|
Greed
and Selfishness
Are
The Real Enemy Combatants
by
Phil Staudt
March 18, 2009
The
Phil Staudt Blog
Question:
What do you call throwing all of the Democrats and Republicans out of a
plane over the ocean without parachutes?
Answer: A good start.
The reason Obama got rid of using the term "enemy combatants"
for captured terrorists is because it is more appropriate to save that
term for our politicians in Washington.
Why is it that the major things done by our elected representatives and
officials, both Republican and Democrat, are the very things that 80% of
Americans wish they would NOT do, such as:
| >getting
the United States into more debt |
| >getting
us involved in wars that don't make sense and we cannot get out
of |
| >letting
millions of illegal aliens stream across our borders and take
away our jobs |
| >giving
extra special tax breaks to companies who close down factories
here and open up new factories in other countries |
| >giving
extra special tax breaks to oil companies that make record
profits by >gouging
American consumers with high gas prices |
| >bailing
out the banks and insurance companies that have been ripping us
off for years |
| >protecting
the Wall Street firms that lied about Enron |
| >protecting
bankers that caused the Savings and Loan fiasco |
| >protecting
the bankers that caused the mortgage melt-down |
| >lying
to us about relations with orderlies in the Oval Office |
| >lying
to us about weapons of mass destruction |
| >lying
to us about AIG bonuses that they knew about all along |
| >sending
hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to banks overseas |
These are
things that bother most Americans and most Americans wish they would NOT
do, but these are the major things that the politicians we elect,
Republicans and Democrats alike, spend most of their time doing.
We are being made fools of by the people we are electing. By keeping
Americans divided as Republicans and Democrats, the crooks can band
together in Washington by deceiving hard working honest decent folks
into thinking that there is hope that their political party is on their
side and is coming to their rescue. If their party is now in power, then
they are deceived into believing that things that are wrong today are a
result of what was caused back when the other party was in charge, and
they are confident that their party is doing what it takes to solve the
problems and they feel that everything will be fine eventually. But if
their party is not in power, then they have hope that their party will
get elected next time around, because they think that their party is
wonderful and will fix everything. But, for some reason, the major
things that we all expect and hope for from any elected officials are
not what we are getting.
I realize that individuals and groups of people who have agendas and
opinions want to pick a political party and be loyal and faithful to
everybody in their particular party because they believe they will save
them from the rats and scoundrels in the opposing party, but it is my
belief that the politicians know that if they can keep us little people
running around with a "keep true to your school" mentality,
finding faults with our enemies in the other party and supporting our
heroes in our party no matter how rotten and corrupt they are, then the
people in power can bankrupt the country and rob it's citizens and
create a panic environment that will lead to abolishing the Constitution
and freedoms and rights and decency, and we will end up being part of a
"new world order" instead of being the United States of
America.
There are some Republican and Democrat politicians that seem like they
are good and decent, but if they endorsed and/or supported the key
players in either the Republican Party or Democrat Party during the past
10 years, I question their wisdom and I do not trust them. In order for
them to get elected and be in a position of power in either of those
parties it seems to me that they had to be dirty rotten lying crooks. In
my opinion, any decent politicians would not continue to be in the
Republican or Democrat parties, because they are both so corrupt.
Democrats tend to be able to see what is wrong with Republicans, and
Republicans tend to be able to see what is wrong with Democrats, but
somehow they never see how horrible and rotten their own party is, and
that is what needs to be done for our country to move ahead in a
positive direction. People have to be extremely critical and scrutinize
the politicians in their own party so that we can get a better group of
politicians running the country. We need to have lots of candidates on
the ballot for President and Senator and other offices on every ballot
on November 4 in the General Election, with lots of candidates to choose
from that do not belong to a political party. Then we might end up not
electing Harvard grads who have never held real jobs, such as the last
two Presidents. We might even get some good people in office who do not
belong to the "good ol' boys and girls club".
During the past six months we have had the opportunity to observe two
different Presidents from opposing political parties with totally
different policy platforms from different races, but when it comes to
handling the national debt and Wall Street and banks and insurance
companies and protecting our borders and the trade deficit, they end up
doing the same things, which happen to be the very things that 80% of
Americans are against.
