VOTERS MUST WATCH AND LISTEN.

It should be their obligation to do those two things..

Every voter should put everything aside, politics and political affiliation, prejudice, emotions and even gut feelings; and use a little bit of his or her G.. given gumption to be able to vote his or her heart out for the country, for a change; because this was not going to be just any regular or ordinary election; it was one that would determine the future, not only of their generation, but of many more generations to come.

We would be looking at forty, fifty years from now, and what would happen then to our children and their children's children, and how the impact of today's and other current events, with respect to the present campaign by both political parties, would have on them.

Joe Klein, the media contributor, described the overall campaign by both Democrats and Republicans as a "vapid and vaporous" campaign; but was it?

Or, should it be so, when the two visions of America have been clearly defined before the citizenry; one being that the general population, or the middle class, should be wielding more political and economic power, while the other, would be a government dwelling on past practices that were unsuitable for present day economy, with the rich getting richer, and the poor, poorer.

A government that would insist that greatness was or could be achieved through flexing strong military power or by sheer empty-headed bravado, just because an ample reason was there, like Iran being able to acquire a nuclear bomb, and therefore it (Iran) must be attacked for the sake of Israel.

Regarding the second type, only the high income earning individuals, of billionaires and millionaires, big financial institutions and top corporations, normally seen as the major participants in the economy and in the "free-market" environment, have full control or influence over the fiscal capability or capacity, and thus permitting Wall Street to control the entire economy of the nation.

The people always thought that they had an elected body, meaning the United States Congress, taking care of the financial and other national affairs, and that was how it should be; but instead, there were professional lobbyists representing special interests, who have the power to change or distort what Congress has decided; because they, special interests, thought that they have the influence to reverse whatever legislation that affected them adversely.

In other words, though, on the surface, everything appeared to be normal, but underneath it all, there was more to it than met the eye; with special interest groups capitalizing on whatever suited their agendas. That was called "the System".

That was how the real Washington D.C. politics happened to be like; and whatever the people did, they could not change the system that has been built into the free-market or the free enterprise environment. Therefore, in reality, almost nothing was actually done without the input or say of those special interest groups.

It was not that the government did not have a part to play in all the goings on; as it was responsible for the life of the nation, but what went on behind the scenes or, as they put it, closed doors, made its (government's) policies to be superficial and almost innocuous.

It all sounded facetious, but president after president has been subject to that experience; and that was how "business" was conducted on "the Hill".

In President Barack Obama's case, he recently let the cat out of the bag, by saying, "You cannot change Washington from the inside; you can only change it from the outside". Meaning, it was the U.S. House of Representatives itself, with a Republican majority via the 2010 mid-term elections, and other special interest entities that were putting stumbling blocks in his way.

In addition to what the lobbyists and their surreptitious masters, the special interest groups, were up to in the background, there were other influences from outside, like foreign governments and other powerful institutions.

He, Obama, practically knew about what went on, because he was a Senator from the South side of Chicago before; and he had thought that, as president, he could get "the System" to change; however, the stonewalling by "the powers that be", plus the Republican House, as mentioned above, would not let him; and for almost four years, he has been struggling to loosen himself and his administration from their grip, but all to no avail.

As the aspersion, which was being thrown around by his detractors went, that he wanted to engage the country in class warfare, but that was not true, or not as Romney and his friends were making the voters to believe that Obama was dividing the country.

There was no way that he could implement any of his policies without "the system" remaining unchecked. His agenda for a better economy has been blocked all around by it (the System).

He would not destroy it, because he could not; but he would have regulations or regulatory measures in place to put it in check.

... but guess what would happen. It would be the Congressional Republicans and the citadels of the business world, such as the American & U.S. Chambers of Commerce, that would vehemently object to those regulations that Obama has set up to make "the system" malleable or to get it under control, and to make it to respond responsibly to public demands, such as private sector job creation. That was the basis of high unemployment.

The System has made government business to drift into its enclave of secrecy, which was unhealthy for carrying out honest undertakings, with the best interest of the general population being foremost in mind. It was for the population's sake that the government existed, but that has been turned around.

Guess again, who the System would find to fit the mold of the person it needed to challenge Obama in his second term bid; and by some obscure happenstance, wanted to be president of the U.S.? It was none other than Mitt Romney.

He has been fighting for the highest office in the land for the past six or seven years within the Republican Party, and failed. However, he was now a clear and perfect "candidate" to be favored to champion the cause of the top echelon of the business world and their political friends that were benefiting more from "the System".

