Bye Bye Barry

 

Joel S. Hirschhorn

 

The final results are in on this historic November day.  Despite the hundreds of millions of dollars he raised, Barack Obama has lost the 2008 presidential election.  American voters have boldly spoken truth to arrogance.  Turned out that all those pre-election opinion polls that showed Obama’s inability to get over 50 percent support were prescient.  Much of the public was never comfortable with Obama, though he clearly was so comfortable acting like he already was president.

 

Hillary and Bill Clinton are probably drinking champagne and having the sweetest time since Bill won his first presidential election.  Hillary must now bite her lip repeatedly and resist saying publicly that “I told you so!”  Hillary in 2012 will reveal that she learned her lessons well.

 

All that Obama audacity of arrogance from the smiling, glib politician finally died the death it so richly deserved.  Too many pundits will blame his loss on his blackness and racist voters.  But the larger truth is that sufficient voters saw through the many lies and deceptions.  Obama always had a hard time giving a simple, short straight answer to tough questions.  He was always mentally calculating exactly how to game his answers so that he would achieve all the benefits he had his eyes on.  He was simply too damn presumptuous and too smart for his own good.  In the end, Americans do not want the smartest person in the presidency or endless nuancing.  They want someone they can easily understand and trust, despite their skepticism.  There were many reasons not to trust the calculating Obama to do anything he promised to do or, for some people, to fear he might.

 

And now the bloviating pundits will also blame third party presidential candidates for siphoning votes from Obama, as if Americans have no right to exercise their political freedom and vote for someone they honestly think has the best policy positions and would most help restore American democracy.

 

Jon Stewart and other late-night comics will feast on these election results, as they should.  I can’t wait to hear jokes about Obama’s wife becoming a more vocal and militant critic of the good old USA, now that she has proof positive that so many Americans are stupid white racists.

 

Of course, now the nation must suffer through the ineptness, confusion and dementia-like dullness of the living-in-the-past John McCain, tough-talking but brain dead.  Will the McCain presidency look like an extension of the incredible terrible George W. Bush White House?  Of course.

 

Still living off a once-true characterization as a maverick, McCain must now surround himself with people who actually are smart and knowledgeable about myriad issues.  Should be no problem finding enough lobbyists.  Pundits will start speculating that McCain will be lucky just to stay alive for four years, but thankfully his vice-president seems more capable.  One thing for sure: the power plutocracy that really runs the country will have little trouble pulling the strings behind the scenes and keep the puppet McCain dancing to tunes written by corporate interests.

 

Ralph Nader summed up this way: “A large fraction of Americans know that we need a Jeffersonian political revolution to fix our corrupt system.  They were not fooled by the Obama rhetoric about change, not from someone that has been a product of and servant for the two-party plutocracy.  Yes, all the votes for me and the other third-party presidential candidates spelled the difference between Obama winning and losing.  Our voters correctly protested against the corrupt two-party system.  They did not elect McCain.  Only those who voted for McCain elected him, and that is something they must live with as they watch a McCain administration continue dismantling American democracy and budget-busting global warmongering.”

 

Cynthia McKinney wisely noted that “It is time to stop saying God bless America, and begin repeating God save America.  The good news is that we will build even greater public support for a true political revolution during the McCain presidency.  All too often things must get much worse before they can get better.  They will get worse.”

 

As to Obama, half-jokingly he said: “I may come back as a third-party candidate.”  Or did that reflect a calculation that Democrats had learned their lesson?  As to all the screaming from the left that the Republicans stole this election also, Obama immediately said “John won it fair and square.”  Thanks Barry, exactly what I expected from a phony change agent.

 

[Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through www.delusionaldemocracy.com.]

Once upon a time when governments no longer served most of their citizens it was the most economically disadvantaged that could be counted on to rebel against tyranny and injustice.  Times have changed, for the worse, despite the spread of democracy.

 

Here we are with a two-party plutocracy that preferentially serves corporate and wealthy interests and lets the middle class suffer and sink.  Plausibly, the middle class is unready to revolt because it still maintains a relatively good standard of living despite rising economic insecurity.  But what about the lowest 40 percent of Americans that are the working poor?

 

A recent survey of this group by the Washington Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University conducted this past June looked at the beliefs of adults ages 18 to 64 working 30 or more hours a week, not self-employed and who earned no more than $27,000 in 2007.  The results show a fascinating dichotomy.  Though there is widespread pain and discontent there is also a stubborn faith in the American dream despite little help from government.