I am glad that the United States elected a black President, because it
shows that we are moving closer to a society that truly believes in
equality for all people. But I am not happy about the particular black
President that we have because he and his buddies are ruining this
country and shooting holes in the boat and burying us in insurmountable
debt. I understand that African Americans and gay rights advocates and
women's rights activists and civil rights activists and companies that
stand to profit from irrational exuberance about global warming are all
happy that the Republicans are no longer in power and they think that
"THEY WON", but I wish they would set aside their excitement
of feeling victorious and realize that Obama and his counterparts are
just as deceptive and cunning and crooked as Bush and Cheney and Rove. I
have listened to some nice decent African American folks who keep
sticking up for Obama no matter what, and they feel that it is
imperative for the Obama Presidency to be viewed as positive because the
future of black Americans is at stake and they want to
"REPRESENT". But whether you are white or black or Asian or
Hispanic, your loyalty to the Constitution of These United States and
your freedom and the freedom of our country and our economic well being
at home and international trade should supercede your desire to stick up
for your President because of his ethnicity or his beliefs in any agenda
you may have or his political party.
For Democrat voters that were just happy to see the Bush regime out of
office and were hoping to see America get back to the kind of economic
policies and progress that was made during the Bill Clinton years, I
think we can all now safely say that Barack Obama is NOT a Bill Clinton
President when it comes to the economy and getting the country out of
debt. Don't give me this line about it was leftover from the last
administration. Reagan used that line to justify his deficit spending
and increasing the debt, and George W Bush used that line when he got
into office. The way Obama is spending money is the equivalent to using
his Blackberry and the taxpayer credit card to charge everything under
the sun and buy every piece of jewelry and every stitch of designer
clothing in existence, but that would cost a lot less.
The economy will probably improve while Obama is President. But whether
the economy becomes fantastic or terrible, the debt will still be there.
I voted for Reagan twice, because he said he was going to cut back on
spending and eliminate deficit spending. He gave trillions of tax cuts
to those making over $300,000 a year, but he also spent more money than
had ever been spent and he racked up record amounts of debt. That is the
President that Republicans look to as their ultimate hero. Any President
can look good if they keep spending more money we don't have. I voted
for Bill Clinton twice because he said that he was going to cut back on
spending and eliminate deficit spending. And that is exactly what he
did. It was the only time in my 48 years that the United States actually
reduced debt. It would be nice if we had a President that did that now.
There are lots of things that a President cannot do, and there are lots
of things that Presidents can do that I disagree with. But one thing
that a President can do is spend a lot of money, or not spend a lot of
money. Is it too much to ask to have a President to not rack up so much
debt that the country goes broke? What can be more basic than that? No
matter whether or not you agree with the President on issues, if he or
she does not control spending, they should not be President. That should
be a prerequisite in every voters mind. The current President and the
last President have spent so much money in the past six months that it
does not compare to any spending and borrowing that has ever been done
in the history of the world, or even could have been imagined. That is
what all of the news networks and media and bloggers and everyone
drinking lattes at Starbucks should be talking about.
At the end of the Bush administration all of his buddies and supporters
and the people who got him into office had to get paid back one last
night before he rode off into the sunset, so a trillion dollars went to
that. Then, once Obama got into office, he had to pay back his buddies
and supporters and the people who got him into office, and the Democrats
had been waiting a long time to be in control of the checkbook and had a
long list of things to buy, so a trillion dollars went to that. But
what's a few trillion taxpayer dollars among friends?
Obama supporters defending his reckless spending and lies about AIG
bonuses are sounding a lot like the Bush supporters I have been
criticizing ever since Bush told America we had to run a deficit in
order to pay Enron to build 2500 power stations across the country or we
would all be in the dark after blackouts mysteriously happened in
California (they didn't vote for Bush) after the behind-closed-doors
private meetings with Cheney where they figured out how to pay back
Enron and Ken Lay for being the largest contributor to the Bush family
campaigns for decades. Of course, there were a multitude of lies and
shady deals after that by the Bush administration, but Obama supporters
need to open their eyes and realize that Obama is just more of the same
and he and his staff and lobbyists and contributors are all in the same
corrupt bed together. Wake up, people, before you are all sold down the
river. Obama is "change you can believe in", and believe you
me that his changes in rules he is pushing for about gays and abortion
and cell stem research are just a way to get people who agree with his
side on moral issues to follow behind him like ducks in a row the same
way the followers of Bush praised him and turned a blind eye to the lies
and deception and corruption because he occasionally made vague
statements that indicated that he might have been against abortion now
and then.
