In his column in the Los Angeles Times for Sunday December 11, 2011, (on page A34) Doyle McManus said that President Obama's speech in Osawatomie Kansas indicates that the President wants "to frame the 2012 election as a clear choice between two philosophies." In this corner we have the group of one percenters and in the other the massive number of the ninetyniners. It will be a bout to the finish. Both sides will bet everything. Will it be a fair fight?
The Bolsheviks were a minority group that caught the majority Mensheviks off guard and took control of Russia via a clever trick. The word Bolshevik means a member of a minority group.
The Nazis were a minority party that gained control of Germany in the early Thirties. Think that the majority voted to give the minority party control of that country or did that party's leaders use some kind of slight of hand (Burn the Reichstag building and initiate Gleichschaltung?) to gain control?
In many Muslim countries a minority of Shiites have control over their bitter religious rivals the Sunnis. Did they win the advantage fairly or use some kind of subterfuge to get the upper hand?
If Obama frames the 2012 election as a death match between the rich and the rest of Americans, will the wealthy hesitate to use trickery to rake in the pot with all the chips?
If you think that (somehow) the results of the 2000 and the 2004 Presidential elections were rigged, what makes you think that with everything they want riding on the next election; they wouldn't want to cheat again to win it all?
If gangsters run a gambling casino, the law of averages says they will make enormous profits. Why would they want to cheat and get more money?
If you have been reading Brad Friedman's reporting on the unreliability of the unverifiable results from the electronic voting machines, you might want to try to make a side-bet on (dishonest?) results that will favor the one percenters.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
