite’s abuse of the system, like Thomas Drake or Bradley Manning, you’re likely to face the full fury of government power. To date, the Obama administration has indicted six individuals under the Espionage Act, more than all other administrations combined.
Mitt Romney may be an aspiring murderer and gangster for fascism, but Barack Obama is a murderous gangster for fascism. He deserves to feel the universal condemnation that will come to him when the economy collapses. We won’t make it to 2016 before we are forced to deal with the world’s debt problems.
When I was growing up, there used to be an expression tossed around between people whenever politics was discussed: ”They’re all crooks.” It was the conciliatory statement and usually got a few nods from around the room and often a few chuckles. Today, that statement is still common, but the chuckles are gone. Instead of being accompanied by slight laughter, there’s a sadness that comes with it. It’s not funny anymore.