I am convinced that if Obama read polls and statistics today that said
that 80% of Americans thought it should be illegal to act gay in public,
and if he was convinced that the majority of voters would vote for a
candidate that outlaws acting gay in public, Obama would change his
policies on gay rights tomorrow. I do not believe that Obama really
cares about gay rights, any more than Bush really cares about abortion.
I said the same thing about Bush for eight years. They just use these
issues to get votes, and follow polls and statistics and how many
kickbacks and perks they can get, and they choose their policies and
supposed convictions based on popularity and votes.
Since most people get their news from CNN and Fox and NBC, things are
not going to be improved if that is all people see, which is what the
crooks are counting on. The big news networks are owned by corporations
that make a lot more money in businesses that are not news related.
Delivering the news is nowhere near as profitable as the money that
General Electric, the owner of CNBC and NBC, stands to make off of
global warming. The biggest advertisers of the news networks and
newspapers has been the car companies and insurance companies and banks.
So who's side would you expect them to be on? The point is that the news
media is in the tank with these corrupt elected officials both
Republican and Democrat alike. Greed. Greed. Greed.
What we need right now is people on both sides of issues like abortion
and gay rights to work together to get rid of all these crooks and
either change or abandon these horrible political parties that are using
these kinds of divisions to destroy the Constitution of These United
States of America. The bill of rights is designed for all of us to be
able to play together on the same playground and get along. It does not
mean that you have to get rid of your moral values or beliefs, but it
also means that the bullies can not be allowed to make you change your
morals and beliefs. And that means that there needs to be an attitude of
cooperation in order to pass laws that affect the national debt and
lobbyists and economy and ecology and law enforcement and courts and
taxes and military action. What we have instead is each person and each
group having one issue that they are pulling for and they are willing to
give up all their rights and freedoms, and the rights and freedoms of
everyone else, just for the sake of being able to trample on the rights
and freedoms of people that oppose them on the one issue that is
important to them. Nobody seems to be interested in equal rights. All
they want is special rights for themselves and forget everybody else.
But the people who having opposing views could get together and make a
list what they agree on and expect for elected officials as minimum
requirements. Then if we end up with politicians who do not perform
adequately based on the things that most of us agree on, we could agree
to get rid of anyone that does not measure up, whether or not we agree
with them on other things.
*For instance, we may all disagree on how much taxes different people
and companies should have to pay, but we can all agree that we need to
stop piling up debt and running ridiculous deficits, and that debt needs
to be paid down, and we can all agree that we are not going to vote for
anybody that racks up more debt and runs deficits, even if it means not
voting at all. And if elected politicians break their promise, we can
all agree to call for impeachment and run them out of the country.
Groups and individuals from both sides should pool some of their money
and run ads on television to inform people that is basic and fundamental
for any candidates from any political party.
*For instance, as long as Democrats know that they are guaranteed to get
99% of gay voters and Republicans know they are guaranteed 99% of voters
who want to see abortion illegal, regardless of whether or not they
promise to get us out of debt debt, neither of those groups has any say
on election day regarding debt as long as they all vote. If those two
groups were in agreement that they were only going to endorse candidates
that promise to not get our country into any more debt, then both the
Republican candidates and Democrat candidates would be forced into
making that an issue and would have to promise voters to not get us into
more debt. But as long as it goes the way it is now, and gay voters and
anti-abortion voters will vote for anybody as long as they agree with
voters on abortion and/or gay rights, no matter how much debt they get
us into, then we will continue to end up with lousy candidates that will
get us into more debt.
*For instance, as long as Republicans know that 99% of the voters who
want less taxes for people making over $300,000 dollars are going to
vote Republican, and as long as Democrats know that 99% of the voters
who want to keep their food stamps are going to vote Democrat,
regardless of whether or not they promise to get us out of debt, neither
one of those groups has any say on election day regarding debt as long
as they all vote. But if all of the voters were convinced to not vote
for anyone unless they promised to not get our country into more debt,
then both the Republican candidates and Democrat candidates would be
forced into making that promise. But as long as it goes the way it is
now, and both of these groups of voters will vote for anybody as long as
they agree with voters about taxes and/or food stamps, no matter how how
much debt they get us into, then we will continue to end up with lousy
candidates that will get us into more debt.
