There Is No Choice

We have previously pointed out that there is actually no choice at all for the US electorate at the upcoming presidential election. This is because in terms of the policies they support, it is nigh impossible to differentiate between the two candidates. We were not just making an unsupported assertion – we offered proof, by showing a video in which they speak for themselves. If one cannot rely on their own words to represent what they stand for, what should one rely on?

Of course it has often been that way in the past too, but usually one only finds out for sure after the election, not already before it. However, the Obamney – clones are so glaringly similar that this time there can be no doubt about it from the very outset. Anyone who actually votes in this election (except if they log a protest vote for a write-in candidate) is basically wasting his time. Not only that, they are announcing that they are gullible and that they meekly support the status quo. As George Carlin once said, 'they lose the right to complain'.

Carlin suggested that if as an alternative to voting on election day, he were to stay at home and masturbate, he 'would at least have something to show for it at the end'. And that was actually quite a few years ago, we wonder what he would have to say about the 'choice' voters are presented with today. Evidently though, Carlin had come to the conclusion that democracy was for Old Greeks.


Allen Keyes on Obama/Romney

What prompted us to write this post was that a friend pointed us to the following video in which Allan Keyes discusses the very same problem. He says a number of interesting things:

 

 

 


 

Allen Keyes on the misfortune of having to choose between Obama and Romney

 


 

Just to make that clear: we were hitherto only aware of Alan Keyes in passing and are not saying that we would endorse his political views in toto. In fact, a cursory examination of some other material we have come across suggests that we would have a number of differences with him. However, what he says in the video above is in  our opinion both true and important.

He makes inter alia the point that if one can no longer differentiate between candidates based on their political program, one is theoretically reduced to judging them on the basis of personal sympathy or antipathy. However, unless one actually knows them personally, such a judgment is necessarily based on nothing but superficial impressions – in fact it is not possible to come to an informed decision.

To our mind the most interesting and important observation is however the following: Keyes suggests that if e.g. Mitt Romney were to be elected,  he would have it very easy to pursue the very agenda currently associated with Obama – there would be little push-back from conservatives. They would likely cheer on the very policies they hated when Obama proposed or implemented them, if Romney were to propose them if he comes to power. At the very least their protest would probably be extremely muted.

Think back in this context to Bush the Second and the PATRIOT act, the warrant-less wiretapping scandal, the torture allegations and his wars. Left-liberals were manning the barricades against many of these policies when Bush introduced them. Many of them were convinced that if they voted for Obama, many, or even all of these policies would be repealed (that was certainly part of the whole 'hope and change' shtick). They have for the most part mutely watched for four years while there was not only no repeal, but an intensification of every Bush era rape of the Bill of Rights. Occasionally one of Obama's supporters took notice, such as Rachel Maddow e.g. did when the president talked about instituting presidential powers that sound like something from a dystopian science fiction novel (essentially he argued in favor of the president becoming the nation's personal 'pre-crime' division):

 


 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aWDMufcS3k

Rachel Maddow is shocked that her hero proposes authoritarian laws that sound even worse than anything Bush ever did or proposed.

 


We are merely astonished that she seems so surprised by this. This is precisely how the ruling elites operate. In order to cement unpopular policies, they use the guy who is officially widely thought to be against them. Keyes has essentially hit on the establishment's very modus operandi in directing history in modern times.

The NDAA's provisions for military detention of mere 'suspects' were e.g. an Obama administration brainchild. Most Republicans were fine with it. There were only a few exceptions, such as Rand Paul, who delivered a notable and excellent speech against them (to no avail of course).

 


 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWApGqE_T-k

Rand Paul in one of his best moment, embedding was not possible.

 


 

Our point is, regardless of who you vote for, you can firmly depend on being disappointed in the areas that actually count. The whole idea that the democratic system such as it is allows voters to alter a nation's course by simply voting for a different  batch of politicians is profoundly mistaken. In reality, the ruling elites use the apparent differences as a slick political ploy: namely to implement whatever agenda they have already decided upon without arousing the anger of the hoi-polloi too much.