Mitt Romney and people like him were driving it (the System); remembering that he was (and is) a Wall Street magnate, running Bain Capital, a private equity firm, before he entered the political field.

In other words, suffice it to say that his business "acumen", history, background and enormous wealth would not allow the RNC and/or the party hierarchy to choose anyone else to represent the party (Republican Party) in the 2012 presidential race, solely for the fact that he was a "natural choice" for protecting "the System", which, was coincidentally embedded in what was commonly referred to as "Capitalism".

Rightly put, "the System" was what was linking the free-market and Capitalist agendas together, as they always went hand in hand. Now, Capitalism was a broad nomenclature; but since it was combined with the System, to alter it (the System) would mean that the whole world would also undergo a drastic, dramatic transformation or change.

Capitalism was widespread, and it involved The World Bank, The International Monetary Fund and even far, far beyond; and the "metamorphosis" would be a humongous experience for all the financial markets, as it would affect every corner of the globe.

The outcome would be extremely unimaginable; and not that the billionaires and millionaires in the U.S. and around the world did not know what would happen; the problem would only be how they would handle the newly emerged situation. With all those restrictions (regulations) obstructing them, they would have nowhere to turn.

They were happy as things were; and they loved the "status quo", as it worked very graciously and profitably for them.

Obama has opted to side with the middle class (and working people) and to initiate the new change; and from the point of view of the wealthy and their associates, (billionaires and millionaires), he was promoting or pushing for a political upheaval to erupt among the people; namely, between two factions of American society, the poor and the wealthy.

That presented a vivid economic picture, with the "haves" on one side, and the "have nots" on the other; and that was where the class warfare accusation against Obama came from.

The scenario, as espoused in this article, was what the 2012 presidential election was all about. It was not about a political philosophy of small government, or even the government's "overspending" attitude.

The real fact of the matter was that, Plutocracy or "chrysoaristocracy" (the rule by the wealthy) was what the country was fast aiming to become; and Obama and the Democrats would not want that for their children and their children's children. They, as a party, would do all they could to stop it.

To many people, his second term as U.S. president would be to galvanize and bring the middle-class up to where it should be on the social ladder. However, as said before, that would upset the apple cart, so to speak; and the wealthy, like Mitt Romney and friends, would hardly want that to happen.

Fortunately, the whole action of both the Obama and the Romney campaigns, was panning out before the voters; and they would be doing themselves a big favor by opening their ears and listening very carefully to what the two candidates, their surrogates, other politicians and their wives were saying, before they (voters) decided to cast their vote on November 6th, 2012, election day.

There would be no regrets, after the fact, if they had seized the occasion correctly and made the right decisions. The consequences would only be reverberating or resonating in the past, and they would have nothing to worry about.

However, if they had gone in the opposite direction to listen to Obama's opponent, the consequences would haunt them for the rest of their lives.

That is how this hub sees it.


Comments 2 comments

Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 4 years ago from Texas

You open by suggesting that the voters should take an "objective" approach to the welfare of our country and our future and then you use that platform as justification that Obama's approach is much more aligned to those considerations than any other alternative...where is your objectivity. Let's get real...Obama is not going to destroy the rich nor are his calls to tax them more going to solve any economic or debt problems...the numbers do not work. Ultimately what Obama does is destroy the middle class and that is quite apparent at the moment. When a government taxes and regulates the investor out of the process of risk taking, the economy shrinks; jobs disappear and people get poorer including the middle class who will bear the burden downstream for Obama's sins. Socialism and Communism does not support a middle class existence...one is either rich or poor with a great void in between. Obama can never extract enough money from the rich to cure the ills of the poor. As he gives away more and more, more and more will be demanded and that burden will hit the middle class who will eventually have to opt to either get rich or join the poor in line for the "free government cheese". ~WB


owurakwasip 4 years ago Author

Wayne Brown,

You are missing the point. What Obama would do would change "the System", which has been set up in such a way that it exploited the middle class and ordinary workers.

The so called "playing field" would be made even; with all types of opportunities open to every citizen, no matter what his or her social background.

Also, with all the tax loopholes closed, it would be difficult for the wealthy to stash away money in off-shore safe-deposit boxes and in overseas banks, and that would increase the revenue of the government for it to handle the deficit and deal with the National debt. That would be good for the economy.

In other words, what he (Obama) would do would be to revamp the IRS tax code for those so called "job creators" to pay their fair share in taxes; period.

That would not be asking for too much; would it?

Fairness would replace the cheating.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working