Week of 11/30/2009

Draft WHO?

- by David Matthews 2

One of the really, REALLY, annoying things about politics of late is this perpetual drive to finish one campaign and begin work on the NEXT campaign, even if it is several years away.

After the 2006 Mid-term Election, the political machines were busy churning up candidates for the 2008 Election, and you had “destiny” candidates spinning up the hype that this would be THEIR campaign to lose.

Worse yet is when you have people who decide to “draft” a candidate into the running, especially someone you would think would be “perfect” but for one reason or another has decided to NOT run. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell was once considered a “draft” candidate back in the 2000 election, but he backed down.

Well it seems there is a NEW movement to “draft” someone for the 2012 Election, even though it’s not for another three years and even though nobody has actually DECLARED their candidacy yet.

So who would it be, you ask? Maybe someone wanted to give Secretary Powell another shot? Well, probably not in the current climate of the GOP. Powell may be willing to be the scapegoat for the Bush Imperium and the chickenhawk neo-cons, but they sure as hell wouldn’t want him anywhere NEAR a position of power over them.

How about one of the trained parrots of talk radio? Maybe the “godfather” of the GOP, Rush “Oxy” Limbaugh? Or perhaps Glenn “Blood Shooting From My Eyes” Beck? Or Lou “Ignore The Duck Season Sign” Dobbs? He’s certainly looking for employment now that he found himself separated from CNN.

Nope. Those aren’t the names being bantered about. The name being bantered about is CHENEY.

Liz Cheney, you ask? You know, the neo-con attack dog who has been doing everything possible to attack the current Democrat control of Washington?

No, wrong Cheney.

Think DICK!

Yes, DICK Cheney! As in the former Vice-President DICK Cheney. The senile old fart who thinks that the office of the Vice-President is accountable to NOBODY at all! The Wal-Mart Greeter-From-Hell whose favorite rebuttal is a request to do something that you are biologically not capable of doing.

There are people who are SERIOUSLY trying to get the former VP to run for the White House in 2012 (presuming they’re not convicted for trying to launch a coup d’etat first).

Why DICK, you wonder? Because he supposedly embodies everything about the GOP that they’re looking for.

And if you think about it… they have a point. He’s a senile old fart who shoots first and manipulates his victims into blaming themselves. He’s never served in the military but he thinks that he knows more about the soldiers on the ground than the soldiers themselves. He believes that he is immune from responsibility. He keeps everything secret, even his whereabouts, but still wants to know what EVERYONE ELSE is doing. If you really think about it… HE IS the GOP!

But, seriously… WHY?

First of all, remember the last time the cons and neo-cons actually managed to “draft” a candidate into the running? Remember former Senator Fred Thompson? You know, “Law and Order” and “Hunt for Red October” Fred Thompson? Remember how you guys thought he would be the IDEAL candidate in 2008? Yeah, that didn’t go so well, did it? His campaign folded faster than a Flat Tax proposal.

Second… doesn’t that come as a slam on your CURRENT so-called “front-runner” candidates? You know, folks like Sarah “Quitter” Palin, Mike “God’s Anointed” Huckabee, and Mitt “I’m really one of you” Romney. Don’t you think that bringing Grandpa Grumpy back from the old folk’s home is something of an INSULT for the wannabes, also-rans, and never-coulds already looking for that 2012 ticket? It would be one thing if Cheney ran in 2008. Then at least he could be seen as the heir apparent to the Bush Imperium. But not now. Not after taking a break.

Third… let’s get brutally honest here… it is WAY TOO EARLY to be discussing 2012 contenders right now.

The last campaign season was a drag on all of us, and that only lasted TWO years. TWO years full of demagoguery and hateful rhetoric and talks of assassinations and lynching and people getting all uppity because they were characterized as being backwater people who cling to God and guns. And you guys want to extend that to THREE YEARS? Or maybe even FOUR? Why not just go ahead and start grooming people for the 2016 ticket while you’re at it? Or maybe you’re already doing that…

How about you cons and neo-cons put away your little “Fantasy White House League” equipment for now and worry about the 2010 mid-term election? After all, the way that the GOP has been shooting itself in the foot (thanks in no small part to your efforts), there may not BE a party for you guys to hang your hat on by the time 2012 comes around.