One must very carefully parse everything one sees or hears on the 'approved' news media these days. More often than not things are not what they seem, and it only becomes clear after some time in what direction they are about to be taken. Often we are confronted with seemingly diametrically opposed opinions on how to tackle a burning problem. Later a 'compromise' will suddenly and 'unexpectedly' make its entrance, consisting of the very policies the elites wanted to introduce in the first place. Upon hearing of the 'compromise', everybody nods sagely and agrees that this is what should be done, not realizing that they were duped from the very beginning.

A good recent example is actually provided by the euro area crisis. Although it appears at times as though the eurocracy's control over events may be lost, it evidently hasn't happened yet.

Consider though what has happened: decisive steps have been taken to protect the banks on the backs of tax payers and to take the EU closer to the point where it becomes a giant socialistic superstate/transfer union. Which as it were is precisely what Romano Prodi predicted back in 2001 already – namely that the EU's political elite would just wait for a sufficiently dire crisis to implement all the measures it couldn't yet put into place at the time the euro was introduced.

When looking at the countries making up the euro area, one quickly notices that voters in them are likewise faced with the 'no choice' dilemma.  It matters not one whit who they vote for, the centralization agenda continues exactly as before every time.

Occasionally a referendum is held to decide whether there is sufficient popular support for things like e.g. the Lisbon treaty. In cases where the vote is unfavorable for the centralization agenda, the  referendum is simply repeated until the desired outcome has been obtained. Of course it's all just a coincidence, right?

Right,  and we have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.

 


 

Readers interested in obtaining this nice little bridge should e-mail us their offers.

(Photo source unknown)

 


 


 


 

.fundraising thermometer

Year End Donation Drive

Dear readers, we are honored by your readership and hope that our special mixture of entertainment and education has added some value to your lives this year. As you can probably imagine, our blog is not really a giant commercial enterprise, for that its readership is too exclusive and small. Nevertheless, running it involves not only time and effort, but also monetary costs. We are therefore starting a year-end donation drive (this message will be shown at the end of all posts until the blog goes on a one-week hiatus at year-end) You can support us either by donating directly, or by acquiring a subscription, resp. other things offered by our affiliates through the affiliate links on the right hand side (their offers include research as well as bullion in all shapes and sizes, incl. safe storage of same outside the banking system). Help us reach our funding goal, so that we may continue to promote liberty and sound economics!

   

Thank you for your support!

To donate Bitcoins, use this address: 1DRkVzUmkGaz9xAP81us86zzxh5VMEhNke

 

Print Friendly

 

11 Responses to “A Few Remarks on Elections”

  • snowmane:

    Romney was my last choice for President. Nevertheless, he is much better than Obama. Like W., you have the choice between a train and a plane on your trip to socialism. But more people are awake today than ever in my lifetime. I went from a Carter liberal to a Regan conservative in 1980. The alternative media didn’t develop until the 90’s yet I was able to know exactly how to read between the lines. There are millions of people who do the same. They didn’t get America here overnight and we won’t change that quickly. All this will end because the system they have built cannot be sustained. All this will come crashing down.

  • Jaesun:

    Does it matter who heads the mafia? Can government solve any societal problems? In order to solve America’s problems government would have to dissolve itself since government is the root cause of our problems.

    It seems that the actual purpose of government is to usurp individual liberties, increase government’s power, condition the people to submit to government rule, (through agency’s abuses like the TSA) and usher in a New World Order. That purpose will be supported by both of the current presidential candidates.

    Before voting ask yourself, Does my vote actual matter, or has the election outcome already been decided? The content of the following video clip could help you answer that question. The relevant section is between minute 1:48 to 4:30, but the entire content helps explain our current situation.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOTa07rSsNs&feature=g-crec-u

  • Lonesome:

    Unbelievable…the author is full of shiite! I would bet the farm you voted for the train wreck and chief, four years ago.
    No one would have ever thought any president could be worse then J Carter. SURPRISE!

