On Monday, Americans watched a supposedly liberal candidate for President and a supposedly conservative candidate for President agree on the importance of massive military spending.
Those who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 with the hopes of less American meddling in the Mideast heard him talking about why he has used drone attacks galore in the region, even killing an American citizen in the role of judge, jury and executioner. They heard why we must remain in the Mideast and why America must shun cuts to military spending.
Mitt Romney agreed with Obama on his points and upped the ante, suggesting that not only should cuts be shunned but also that military spending increases should be championed. And conservative voters watched yet another Romney forward-march toward centrist candidate, effectively Etch A Sketch-ing much of the “true conservative” Republican persona that many voters on the right so badly wanted to battle Obama in the coming election.
Oh yeah, and they talked about Israel. And Israel. And Israel. And Israel. It became apparent that the third and final Presidential “foreign policy” debate focused largely on domestic policy. When the candidates did focus on the intended topic, the differences in position were non-apparent.
So the choice — the “direction for America’s future” choice — is clear, and the next four years are going to be a continuation of the past 12: a back-and-forth over taxes at home that never reaches a clear and concrete conclusion to the benefit of anyone; a continued assault on Constitutional civil liberties; a continued boon to the American and International banking cartels; and, without a doubt, a continued effort to line the pockets of America’s ever-expanding military industrial complex, which will take the lives of more American volunteers abroad and continue to double down its domestic expansion.
Often, it seems that these political writings are constantly dismal in tone. But there is no other option, for the readers will continue to lie to themselves until they are no longer allowed a political opinion. But, for all of those who continue to lambaste anyone who suggests that neither Obama nor Romney is the man for the job, here are some points with which you may agree at least slightly.
- America is financially doomed due to a little more than half a century of government ineptitude.
- The only way to reverse the coming economic calamity is to implement drastic change and completely alter the way citizens of the Nation view their place in the world and their responsibility at home.
- This was not a Nation built on the idea that a ruling class has the authority to manipulate a peasant class.
- The government no longer works for you.
- Debt cannot be lessened by increasing spending, whether it is on corporate welfare, domestic entitlements or the military.
- A government with the ability to print money ad infinitum has no reason to tax its citizens’ income.
- The National Defense Authorization Act, domestic surveillance dragnets set up to catch anyone critical of government, parliamentary police forces and threats to free speech, personal property and the right to personal defense must all be eliminated.
Neither Obama nor Romney agrees with any of these things. They both incorrectly believe that governments can effectively create jobs. They both believe that safety always trumps liberty. They believe in and belong to the ruling class and are surrounded by members of the military-industrial and banking cartels that flourish only when Average Joe flounders. They both believe that increasing government spending in one way or another will help to reduce the government’s debt.
So, say again that a vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Obama; it doesn’t matter because a vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. A vote for either man is a vote for moving again further from the principles upon which this Nation was founded.
A third party vote may indeed be a fool’s errand, because a vast majority of the population of this Nation is informed only by corporate-controlled (and, thereby, government-controlled) mainstream media that have gone to great lengths to black out any message but that of the two (one) party status quo.
On Tuesday, another debate was broadcast. It wasn’t carried by FOX, MSNBC, CNN or any other major television news networks. It was, however, shown on Russian semi-state-run network RT, as well as C-Span and a handful of online news channels.
The event, sponsored by the Free and Equal Elections Foundation, included the Justice Party’s Rocky Anderson, the Constitution Party’s Virgil Goode and the Green Party’s Jill Stein (none of whom you’ve probably heard of) along with Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. The debate was refreshing; and, while the candidates agreed on many of the issues of the zeitgeist, they certainly offered a clear collective rebuttal to the ideas of Romney and Obama.
Because most readers probably don’t know much of anything about the aforementioned third party candidates, this column will not pick apart the debate but will rather challenge readers to wake up from the Romney/Obama coma and watch the event below. There are no funny moments or personal attacks, but it looks a lot like what one may expect the Nation’s Founders had hoped for modern political discourse.
*The debate begins at 1:02:55.*
Johnson took the night. Though the Libertarian is on the ballots in 48 States, enough to secure an Electoral College victory, it is evident that he won’t win in the Presidential election. America is too lazy to digest anything but FOX/MSNBC mind mush and demand a clear alternative to Thing 1 or Thing 2.