Week of 11/23/2009

Life Is NOT A Privilege
– by David Matthews 2

Do you know what’s really repulsive? Someone who is intentionally arrogant and pompous.

It’s one thing to be that way unintentionally. To come off as arrogant and not know it. But when you’re that way and you know it, that’s when there’s trouble.

One of the reasons why the French Revolution was as violent as it was partly had to do with the pompous, self-righteous arrogance of the nobles. When the “Let them eat cake” quote was made public, it didn’t matter if Marie Antoinette said it or not, it didn’t matter if it was said in jest or if she was seriously as clueless as it implied, it was still scornful and pompous and arrogant, and it helped fuel the bitterness and the rage that already existed amongst those that were being forced to suffer simply so Ms. Antoinette and her elite friends could party all the time.

“Privilege” is an elitist term. It means that you didn’t really get where you are because of hard work or talent or skills or because you saved your money. You got it because someone else GAVE it to you. The power isn’t in YOUR hands, it’s in someone else’s.

“We serve at the privilege of the President.”

Sound familiar?

Well to a large extent, WE ALL serve at the “privilege” of someone else when we work for a living instead of working for ourselves. If you don’t own the business outright, then your job is at the “privilege” of other people.

There are a lot of things that are considered a “privilege” in our society. Driving is a privilege. Shopping is considered a privilege. Doing business is considered to be a privilege. How many times have you seen a sign that says “We reserve the right to not do business with you” or something to that effect?

But is LIFE ITSELF a privilege?

According to certain members of Congress and the insurance companies, it apparently does.

One of the key problems that healthcare reform tries to fix is people not having insurance coverage. That’s why this idea of a “public option” or a government-run or government-managed program keeps coming up. Because people have either been dropped from their insurance or because they cannot AFFORD to get insurance.

You see, in the minds of insurance companies, healthcare coverage is a PRIVILEGE. Not everyone can get coverage. They certainly don’t want to be stuck paying out money for people who are just going to get sick all the time, right? This is, after all, a form of legalized gambling, and NO gambler in their right mind ever wants to LOSE.

Now many states have been down this road before when it comes to other forms of insurance like car insurance and homeowners insurance. Some people couldn’t afford it. Others just chose not to get it. The government’s solution was simple: require everyone to have it.

You see, in the minds of our corrupt politicians, having a car or having a home is a PRIVILEGE… one that can be taken away at their leisure. You can’t afford insurance? Then you don’t get to drive a car, or you don’t get to own a home. It’s that simple in their corrupt little brains.

But what about healthcare?

No difference, according to our corrupt politicians. If not having it is a problem, then members of the U.S. Senate want to REQUIRE you to have it… OR ELSE!

This is the glorious plan of Senator Max Baucus of Montana, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and the guy who was spearheading the Senate side of the reform program. It should be noted that he’s considered the darling of healthcare companies, reportedly receiving millions in contributions from the insurance companies, pharmaceuticals, and health services, and they would obviously profit heavily from a government decree that would FORCE people to sign up for and pay for health insurance OR ELSE.

I want you to think about the sheer insanity of this idea. If part of the problem with healthcare coverage is that a segment of the populace cannot AFFORD to get healthcare coverage, how does REQUIRING they pay for it serve as a solution?

Make no mistake, this IS what people like Baucus want us to do. They want to FORCE US to enroll for healthcare insurance even if we cannot afford it! And if we do not or cannot afford it, we face FINES. In other words, we will lose even MORE MONEY that we did not have in the first place simply to appease the demented logic of those that have been bought and paid for by healthcare providers and insurance companies and Big Pharma!

It’s one thing to have a public option, a program that would be funded by the taxpayers. At least then there WOULD be coverage without that ever-prevalent THREAT OF FORCE.

And if you don’t think there isn’t that threat of force, ask yourself what happens after you refuse to pay a fine imposed by the government. You know those police chases you see on TV sometimes? What do they usually get stopped for in the first place? Things like unpaid traffic tickets.

Now when asked about this, supporters of this kind of demented logic justify it by falling back ON the car insurance example. Their rationality is that since they can FORCE drivers to get car insurance, they can FORCE the rest of us to get healthcare insurance.