    And you proclaim there is no difference between the two.
    How about for openers, one is a socialist and one is a capitalist. Do you really believe Romney won’t roll up his sleeves and get to work on our nations problems. What has obama done for four years, besides spending money…we akll know that answer. The fool has campaigned, played golf, and partied with the libs on the view and JAYZ AND BOUNCEY.
    Only a fool would quote Carlin and tell the world you are wasting your time to vote!

  • Belmont Boy:

    “Occasionally a referendum is held to decide whether there is sufficient popular support for things like e.g. the Lisbon treaty. In cases where the vote is unfavorable for the centralization agenda, the referendum is simply repeated until the desired outcome has been obtained.”

    Indeed. And not just in Europe. Remember TARP. Congress voted it down. Then, several days later, they passed it. A sufficient number of members had, evidently, received offers they couldn’t refuse.

  • boatman:

    either will be remembered as the worst pres. ever…………being in office when the japan+western world debt/credit bomb blows.

    but anyone better than the current obozo.

    so i’ll vote mittens.

    obozo wins and it costs me 2 supremes+idiot foriegn policy and idiot EPA….. to be rid of the worst of the two parties for 20 years.

    human nature changes not one iota……..and we reset n start over.

    anyone not holding gold/silver is toast.

  • FreemonSandlewould:

    I know it all the rage style to make proclamations that there is no difference…..coke and pepsi etc etc ad infinitum.

    The practical engineer in me calls bull shiet on this. Romney is by far the lesser of 2 evils. If by nothing other than competence.

    A vote for a 3rd party candidate is a vote for Obama. Do not do it.

    I admit we’ll limp through with Romney but that’s better than going down for the count in a ditch beside the road.

    So the choice is a full on collapse or a Romney limp through. I’ll take limp through please.

    • jimmyjames:

      I admit we’ll limp through with Romney but that’s better than going down for the count in a ditch beside the road.

      So the choice is a full on collapse or a Romney limp through. I’ll take limp through please.

      ***************

      If Romney gets in and starts trade wars like he promised-the ditch is exactly where you will end up and you wont have any legs left to limp along on-
      Not that Obama is any better or his ditch any shallower-

    • JasonEmery:

      “Romney is by far the lesser of 2 evils.” “So the choice is a full on collapse or a Romney limp through.”

      You apparently think you are much smarter, in terms of monetary policy, than Ludwick von Mises. Please state your credentials, including links to your publications, so we can evaluate your writings.

      Unless you think Romney can successfully lead to the invention of a time machine, and go back to 1971 and prevent the cutting of the last link between the dollar and gold, you are horribly wrong. There is no escaping an economic calamity, roughly proportional to the size of the preceding bubble.

      The problem with Obama or Romney, as opposed to Ron Paul, is the first two will kick the can down the road until we go over the final cliff. Paul knows that we desperately need to cut spending by over a trillion, PER YEAR, IMMEDIATELY. And restructure our debt.

    • Toolate:

      Why would you vote for “the lesser of two evils”? Vote for who you want to be president. Obama and Romney are essentially both trying to feed you a crap sandwich. Sure Obama says that his CrapLoaf on sawdust bread is the best, but Romney swears that his CrapLoaf on stale rye is what you really want. No matter who wins you lose. Vote 3rd party and say I refuse to eat the CrapLoaf that you are trying to feed me. A Vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Ron Paul. Vote you for the right man. Later on when Obama or Romney burns this country to the ground atleast you can say you didn’t vote for them.

Leave your comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Support Acting Man

FINCABAYANO160×160e

Archive

Own physical gold and silver outside a bank

Realtime Charts

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

[Most Recent USD from www.kitco.com]

THE GOLD CARTEL: Government Intervention on Gold, the Mega Bubble in Paper and What This Means for Your Future

Oilprice.com