Blue vs. red; D vs. R; Goldman Sachs' candidate of 2008 or Goldman Sachs' candidate of 2012; Koch-unfriendly or Koch-friendly; someone that never struggled in a low-level public service or physically dangerous job for crap wages vs. someone that never struggled in a low-level public service job or physically dangerous job for crap wages; and choosing to shoot our democracy in the stomach with a blue bullet or red bullet in the guise of an election. It's pretty tragic that looking at most politicians today merely confirms that those with the most honesty and brains want nothing to do with politics. And those who have no problem stepping on other Americans or getting rich by stepping on other Americans and think greatly of themselves for doing so fund the politicians or choose such phony "public service" as the means to get rich. Serve the public, go teach kids or sweep streets or do something else necessary, getting elected to become a multi-millionaire and to enjoy tens of millions of dollars of public-funded perks now and forever isn't noble and sure as Hell ain't sacrifice. What wonderful and varied choices we have nowadays.
Here's who will win: the people that "donate"/bribe politicians/puppets, the lobbyists that act like bagmen, and the politicians/whores that do their bidding. As for us, come on now, what do average citizens that want a thriving democracy in the USA 2012 have to do with the political process our Founding Fathers envisioned? Every election we must choose who gets to be rich through "public service" at our expense. Even the losers get rich through said service as they can appear endlessly bemoaning their political opponents for 2-4 years in friendly TV studios. USA 2012 - brought to you by [fill in the appropriate foreign or domestic corporate or other big money sponsors].
Take the money out of politics, take it out now. Until then, all these politicians will serve the money that pulls the strings, which is why we always see the corporations hedging their bets and contributing to as many people as possible.
If corporations (private and public) seek profit at all costs, then surely profits trump democratic rule and principles according to the corporations' own rules of operation, correct? Yes, even simpletons in politics and business and corporate-owned TV studios understand that logic. So democracy has been subverted to the whims of corporate boardrooms. I didn't say shareholders purposely because the CEOs and boards don't serve pensions and mutual funds and other shareholders, they serve the tiny elite in boardrooms, no one else. No one in their right mind would reward a CEO that cripples a company with a massive bonus or $20 million payday for violating criminal laws, but we see it all the time in 2012.
By the way, watching people like Mike Bloomberg and Putin and Bloomberg's attacks against Occupy and Putin's attacks against Pussy Riot, how different are the politicians truly? Do these people serve their constituents (in name only) or the small unelected elite? Both changed election laws to maintain power because apparently in New York City and Russia there was no one else available that was as special as they are - NO ONE (shocking, as I'm sure most New Yorkers and Russians would disagree with the low opinion Bloomberg and Putin held of them while also wanting their votes).
Watch the endless attacks against this enemy or that, and if new enemies need to be created, so be it. Bloomberg will attack out-of-state gun dealers (Mikey, you are a public servant in NYC, stop worrying about everywhere but NYC by sending police out-of-state (jurisdiction sounds nice - remember it)), soda "cartels" (pathetic), fast food, etc. while purposely avoiding bankers. Does Bloomberg ever mention how bankers have repeatedly laundered money for terrorists and drug cartels still, post 2001, some of these TBTF banks still help our enemies arm? And there's no dispute about it because these banks admit it and no one ever serves jail time or forfeits money for AIDING AND ABETTING TERRORISTS? And drug cartels? I thought the police would be up in arms about banks helping terrorists and drug cartels, you know, while enforcing laws? But utter silence? Really? Profiting from aiding our enemies and our politicians readily accept donations from those banks without even criticizing them? Hmmmm. Mikey, look up Wells Fargo, HSBC, Bank of America, Standard Chartered and the other TBTF and send the NYPD down there. They have been found to help drug cartels and terrorists. Google it. Leave the armed guards behind, mingle with the people (they aren't scary, and you did kind of promise to represent them) and go hold a press conference outside attacking banksters for helping terrorists and cartels while returning any money you ever received from them - ever. It is much easier than sending the NYPD out of NYC to videotape gun shows or McDonald's customers or Coke drinkers.
And Putin will never criticize fellow oligarchs that all prosper from corruption unless they break from his control. Never. But he will blame Georgians, or Ukrainians, or a band composed of only three women as if it threatens Russia's very existence? Sending three women to prison for two years for expressing disgust? In 2012? Really? Seems to me to be some insecurity and perpetual ready-made enemies when the true groups and corruption destroying the people are never to be identified by the governments in charge because they are one-in-the-same. Macing fellow citizens in the face is all good if they dare speak out against corruption or try to exercise their First Amendment rights? In 2012? Really?
Does DHS really want people to "see something, say something" when TBTF banks are aiding our enemies? Or are we supposed to turn a blind eye to that and remain mute and instead inform on our neighbors for nothing merely because the criminals are incorporated and donate to politicians? Who wins in 2012? Democracy loses, that's for sure.