 

Ninety percent of this group sees the current economy negatively, either not so good or poor, with 52 percent feeling financially insecure and 50 percent feeling less secure than a few years ago.  The fractions saying they have difficulty affording basic things are severe, including: 88 percent that cannot save money for college or other education for their children, 82 percent paying for gasoline or other transportation costs, 81 percent saving money for retirement, 65 percent paying for health care and health insurance, 65 percent handling child care, close to 60 percent paying credit card bills, monthly utility bills and rent or mortgage costs, and 47 percent buying food.  Three quarters say it has gotten harder to find good jobs and nearly that fraction for finding affordable health care, and 68 percent finding decent, affordable housing.

 

In the past year this group has had to take many actions to make ends meet, including 70 percent that cut electricity use and home heating; 62 percent that took an extra job or worked extra hours, 51 percent that postponed medical or dental care and 50 percent that took money out of savings or retirement funds.

 

All this sounds pretty bleak.  But are these people mad and pessimistic?  Not exactly.

 

An amazing 69 percent are hopeful about their personal financial situation, 59 percent believe they are more likely over the next few years to move up in terms of their social class, 59 percent believe that their children will have a standard of living much or somewhat better than theirs, and 56 percent think they will achieve the American dream in their lifetime.

 

Do these lower economic class, hardest hit Americans that account for 25 percent of the adult population believe that government helps them?  No.  Only 22 percent believe that government programs are making things better for them.  But apparently they have bought hook, line and sinker into Barack Obama’s change rhetoric, with a 2 to 1 margin favoring him over John McCain.  And when it comes to beliefs about which candidate will do better for them the margins favoring Obama go up to 3 or more to 1 for improving their own financial situation, the national economy and the national health care system.  Similarly, Obama is seen as much more concerned with their needs and better represent their values.  All very good news for Obama, except that only 70 are registered to vote and about a third saw no difference in whether Obama or McCain was in office.

 

Faith in Obama, however, pales in comparison to the other source of comfort for dealing with hard economic times.  A striking 78 percent find religion or faith in God helps them get through tough economic times.

 

The unmistakable conclusion from all these data is that no rebellion against the power elites running the two-party plutocracy seems likely.  If the bottom 40 percent of Americans in terms of income still believe in the American dream and change-spouting politicians like Obama, it is hard to believe that the more affluent middle 40 percent of the population are ready to support more radical change through political rebellion.

 

Interesting how gasoline prices are dropping as we approach the Republican and Democratic conventions and Election Day.  Apparently, America’s ruling class knows what it is doing.  It can keep channeling more and more of the nation’s wealth to the rich, Upper Class producing more economic inequality without fearing the kind of political revolution that Thomas Jefferson thought the nation needs periodically.  Consider this: In the three decades after World War II household inflation-adjusted income of the bottom 90 percent increased 83 percent compared to 20 percent increase for the top 10 percent.  In contrast, in the past three decades, the bottom 90 percent saw only a 10 percent increase while the top 10 percent received an increase of 232 percent!  The two-party stranglehold on our political system has produced rising economic inequality.

 

Forget all that nonsense about the proletariat.  Most Americans use their faith in God or religion or conventional politicians to cope, even in some of the most insecure economic times in American history.  They remain overly confident in voting as the path to change.  The ruling class has successfully used propaganda to dumb down and manipulate most of the public because delusion has become the opiate of the masses.

 

In God and Barack Obama We Trust could be placed on all our currency if the views of millions of Americans are taken seriously.  Don’t you feel better?

 

[Joel S. Hirschhorn can be reached through www.delusionaldemocracy.com.]

Poisonous Plutocracy Pushes Economic Inequality

 

Joel S. Hirschhorn

 

The biggest political issue receiving no attention by the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates is the powerful plutocracy that has captured the government to produce rising economic inequality.

 Read the rest of this post...

Compared to the politics of today, the spring of 1968 seems like a period of unbridled optimism: young people took to the streets for a better world and 'utopian' and 'radical' were not yet dirty words. But while many of those young radicals are now establishment figures in politics, media and business, the world they sought has not come about.
 Read the rest of this post...

God Bless Ralph Nader

Joel S. Hirschhorn

Because he wants to salvage American democracy and help Americans, Ralph Nader is running for president again. He deserves the support of all Americans that see themselves as progressives, dissidents, independents, and patriots who want to remove the stranglehold of the two-party plutocracy on our political system.
 Read the rest of this post...

Perhaps a global political apocalypse has already arrived.

Activists and dissidents should understand that evil forces and tyrannical governments have evolved. Just as human knowledge and science expand, so do the strategies and instruments used by rulers, elites and plutocrats. By learning from history and using new technology they have smarter tools of tyranny. The best ones prevent uprisings, revolutions and political reforms. Rather than violently destroy rebellious movements, they let them survive as marginalized and ineffective efforts that divert and sap the energy of nonconformist and rebellious thinkers. Real revolution remains an energy-draining dream, as evil forces thrive.
 Read the rest of this post...