But there is a HUGE difference between owning a car and getting healthcare insurance… and that is that you can always choose to NOT drive a car. If you don’t have coverage, you can choose to NOT DRIVE. But you CANNOT CHOSE TO NOT LIVE! Or at least you’re not supposed to… because that is called SUICIDE!

And yet let’s get brutally honest here… that is EXACTLY the kind of choice Baucus’ “masterpiece” plan called for! Sure there were SOME “hardship exceptions” that were offered, but the basic rule was that you HAD to get coverage, even if you couldn’t afford it… OR you would be fined, which would mean paying even MORE money that you don’t have in the first place… OR you just had to kill yourself. As disturbing as it may seem, and it is just that… there is no other way around that kind of thinking. It’s either pay money that you don’t have… or just kill yourself.

Worse yet, President Obama, in his joint-session address to Congress and the nation, actually SUPPORTED THE IDEA!

Now I would like to think that, much like his predecessor’s “16 words”, President Obama really doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I would like to think that he was simply reading the script that was put before him, and if he really put two brain cells together and put some thought into what he was saying, that he would realize the Machiavellian choice being proposed and would want to change his mind. I’d like to think that he’s smarter than this.

Thankfully… thankfully… there ARE people who saw what was going on and have put in a public option to balance things out. But unless this can be guaranteed by the time it reaches the President’s desk… presuming the whole thing even makes it THAT far… we would have to choose between continuing a bad situation or bringing in something that would make it much worse.

LIFE IS NOT A PRIVILEGE! The very arrogance of certain politicians, no matter the political affiliation, to operate as thought that simple statement was not true only serves to further justify the distrust we have for those who claim to be operating on our behalf.

Week of 11/16/2009

The Armageddon Gambit
– by David Matthews 2

(Writer’s warning: the following article is done completely in jest, and it is best approached as such. Do not presume that any of the suggestions being made should be seriously considered.)

For years liberals have tried to come up with various ways to get rich and powerful people to give up their monies. Often they use a combination of arrogance and the platitude of some “communal equilibrium” to justify it. Sometimes it’s a misguided sense of charity that wins the day, but despite millions upon millions donated, the problems the charity groups CLAIM to deal with somehow aren’t resolved, so the rich and powerful sort of figure that out.

Unfortunately rich and powerful people are greedy and self-centered people. They wouldn’t be rich and powerful if they weren’t greedy and self-centered to begin with. This is why liberals have a hard time convincing rich and powerful people to part with their wealth, because they appeal to a sense of community that the rich and powerful have no real appreciation of.

However I think that I may have come up with the BEST way to convince the rich and powerful to give up their wealth…

Convince them that the world is about to end.

Okay, okay, I know what you’re thinking… this has been brought up over and over again, and usually it’s by some nutcases who read scrolls and invisible numbers and codes in religious documents, or maybe take a little too much LSD and start tripping out, and they supposedly see end days and they go hide in bunkers with dim-witted followers who consider bunkers a step up from their meager trailer park existence.

Guess what? That’s strictly amateur hour material.

Where the bush-league doomsayers fail is that they only have THEIR words and THEIR interpretations. There’s no definitive corroboration that what they are saying will come true. It’s just THEIR word, and if you’re talking about some nutcase who took a lot of drugs when they were younger and was a fourth-grade dropout, then they don’t have too much credibility to begin with.

For this to work liberals need to bring in as many experts as possible. You need to coordinate with as many scientists and seismologists and climatologists as you can to convince the rich and powerful that the world as we know it is going to come to an end. They need proof, and they need proof that even their own people will find hard to refute. In fact you may have to bring their experts into the con for this to work.

Oh, and don’t forget they need to believe that this information is a “secret”. The public will never know about this. If anyone suggests it in the open, then these same experts will immediately refute and reject it outright. This is just for those who “need to know”. Because let’s get brutally honest here... in order for them to believe that the literal “End of the World” is nigh, they need to believe that ONLY THEY will know about it in time to do something to save themselves.

The next thing you need to do is to convince them that you have a way to SAVE them from destruction, because the first instinct these rich and powerful people will have is to find a way to ride out whatever cataclysm is about to happen. And we’re not talking ethereal “salvation” either. No “Rapture”, no biblical calling home of the faithful. We’re talking physical survival. They want to be able to walk into the “new” post-cataclysm world on their own two feet, confident that they survived when the rest of the world didn’t.