*For
instance, if 10% of the voters will only vote for a white candidate,
regardless of whether or not they promise to get us out of debt, and if
10% of the voters will only vote for a black candidate, regardless of
whether or not they promise to get us out of debt, neither one of those
groups has any say on election day regarding debt as long as they all
vote. But if all of the voters were convinced to not vote for anyone
unless they promised to not get our country into more debt, then both
the Republican candidates and Democrat candidates would be forced into
making that promise. But as long as it goes the way it is now, and both
of these groups of voters will vote for anybody based exclusively on
race, no matter how how much debt they get us into, then we will
continue to end up with lousy candidates that will get us into more
debt.
If I had the
opportunity to get a high paying job working for the Federal Government,
doing a job that is respectful and decent, I would not refuse to take
the job just because the President at the time does not belong to a
certain political party, and I would not quit my job just because a
different political party comes into power, and I would not decide
whether or not to take the job based on whether or not the people in
power agreed with me on moral issues. Nor would I expect anyone to
decide which corporation to work for based solely on the personal moral
values and the lifestyles of board directors unrelated to business. The
aforementioned major things that I expect from the President of The
United States and other elected officials should be what we focus on,
and then once the car has an engine and wheels we can figure out how to
get the kind of seats and stereo we want.
If you have
been voting based solely on your desire for gay rights, would you vote
for a candidate that promised you gay rights and also promised that in
five years from now there will no longer be a United States of America
or a Constitution and we would all be under Chinese rule, would you
still vote for that candidate? If you have been voting based solely on
your desire for gay rights, would you vote for a candidate that promised
you gay rights and also promised that in five years from now there will
no longer be a United States of America or a Constitution and we would
all be under Chinese rule, would you still vote for that candidate? If
you have been voting based solely on your desire to see abortion
illegal, would you vote for a candidate that promised you to make
abortion illegal and also promised that in five years from now there
will no longer be a United States of America or a Constitution and we
would all be under Chinese rule, would you still vote for that
candidate? If you have been voting based solely on your desire for gay
rights, would you vote for a candidate that promised you gay rights and
also promised that in five years from now there will no longer be a
United States of America or a Constitution and we would all be under
Chinese rule, would you still vote for that candidate? I believe that is
exactly the way that many voters in America are voting.
You and I do not have to vote for politicians that are going to ruin the
country just because we want to vote against politicians that have
beliefs we do not like. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still
voting for evil. It is your right as a Citizen of the United States of
America to not vote at all. If 30% or 40% of the voters insisted on no
longer voting for the lesser of two evils, and declared they were not
going to vote at all unless they can vote for candidates who explicitly
promise to not to get us into more debt, no matter what else they
promise to do. If 30% or 40% of the voters insisted on no longer voting
for any Republicans or Democrats because they have had their chances,
and have done nothing but put this country on a crash course with
economic depression and moral destruction and a communist style
government, then these parties would be forced to either get serious and
change their practices or cease to exist.
We the
people need to come up with some minimum standards that most Americans
can agree with for whom we elect. Getting us out of debt would be a good
start.
by Phil Staudt
March 18, 2009
The
Phil Staudt Blog
Recommended
Articles:
GOP Budget: $500 Billion-plus Annual Deficits
Written by Thomas R. Eddlem Thursday, 02 April 2009
 Tags: Democrats Obama
Republicans Bush
|
Very well put!!! I hold the same views on our current political system. I wonder if the people will ever get it?
Reply to this
Great article Phil, but you better watch out with that talking about the illegals and the Bill of Rights....that might make you a terrorist.
You might Be a Terrorist If...
Reply to this
Humm... interesting,
I like the way that you have backed most of your opinions with facts...
This post is a great read and makes alot of sense...
Keep up the good work
Reply to this
Thank you for such a great blog. Where else could anyone get that kind of information written in such an incite full way? I have a project that I am just now working on, and I have been on the look out for such info.
Reply to this