Barack Obama by Petr Kratochvil
Which Republican Party Do You Support?
by David Glenn Cox
We all want to live in a better world and we all want to lead a better life. Governments and political systems are established to provide an opportunity for the people to obtain this better world and this life. When government fails to do so, it then becomes time to look again and to reevaluate what is correct and what is incorrect in that government.
Governments are servants of the people and when they fail to provide for the people they are intended to serve, then, they should be fired. We can label or pigeon hole governments as free or independent or Capitalist or Communist or any label in between. The Chinese operate under what is called "Two systems one China policy," A one party Communist dictatorship with a Capitalist economic system. Saudi Arabia is ruled by a king with a council of ministers, in Great Britain each new Prime minister presents the new government for the sovereign's approval, but it is merely ceremonial. In Saudi Arabia the king is all powerful and it is the ministers who are ceremonial.
On paper governments can be called whatever they desire to be called, but that doesn't make it so. The former Soviet Union was called a Socialist Republic, a one party state with a managed economy, when it was in fact, a paranoid totalitarian state that never survived its own revolution. Living under the Stalinist adage, "you are loyal Comrade but are you loyal enough?" Everyone from commissars to street car conductors lived in fear of the state. No one actually thought of the state as benevolent or kindly and yet the trains ran and the crops were harvested. All was not perfect and all was not lousy.
Governments hide their intentions and cloak their true aspirations; Barack Obama's so called health care reform was in fact health insurance reform. It was sold to the public as offering more coverage when it was actually a means to stifle hospital bill defaults by forcing customers to buy what they couldn't actually afford in the first place.
Opponents of the program sold the idea to the public that this was Socialism, that big government was taking over health care, but why? Why were Republican members of Congress so vehemently opposed to a program lobbied for by the hospital associations? Was it a question of status quo, did they fear doctors would receive lower payments? Would the big drug companies be forced to lower costs?
All of these were factors but it was also important for the Republicans in Congress to deny the new President a political victory. It was more important to scuttle the new administration than to actually do anything constructive. Did the Republicans go to the media and expose this health care reform as a swindle for poor Americans or exclaim to them that it would only exacerbate the problems? No, the Republicans went to the public prepared to scare them.
Death panels and end of life conferences, while all but a few Democrats kept their mouths shut tight and refrained from telling the public that this Democratic President's vision of health care reform was far worse and far less generous and much the same as Richard Nixon's managed health care reform package. More expensive, less effective, a health care reform package that was said to be all inclusive, solving all America's health care needs when it didn't even include 9/11 responders. It was a hodge podge, a mish mash designed to hide a special interest group gaining an advantage in the market place.
This President was selling sh*t for Shinola and the Republican's only answer was that it was the wrong color brown. Neither party was interested in telling the public the truth and neither party had the best interests of the public at heart, both sides where protecting their special interest crony's while trying to score style points. The Republicans selling the public a myth of Socialism, yet Socialism would have covered everyone. Socialism would have eliminated private insurance companies entirely. Yet, Socialism was not even offered a seat at the table because it would have taken money from the pockets of the special interest groups that both parties in Congress were busy trying to protect.
Free trade has decimated this country's domestic economy, weakened its industrial base, and swelled its trade deficit while lowering the standard of living for hundreds of millions of Americans. The board game Monopoly is instructive; imagine the houses and hotels for your game are purchased from another game across the room where they cost only 10 percent of what they cost in your game. The money leaves your game and cannot be replaced, the banker makes a profit selling the houses and hotels back to you but soon there isn't any money left on your table and everyone goes broke, except of course, the banker.
In this country, we wake up on the first of each month with a forty, fifty or sixty billion dollar trade deficit. The bulk of that money is gone, the profit from buying third world and selling first world is accrued in the hands of the very few. This country is literally bleeding to death and so the government must expand the money supply, adding plasma to hide the loss of whole blood. Does government do this simply to aid the populace or just to keep the swindle operating? Banks expand the money supply even further with credit cards and debit cards and easy credit terms but not to aid anyone but themselves. Their goal is to disguise the disappearing money supply.
Since the collapse of America's economy the Federal Reserve has been lending money to member banks for as low as one tenth of one percent interest. One million dollars borrowed for $1,000 interest, the Fed is lending to the banks at more than $30,000 below the cost of the treasury bills printed plus ten years interest owed. Not one member of Congress has so much as made a peep about this wholesale robbery of the American Treasury.
Barack Obama then appointed his cat food commission to lay out a path towards deficit reduction, a commission loaded to the rafters with opponents of Social Security and Medicare. The committee's plan was filled with ideas right out of John McCain's 2008 Republican National platform. Despite the fact that the Cat food commission report did not receive enough votes to pass through its own committee, Barack Obama declares it a good starting point for budget negotiations.
It smacks of a foregone conclusion, a sham, a who do and a fraud. Not a word about reigning bankers in or redirecting some of these funds towards a legitimate jobs program. No, instead the President says that budget negotiations must be tackled before any jobs program. This after Obama said that in these negotiations "he will probably irritate many in his own party," I feel certain that Benedict Arnold would have said the same thing.
1 | 2