For that you need a shelter. You need a special bunker, or a vault, or some sort of ark, or maybe even a combination of these things. Something HUGE… or seemingly huge. Fortunately we have a LOT of abandoned mine shafts and closed-up nuclear silos from those Cold War days. You need to give the impression that these haven’t really been filled up and cemented over.

Once you have them convinced that the end-of-the-world is REALLY about to happen and that you DO have a way for the rich and powerful to survive, that’s when you deliver the hook. And the hook is that you’ll save a “place” for them, but only if they’re willing to give up a sizable portion of their money. Don’t be greedy and ask for ALL of it. They have to believe that, while they won’t be able to take it ALL with them, that they WILL be able to take some of their largesse, so that when they to re-emerge in that “new” post-cataclysm world they will STILL be in positions of power and respect.

Then have them wait. And be sure to update them repeatedly to verify that the “end of the world” is STILL coming and that the masses won’t know what will “hit” them. Be sure to tie in any kind of natural disaster that occurs as being a harbinger for future events.

Presto! Countless billions of dollars eagerly handed to you for whatever government project you want enacted. And if they ask about the spending you can always say that it’s just “cover” to keep the masses ignorant to what’s yet to come.

Now if you’re smart, you’ve convinced the rich and powerful that they have a couple of years to prepare for the end of everything. At least two or three years will suffice. That will impress upon them the urgency to act now instead of waiting. After all, preparations need to be “made”. You give them too much time and they’ll delay giving up their money. You give them too little time and they’ll suspect getting scammed.

The really hard part will come when the so-called “deadline” comes near. If you’re lucky then you’ve convinced your fleeced elites to head to that “safe place” before any sign of bad things reportedly start to happen. You can always come up with reports of certain cataclysms while they’re on their way there.

Unfortunately there will come that point when the fleeced elites will realize that they’ve been taken for a ride. If you’re lucky they’ll be holed up in the “safe place”, being fed a continual supply of doom and gloom, and thinking that the world is in fact coming to an end around them. But at some point they WILL opt to come out of their hiding place and they will be ANGRY if the world is the same as it was when they went in.

However…by this time they will not have the money and power and influence that they once had. They will, at that point, have given up most of their wealth, and the rest of the world will have learned to go on without their influence. They would, essentially, be neutered.

It’s a really great scheme if someone were to orchestrate and organize it. It would deliver countless billions to where it would be needed the most, and it would get those annoying rich people out of the way.

Oh, by the way, there is one last thing that you need to do… you need to make sure that NONE of this EVER goes out to the general public. I know it’s tempting to develop this into some Made-For-Cable feature, or even perhaps a major blockbuster motion picture, but the con won’t work if people suddenly realize that this was all just a farce.

Wait… you mean to tell me they’ve ALREADY turned it into a movie?

Oh nuts. Guess it’s back to using political arrogance and wealth envy.

Week of 11/09/2009

Show Me The Freedoms!
– by David Matthews 2

One of the things that have really bothered me of late has been this cry from conservatives and neo-conservatives about “lost freedoms”. Every time they open their mouths, they cry about “this freedom” or “that freedom” that is lost or threatened by President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress.

But I have to ask… WHAT freedoms are they talking about?

No, seriously, WHAT FREEDOMS?

Media moonbat Glenn “Blood Shooting From My Crying Eyes” Beck constantly cries over the “freedoms” that are lost, or are being lost, or are about to be lost. He and the other flakes and trained parrots for the GOP are acting as though they are the direct mediums to America’s Founding Fathers… when, in truth, if those Founding Fathers knew what was being done in their name, they would probably pull a “Dawn of the Dead” act just to bitch-slap these flakes silly. They certainly NEED a hard dose of reality after the stunts that people like Beck pull.

So the first question that needs to be asked is WHAT FREEDOMS are supposedly being “threatened”?

If the subject is healthcare, WHAT FREEDOMS are supposedly on the line here?