Title, Pakistan’s Strategic Culture and Foreign Policy Making: A Study of Pakistan’s Post 9/11 Afghan Policy
Author Ijaz Khan
Publisher Nova Science Publishers, New York, USA
The book studies Pakistan’s Strategic Culture and Foreign Policy Decision–Making process with the help of Prof. Karl Deutsch’s Streams of Information Model and explains how and so why Pakistan made the decision to support Taliban, then why and how, in the wake of 9/11, it changed that policy, noting the difficulties it is facing as a result of the changed Afghan Policy. It is argued that Pakistan’s support for Taliban was a result of its strategic culture that had developed over years, that saw religious extremist forces as good and reliable tools of policy, more precisely its security policy. Thus all its domestic perceptions were woven around Pakistan’s establishment belief that Taliban serves Pakistan’s regional security interests best. The change resulting in abandoning of Taliban was more a result of external inputs which conflicted with its long held security perceptions which continues to be unchanged for most part. Thus one notes a growing crisis of state and society and more importantly of international credibility as long as Pakistan’s role in the ‘War against Terrorism’ is concerned as pro Taliban Policy continues to be viewed as a better option in a wide range of establishment intelligentsia, not just the religious extremists. The book ends with suggestions how and where to change Pakistan’s decision making process by changing its strategic culture, as required by Pakistan’s announced change in its Foreign/Afghan Policy. The study helps in understanding Pakistan’s role in the ‘War against Terrorism’ addressing issues of capabilities as well as willingness.
 Read the rest of this post...

Bhutto had no business being in Pakistan but for Rice. Rare indeed does a government policy end in so spectacular a failure as having the bloody brains blown out of a former and potentially future head of state before millions of onlookers. It was in the name of the State Department's "Freedom and Democracy" agenda that Rice first conceived of the purely cosmetic notion of having the telegenic and politically pliable Bhutto pose as the duly elected spokesmodel, for what was to remain a brutal, military tyranny directed by the US to root out, torture, and exterminate every deemed pro-Taliban/Al-Queda lifeform in Pakistan from lizard up. Even in an Administration infamous for using plausible gullibility to exonerate its members from personal responsibility and guilt for catastrophic failures, surely this last, in a long, long line, of world historical blunders should compel that rarest of occasions in the Bush White House, a resignation for failure. Rice has got to go.  Read the rest of this post...

Guerrilla’s Merger into Army? : Unfortunate! Krishna Hari Pushkar Berlin, Germany In Nepal, there is ongoing blackjack discussion about the “Integration of Maoist Rebellion Guerrillas into Nepal Army” and most probably it will be amalgamated, this situation emerged due to State is under the control of Insurgents. I have personally criticised the model and way of peace accord since beginning because of its poor feasibility, now it’s hindering to go forward on agreed peace road map. State is compelled to make one after other frequent amendments as per Maoist will and strategy. I would say, “State lost dignity” in the case. However, I am not against the peace process, my concern is only technical part of peace process that drastically failed and now state anguishes with severe crisis.  Read the rest of this post...

From Salih Mirzabeyoglu's "The State of Grandsublime" (I am the editor of this work): ISLAM AND STATE Islam is tightly connected to the state, just as the soul is integrated, inseparably, with the body; it is inextricable, and an organ system can never be imagined without it. • Is it imaginable that Islam, which embraces the whole universe, excludes the state, which is the aggregate of material and spiritual values of the human community? • Now that "people" are the External (Zahir) of the absolute Truth (Haqq) and the absolute Truth (Haqq) is the Inward (Batin) of "people," the unique principle of an Islamic state is the absolute Truth (Haqq), and the sovereignty uniquely belongs to it.  Read the rest of this post...

From Salih Mirzabeyoglu's "The State of Grandsublime" (I am the editor of this work): THE DESCRIPTION AND CHARACTERISTICS OF DEMOCRACY Since a very early time, one may have seen various descriptions and explanations of democracy. When talking about the types of states and governments, there is a widespread habit of categorizing them into three general types: monarchy, aristocracy and democracy. By the way, let us point out the following fact: “The word government means the power used by the state agencies as well as the agency using this power. This concept sometimes expresses all the boards using the power including the 'Great National Assembly' and sometimes it targets only the 'Council of Ministers.' In short, the government is a part and an organ of the state.”  Read the rest of this post...

How democratic are the institutions upon which we depend for the promotion and protection of democracy? The truth is that that many of them, especially the international ones, are not democratic at all. In most cases they are not even representative. This may seem to be a bit of a contradiction. It is not as contradictory or as undesirable as it at first appears. Even in the most dedicated democracies many officials that can have a profound effect on the lives of people and that can be very powerful in their own right are not elected but appointed, and they can be in charge of institutions that are likewise neither created nor run democratically. Heads of law enforcement agencies are good examples.  Read the rest of this post...