August 13, 2012 at 09:40:24
Does it really matter that Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan to run as his #2 in November?
Traditionally, we Americans have been made to believe the choice for a vice presidential candidate was a big deal i.e. somebody to compliment the presidential nominee and garner additional votes, hopefully capture his state and others in the election and be a credible president if something dire happens to the president.
Back when the two main party's national conventions meant something and the eventual presidential nominee wasn't pre-ordained by the primaries, the nominee for vice president was often a rival in those primaries and chosen as a concession for his committed delegates to coalesce around and agree to support his opponent. Lyndon Johnson comes to mind in the Democrat's convention in 1960 when Kennedy chose Johnson as his running mate.
Now the national conventions are nothing more than balloon-dropping extravagances, meaningless afterthoughts of political puffery. The presidential candidate has long been decided in the party's primaries to vie against a sitting president, the other major party's unchallenged opponent.
Though the Republican Vice Presidential choice of Sarah Palin in 2008 caused a stir with questions about her competence to be president should a mid-70s John McCain become incapacitated, the harsh reality is, the presidential candidates [Excluding Ron Paul] and their running mates from either of the two main parties doesn't really matter who sits in the Oval Office.
That's because the ultimate policy choices of [private Rothschild “Federal Reserve” System debt-slavery] endless war, unnecessary defense spending, the dominance of the big corporate and special interests influence over the electoral process and the political agenda in favor of those interests does NOT change regardless of which major party's candidates is elected. (VN: Lets not forget the poisoning of our food through GMO and the labeling issue that is currently going on in California where all the major banker khazar owned corporations are funding an opposition to the labeling initiative that is horrific in dollars. They have put in 25 Million dollars to buy ads against the labeling issue. Yup, this is fascism rapidly approaching with a bit of depopulation thrown in, which is why they don't want to label the "killer" GMO products. If it passes in California, it will pass in the rest of the country. That is why who is president is important for the khazar zionist bankers, since its their companies that are funding the opposition to labeling.)
Though Barack Obama was and is brighter and more eloquent than cowboy George W. Bush, the ultimate policy decisions of the two men differ very slightly and in some cases have become worse.
Cases in point:
Drone warfare and missile strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia have grown substantially under Obama and what Bush initiated, getting secret Justice Department memos written giving "legal" cover for anything the president does but kept secret for reasons of national security (and therefore unchallenged), has become more pronounced since Obama came to power.
Tax cuts for the rich remain in place. Unemployment, foreclosures, student loan debt remain unacceptably high, while the big banks that needed to be broken up remain “too big to fail”.
Meanwhile the financial industry skullduggery that became so pronounced during the Bush years has not been reined in with tough regulations under Obama which can only mean a new financial meltdown and severe economic dislocation will surely be in the offing in the not-too-distant future.
So the "illusion" is we "choose" candidates from the other major party when we believe the current office holders of the other major party fails. But it's a ruse, a con job as so clearly evident by Mr. "change you can believe in" Obama pretty much a facsimile in policy execution as that of his predecessor.
That's the harsh reality; Obama/Biden or Romney/Ryan. It doesn't really matter!!!
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
No comments:
Post a Comment