Sure there’s the talk about the dreaded “Fairness Doctrine”, but that particular neo-con boogie man is something that has been opposed for thirty years now. It’s been brought up over and over and over again by liberals who yearn to silence their opponents, but that’s all that it has been… TALK.

Tell you what, Glenn, you find that legislation or regulation that would reinstate the “Fairness Doctrine” and we’ll fight it together. In fact you’d have people on ALL sides of the political spectrum coming out to FIGHT that kind of legislation or regulation. BUT you’d have to find it first.

Conservatives, on the other hand, have actually CENSORED speech in the past. Remember the needless hysteria surrounded Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl “flash”? The congressional hearings, the new censorship laws imposed, the directives to the FCC to crack down on “offensive” material… any of those things ring a bell?

Moonbat Beck wants people to think that “net neutrality” is also a form of censorship. It only works, of course, as long as most people have absolutely no idea what net neutrality REALLY is. For those of you who are more ignorant than a 17^th Century colonist during the Witch Trials, net neutrality would be the one thing that would prevent your Internet provider from blocking the Fox News website, or wanting you to pay extra just to view its streaming videos. You get the picture?

So again… WHAT FREEDOMS are really on the line here?

The “freedom” to choose your own healthcare provider? In many states you don’t have that anyway! Several states just have ONE insurance provider. ONE. And what happens when IT decides you’re not eligible for coverage? Is that what Beck and company call a “freedom”?

Oh… how about the “freedom” of information between a doctor and patient? I’m sure Beck and company would say that THIS is being “infringed” by healthcare reform, right?

UNLESS… the “treatment” being discussed between doctor and patient is something that they could not discuss anyway. Things like… abortion… medicinal marijuana… experimental non-approved drugs... discussions that Beck’s wacky zoo crew friends would RATHER NOT be brought up.

Is THAT the “freedom” that Beck is lamenting over? The “freedom” to BE silenced?

Let’s see… what other “freedoms” that Beck and his wacky zoo-crew friends want to fret about?

The freedom of association, you say? Hmm… which “association” are we talking about? The one between doctors and patients? Doctors and big pharmaceutical companies? Hospitals and insurance providers? Employers and insurance providers? Insurance providers and Americans? Or maybe between Insurance executives, Big Pharma executives, Hospital executives, and their stock brokers, financial advisers, and golden parachutes?

And HOW ARE any of these things “threatened”? Beck and his zoo crew won’t answer that. They’ll just say that it is.

And THEREIN lies the problem! The cons and neo-cons and their wacky zany zoo people like Glenn Beck banter words about like “freedom” without the slightest ounce of PROOF that any of it is actually THREATENED!

In fact Beck and his zoo crew have to actually INVENT so-called “freedoms” to justify their fraudulent claim of them being “threatened”. They have to MANUFACTURE the “right to make a profit” to then claim that it is “threatened”. They have to FABRICATE a “right to own a business” for them to then falsely claim that it is “under attack”.

As a matter of fact, I can and will shoot down that whole premise of Beck and his zoo crew with one simple question! ONE QUESTION! That’s all that it takes to shoot this whole thing down!

Glenn… if you and your cons and neo-con supporters really and truly subscribe to this belief that there is a “right to own a business” and a “right to make a profit”, would you then vigorously defend my perceived “right” to open a brothel between a Day Care Center and a church?

Glenn? Are you there, Glenn? You and your zoo crew myrmidons all of a sudden became painfully silent. Where did you go Glenn? I thought you were all for my perceived “right” to own a business and to make a profit, Glenn. You mean to tell me that there ISN’T such a “right”? You mean to tell me that not all businesses are treated the same? But that is what a “right” entails. It means it’s something that the government has NO BUSINESS getting involved in! You mean to tell me that there ARE some businesses that can-and-must be outlawed or controlled or corralled through government?

Let’s get brutally honest here… if you want to sit there and scream and shout about endangered freedoms, then you had better be prepared to actually EXPLAIN what those “freedoms” are! You got your chalkboard, Glenn… and you know how to use it… so go ahead and actually LIST which specific freedom is endangered.

You want those of us who REALLY support freedom to support your side, Glenn? Then you SHOW US what “freedoms” are at stake!

