Politicians And Money
By Ted Baiamonte Comments: bje1000@aol.com (04/19/07)
Over the last few days the drive by liberal media, as the saintly but long winded Rush Limbaugh calls it, has treated us to headline stories about how much money the Democrats have raised. At last count Hillary had raised $26 million and Obama $25 million. It is big news because everyone appreciates that money is very important in politics, and that candidates spend most of their time raising it because with it they can afford to advertise for votes. It's sort of a relentless chicken/egg cycle: you raise money; you advertise with it to get more votes; then you are able to raise more money because you are getting more votes. The Democratic cycle continues until it has landed someone in the White House as our blessed President. Could you be prouder of the process?
So why doesn't the media do its job and tell the truth about the whole intellectually corrupt process? Why don't candidates just publish a book with their positions in it, and just mail it anyone who wants to know what they stand for rather than advertise through TV 28 second TV commercials? The answer is simple really. In modern day Democratic America people find a 28 second TV commercial (the mother's milk of politics) to be more influential than a 300 page book. In fact, a best seller in our nation of 300 million people requires sales of only 30,000 books. No one reads books any more, but they do watch and respond to 28 second meaningless TV commercials that can't possibly say a thing. Sadly, these commercials apparently determine who becomes our President. So it turns out that 200 years into Jefferson's America, saying nothing in a 28 second TV commercial has become far more important than saying a lot about one's vision of the future of the world in a mere book. It all shows a shocking contempt for American democratic values but since neither politicians nor the media want to offend voters or customers the tragedy seemingly will continue growing until every American is, politically anyway, as stupid as a stone. Somehow our American democracy has devolved to the point where politicians and the media lie and deceive as a matter of routine, rather than educate and lead.
Of course, no one appreciates the 28 second TV commercial, and the stupid people who are tricked by them, more than the Democrats. Indeed, one can say the modern Democratic Party is shaped around not saying anything intelligible to anyone. It all started with the first Republican: Thomas Jefferson. He created an intellectual vacuum by standing for the enormously revolutionary and intellectually unassailable concept of freedom from gov't. The bereft opposition (modern day Democrats) had no other position because, quite simply, there was none given what Jefferson had discovered about world history; so they stood for the only thing possible: less freedom or, by default, against whatever Republicans stood for. It was and is an impossible position, and accordingly their leading candidate at the moment is none other than Hillary, She is leading not because of her ideas but exclusively because she is an ex president's wife, which apparently is emotionally attractive, at the moment anyway, in the intellectual vacuum of Presidential politics, at least to an dumbed down electorate for whom the notion of an idea no longer holds any appeal whatsoever. Were it not for her ex President's wife status she would be the least known person in the Western Hemisphere. But as things stand she is an ex President's wife who can buy enough worthless 28 second TV commercials to become President Of The United States.
Knowing that she was running the moment she left the White House, she did a supreme job of not ever taking any positions whatsoever except when absolutely cornered, and even then she took them from very low in her corner. The one concession to decency and responsibility she did make do was serve on the House Armed Services Committee to establish some military affairs credibility which she figured a few people might think important during a time of protracted World War. But, when the 28 second TV commercials start to flow it won't matter much that from her hippie college days forward to the exact moment of her presidential campaign she was absolutely contemptuous of the military.
And then of course there is the Democratic number two: Barak Obama, who is there exclusively because he is a charismatic black guy, even though he is, if it's possible, even less qualified than Hillary. He is the perfect man to further subvert or dumb down our democracy with 28 second TV commercials. To this point his only idea is to have "hope", and in a grotesque sort of way it has actually been enough to make him a close second to Hillary in the polls. He is gaining perhaps because he stands bravely for hope while Hillary seems to stand for nothing at all. The two slick charlatans are now locked in a brutal campaign to see which can be the most vapid caricature on earth of a political leader so nothing will interfere with the impending 28 second commercial blitzkrieg to which we all soon be subjected.
Contrast those two sad pols with the extreme gravitas and experience of Republican front runners Guiliani and McCain. Guiliani was a hard nosed federal prosecutor (who got there without being married to his predecessor) who went after the mafia successfully, a hugely successful mayor who made dramatic changes to a dying liberal NYC, and the man who led the nation through 9/11. He has taken and is standing by very controversial positions on abortion, gay marriage, and the war in Iraq. He is almost the precise opposite of Hillary.
Then there is John McCain, a ex naval officer and fighter pilot who was shot down and tortured for six years in Vietnam, refused to take advantage of family ties to escape the torture until all of his men could escape the torture with him, and then became a long standing Senator who holds the record for being on Meet the Press the most times (a difficult and obligatory interview program on which Hillary has appeared just once). As Hillary flops around on the sand like stranded jelly fish, McCain proudly states that he would rather lose the election than the war in Iraq, knowing that saying so will almost certainly cause him to lose the election. He is as non Democratic as a human being can be.
Yes, please notice how Democrats revere fraudulent candidates with no positions, but as importantly, notice that on top of 28 second commercials, Democrats try to further subvert our democracy by dragging the least qualified voters among us into the voting booth knowing they have the least loyalty to American ideals, the least qualifications to understand and vote for the common good, and the most likelihood to vote for money in their pockets. Democrats have the "make every vote count initiative" which is an attempt to register convicted felons, they want open borders to terrorists so poor Mexicans who sneak in, and their supporters, will vote for them, motor voter laws so people won't have to get out of their car to vote, and even "no picture ID" voting so those not clever enough to have or get picture ID's can still vote. Democrats are busy creating a universe of voters who will be inspired by contemptuous TV commercials, and the drive by media is perfectly complicit in their effort.
If that's not subversive and anti American enough, consider that when Democrats do legislate they legislate exclusively in a manner to buy votes. Voters who get money from Democratic programs make up a huge percentage of their voters? They vote for Social Security , Medicaid, Medicare, Welfare, Food Stamps, WIC, Section Eight Housing, citizenship, and jobs in the vast Democratic bureaucracies, and somehow this is not considered a conflict of interest in modern day Democratic America? We only have to look back to last Sunday on "Meet The Press" for the latest example. When Rep. Charlie Rangle was asked why their fought for and dreamed of legislation against the war was laden with pork (aquariums in Ohio, etc,) he replied, "we didn't have the votes; we had to buy them".
Since when is democracy about voting for money in your pocket rather than for the common good? Republicans oppose or want to scale back all the programs through which Democrats buy their votes, and yet they remain competitive based purely on philosophic integrity. The contrast is truly startling and tragic.
Yes yes, Republicans raise money too, rather than write books. But they do it out of a practical necessity to stay viable in a dumbed down Democratic America, while the Democrats do it out of a cynical contempt for traditional American democratic values. They have no philosophy or positions, only naked ambition; so for them conditioning the electorate to respond to ubiquitous 28 second commercials is the perfect treasonous antidote to America's complex Republican Jeffersonian philosophy that reversed the world's bloody history 180 degrees. If you doubt it, ask yourself who would win in an intelligent America where a presidential campaign was limited mostly to the candidates' books, five 3 hour debates, and politically literate voters with no obvious conflicts of interest. And then ask yourself what would happen if the drive by liberal media, from whom the vast majority of Americans still get all their news, weren't marching in lock step with the Democrats by pretending the way they are is legitimate.
Ted Baiamonte
(Printer friendly version) Email: Ted Baiamonte Comments: bje1000@aol.com