Comments
Lobbyists + campaign contributors + puppets always win
Blue vs. red; D vs. R; Goldman Sachs' candidate of 2008 or Goldman Sachs' candidate of 2012; Koch-unfriendly or Koch-friendly; someone that never struggled in a low-level public service or physically dangerous job for crap wages vs. someone that never struggled in a low-level public service job or physically dangerous job for crap wages; and choosing to shoot our democracy in the stomach with a blue bullet or red bullet in the guise of an election. It's pretty tragic that looking at most politicians today merely confirms that those with the most honesty and brains want nothing to do with politics. And those who have no problem stepping on other Americans or getting rich by stepping on other Americans and think greatly of themselves for doing so fund the politicians or choose such phony "public service" as the means to get rich. Serve the public, go teach kids or sweep streets or do something else necessary, getting elected to become a multi-millionaire and to enjoy tens of millions of dollars of public-funded perks now and forever isn't noble and sure as Hell ain't sacrifice. What wonderful and varied choices we have nowadays.
Here's who will win: the people that "donate"/bribe politicians/puppets, the lobbyists that act like bagmen, and the politicians/whores that do their bidding. As for us, come on now, what do average citizens that want a thriving democracy in the USA 2012 have to do with the political process our Founding Fathers envisioned? Every election we must choose who gets to be rich through "public service" at our expense. Even the losers get rich through said service as they can appear endlessly bemoaning their political opponents for 2-4 years in friendly TV studios. USA 2012 - brought to you by [fill in the appropriate foreign or domestic corporate or other big money sponsors].
Oligarchs and plutocrats win unless we change the system
Take the money out of politics, take it out now. Until then, all these politicians will serve the money that pulls the strings, which is why we always see the corporations hedging their bets and contributing to as many people as possible.
If corporations (private and public) seek profit at all costs, then surely profits trump democratic rule and principles according to the corporations' own rules of operation, correct? Yes, even simpletons in politics and business and corporate-owned TV studios understand that logic. So democracy has been subverted to the whims of corporate boardrooms. I didn't say shareholders purposely because the CEOs and boards don't serve pensions and mutual funds and other shareholders, they serve the tiny elite in boardrooms, no one else. No one in their right mind would reward a CEO that cripples a company with a massive bonus or $20 million payday for violating criminal laws, but we see it all the time in 2012.
By the way, watching people like Mike Bloomberg and Putin and Bloomberg's attacks against Occupy and Putin's attacks against Pussy Riot, how different are the politicians truly? Do these people serve their constituents (in name only) or the small unelected elite? Both changed election laws to maintain power because apparently in New York City and Russia there was no one else available that was as special as they are - NO ONE (shocking, as I'm sure most New Yorkers and Russians would disagree with the low opinion Bloomberg and Putin held of them while also wanting their votes).
Watch the endless attacks against this enemy or that, and if new enemies need to be created, so be it. Bloomberg will attack out-of-state gun dealers (Mikey, you are a public servant in NYC, stop worrying about everywhere but NYC by sending police out-of-state (jurisdiction sounds nice - remember it)), soda "cartels" (pathetic), fast food, etc. while purposely avoiding bankers. Does Bloomberg ever mention how bankers have repeatedly laundered money for terrorists and drug cartels still, post 2001, some of these TBTF banks still help our enemies arm? And there's no dispute about it because these banks admit it and no one ever serves jail time or forfeits money for AIDING AND ABETTING TERRORISTS? And drug cartels? I thought the police would be up in arms about banks helping terrorists and drug cartels, you know, while enforcing laws? But utter silence? Really? Profiting from aiding our enemies and our politicians readily accept donations from those banks without even criticizing them? Hmmmm. Mikey, look up Wells Fargo, HSBC, Bank of America, Standard Chartered and the other TBTF and send the NYPD down there. They have been found to help drug cartels and terrorists. Google it. Leave the armed guards behind, mingle with the people (they aren't scary, and you did kind of promise to represent them) and go hold a press conference outside attacking banksters for helping terrorists and cartels while returning any money you ever received from them - ever. It is much easier than sending the NYPD out of NYC to videotape gun shows or McDonald's customers or Coke drinkers.
And Putin will never criticize fellow oligarchs that all prosper from corruption unless they break from his control. Never. But he will blame Georgians, or Ukrainians, or a band composed of only three women as if it threatens Russia's very existence? Sending three women to prison for two years for expressing disgust? In 2012? Really? Seems to me to be some insecurity and perpetual ready-made enemies when the true groups and corruption destroying the people are never to be identified by the governments in charge because they are one-in-the-same. Macing fellow citizens in the face is all good if they dare speak out against corruption or try to exercise their First Amendment rights? In 2012? Really?
Does DHS really want people to "see something, say something" when TBTF banks are aiding our enemies? Or are we supposed to turn a blind eye to that and remain mute and instead inform on our neighbors for nothing merely because the criminals are incorporated and donate to politicians? Who wins in 2012? Democracy loses, that's for sure.
Add new comment