You see, here’s the problem: Beck and his zany zoo crew are flipping out over manufactured “threats” to freedoms while at the same time ignoring ACTUAL threats and infringements on REAL freedoms. Where WERE these self-styled pseudo-patriots when the government said that “9/11” was their universal justification for everything? Where WAS that three-pointed cap of theirs when it came to the PATRIOT Act or the FISA courts? Where WAS that reverence for America’s Founding Fathers and for freedom itself before November of 2008?

Worse yet, as long as Beck and his myrmidons are screeching about fabricated “threats” - done pretty much at the behest of filthy-rich insurance companies, hospital administrators, and Big Pharma - they diminish the efforts of those who respond to the REAL threats to freedom in this country. So WHEN the government decides to pull another PATRIOT Act or something far worse in the name of “national security”, those of us who TRULY stand up and oppose it will be compared to Beck and his zoo crew. He and his friends are actually doing the cause of freedom a DISSERVICE!

Glenn Beck does what he does to get attention for himself. This has always been the case, no matter if he’s on radio or TV. You can take the character out of zoo radio, but you can’t take zoo radio out of the character.

I’m not saying that the healthcare programs going through Congress doesn’t have some faults. There are some proposals going through that ARE a threat to personal freedom, such as requiring mandatory insurance without providing a public option. But if you’re going to pretend to side with names like Jefferson, Madison, and Franklin, then you had BETTER be serious about it, and you had BETTER provide SPECIFIC instances and examples. Because for those of us who DO take the cause of freedoms seriously, THIS IS NOT A GAME! This is not some talk radio stunt or a shtick to put on Fox News for the sake of ratings.

It’s time for moonbats like Beck to be sent back to the zoo where they belong.

Week of 11/02/2009

What If You Are Wrong?
– by David Matthews 2

“What if you’re wrong?”

“I’m not.”

Famous last words. Or they should be.

Hollywood loves to spin tales of people taking extraordinary steps to do what is right, to save the day, to right the wrongs. No matter how far-fetched the idea or theory may seem, the hero is NEVER wrong about it. The plan will always come through, the fear or concern or suspicion WILL be validated, the idea WILL work.

The hero has every reason to be so cock-sure in what they believe in. They don’t need experience or evidence or proof, they just need GUTS, intuition, determination, and the feeling that THEY ARE RIGHT, and they will win the day.

But what if the hero WASN’T right?

Did it ever occur to anyone how some of the most dramatic stories would have turned out if the hero WASN’T right? What if there WAS no grand conspiracy? What if that hunch WAS wrong? What if the gambit DIDN’T work?

Nobody ever thinks about that. And fortunately in the fantasy worlds of Hollywood, they don’t HAVE to think about it. The hero is ALWAYS right because it SAYS so in the script.

But we don’t live in the fantasy world. We live in the REAL world. And unfortunately for the REAL world, luck is NOT always on the side of the good guys. In fact, the “good guys” are not always “good” to begin with. Sure they may have the right INTENTIONS, but so do most of the things that go horribly wrong.

The key element is RISK. Everything has some measure of risk to it. Action, inaction, decision, indecision, they all have some measure of RISK to them. You can take action, or you can do nothing. Either way there is RISK involved. If you win, you get rewarded. If you lose, you deal with the consequences.

That is how it applies to the vast majority of people in this world. That’s how the system is supposed to WORK.

The problem comes when you have that segment of the populace who DO mess with that system. Who do everything they can to maximize their reward and to minimize - if not eliminate - any and all kinds of consequence.

The great disconnect that exists between Corporate America and the rest of the world is that THEY HAVE changed the rules for themselves. When they win, they win big. They give themselves raises and “retention incentives”, stock options and other perks. But when they lose, they don’t really LOSE. They manipulate the numbers so that it looks like they’re still making money, or at least aren’t losing money. They manipulate those in government so they can outsource or “streamline” jobs to other nations, or bring people in from other nations so they can pay them cheaper than they would have to in the normal business world. They even talk the government into giving them big stinking bailouts under the excuse that they are “too big to fail”.

And when worst comes to worst, they aren’t held accountable for their actions. Sure it may have been THEIR decisions that lead down the road to bankruptcy and dissolution, but THEY can’t be held to account for that! It’s just the “nature of the system”. Sure it can lead to rampant layoffs, the unexaggerated destruction of whole communities, vast economic depression, but THEY can’t be the ones responsible for it! THEY didn’t do anything wrong! It’s just how things are. Things just MAGICALLY happen that way.

And they get away with it too, because they make friends with those who have even more experience in changing the rules to their benefit… those in GOVERNMENT!

Those in government operate under two simple rules:

Rule #1: The government is NEVER WRONG.

Rule #2: When the government is wrong, see Rule #1.

Oh they can hide it, of course. They have plenty of years experience in doing just that. They keep us busy worrying about one fear or another, one threat or another, one convenient “scandal” after another. They play games with political parties, manipulating the rules, doing everything they can to divert attention from the fact that they write themselves more and more immunization from accountability.

Sure “mistakes” can be made, but THEY will never admit to making them. Abuses will happen, but nobody can be held to account for them.

THE ONLY TIME that those in government are held accountable for ANYTHING is when they deem the action to be only for their own self-interests. $90,000 in a freezer is considered “wrong”, but rubber-stamping a $700,000,000,000 program that makes eight banks more powerful and less accountable is perfectly fine and dandy.

They’re always for holding people accountable, as long as THEY aren’t the ones that need to be held to it. They’re always for transparency, as long as THEY aren’t the ones being asked to open up. They’re always for responsibility, but only as long as THEY get to point the finger of blame, and it never seems to fall on THEMSELVES.

Sometimes they soft-pedal it. Sometimes they offer up a “truth and reconciliation commission” that would have no real power and certainly hold no-one to blame. If they feel obliged to have a “special prosecutor” then they may need to toss out a sacrificial lamb… some minor player who will willingly take the fall on some minor charge. Or they’ll insist that we “not dwell on the past”… that we should “move beyond” it all and start anew.

Or sometimes they will brazenly out-and-out refuse to be held accountable for their actions. They’ll dismiss the whole thing under words like “Executive Privilege”, “Legislative Immunity”, or just outright call it for what it is… “Sovereign Immunity”. “Sovereign” as in DOMINION. They are your MASTERS, accountable to no one, not even to God. That is how they carry themselves. That is how they expect us to treat them. To them, government is not “by the people, of the people, and for the people”. Quite the opposite, in fact; the people are supposedly there FOR GOVERNMENT.

Let’s get brutally honest here, the whole concept of JUSTICE itself is PERVERTED whenever you have a group that deems themselves beyond reproach and beyond accountability.

You want to know when corruption in government really starts? It doesn’t start with freebees or the occasional bribe. Those are just pilot fish compared to the whole whale. Corruption actually STARTS when you have those in government who decide that they don’t have to question whether or not they’re doing something right. When they believe they don’t HAVE to justify their actions or account for their activities. It’s not the cop being GIVEN the free coffee or the assemblyman being GIVEN a free meal that makes them corrupt. Businesses give away free coffee or free meals or free newspapers for any variety of reasons. It doesn’t make it corruption. Corruption in government happens when these people believe that these things, and much more, are OWED to them simply BECAUSE they’re in government.

As soon as they believe themselves to be above the rules that the rest of us are bound to, it’s only a matter of time before those with money and influence start cuddling up to them, because they know that they will be the ones to re-write the rules. You take a look at all of the problems we face today, all of the things that are destroying America bit by bit, and you’ll find powerful people using the power of government to put themselves above us, and to put themselves above reproach.

Want to make a quick fortune and don’t care about the consequences? Get government to exempt a whole market out of oversight and let it run rampant. That’s what they did with the price of oil.

Want to make eight banks more powerful than ever before? Give the Treasury Department $700 billion, complete autonomy to spend it as they see fit, and complete immunity from prosecution for lying about how it would be used.

And make no mistake, the problems that we are dealing with right now WILL come back to haunt us in the future as long as we refuse to hold the ones responsible for CREATING them in the first place accountable for their actions.

We need to start asking others “What if you are wrong?” What happens if your hunch doesn’t pan out? What happens if your guess is wrong? What happens if your plan fails?

And we need to pay attention to the answer as well… because it’s one thing to ask “What if you’re wrong?” and be told that they’re not.

It’s another thing completely to be told they don’t have to answer that kind of question AT ALL.