By Thorne Godinho
The stage is set; blue and red fluorescence blinds the audience; men in suits smile eagerly into the camera – these politicians must convince middle America that they can beat Obama. This mediocre crew of Republican candidates (now reduced to five forerunners – minus the belle of Tea Party conservatism, Michele Bachmann) has been battling it out, forced to stumble over answers and flip-flop towards the creation of a policy platform which would woo conservatives, and fight back against the so-called socialism of “Yes, we can!”
The rise of Dr Ron Paul, who came second in the recent New Hampshire primary, is indicative of a Republican Party, and America, in dire need of a new direction. Paul, a man who views the disbursement of pocket money to children as an extension of nanny state dependency, is an avowed ‘pro-life’ libertarian. He wants to end foreign military intervention and believes in the legalisation of drugs; he also wishes to reduce the size of America’s government. A Ron Paul Administration would scrap social security for the poor.
With an end to foreign wars, and the return of thousands of America’s troops, it is not difficult to see Ron Paul’s possible term in office resurrecting the proudly individualist post-WWI America of the 1920s. This was a time when unemployed soldiers, having just returned home from Europe’s trenches, formed giant squatter camps to protest government’s reluctance to provide welfare to an increasingly impoverished country.
It would take Roosevelt’s foray into Keynesian economics and a new world war to get America moving forward after the Depression. Barack Obama is in a position to implement a similar wave of domestic investment schemes to create jobs. But he’s proven to be an establishmentarian; Obama has not raised taxes for America’s wealthiest (the so-called one percent?) and the corruption that pervades Capitol Hill is as firmly entrenched as before.
But it would be foolish to think Obama has not initiated schemes to improve the lives of all Americans; he delivered on his 2008 promise to institute universal healthcare, and was summarily condemned as a socialist by hordes of ‘Don’t tread on me’-flag-bearing housewives and conservative ideologues. Despite the fact that Obamacare, as it’s become known, served as part of Obama’s winning election platform, the American electorate angrily turned against it as soon as it became law.
The electorate is now seemingly aware of America’s escalating government debt, and Obama’s slow reaction to this issue has spurred voters (even those identifying themselves as the occupiers of Wall Street) to consider the politics of Paul, Bachmann and even Rick Perry – a man who was unable to name the three government agencies he’d like to axe as President.
Primary voters are participating in an election which will most likely result in less government intervention in the economy, but will signal the re-commencement of increased intervention into the private lives (read: bedrooms) of ordinary Americans. The incessant flip-flopping of Mitt Romney, the most likely GOP candidate in 2012, is indicative of this – his former liberal stances on gay rights have turned rigidly conservative. And Rick Santorum, a former lobbyist and proprietor of all that is wrong with American politics, believes only in dignity – not equal rights for all.
Only in the land of the truly free would the vacuous and vapid, intolerant and incongruous, corrupt and corruptible, and decidedly hypocritical have a serious chance of winning the battle to become the leader of the free world.
Lord have mercy on us all…
Follow Thorne on Twitter!
Advertisement
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
In the Land of the Free…
By Thorne Godinho
The stage is set; blue and red fluorescence blinds the audience; men in suits smile eagerly into the camera – these politicians must convince middle America that they can beat Obama. This mediocre crew of Republican candidates (now reduced to five forerunners – minus the belle of Tea Party conservatism, Michele Bachmann) has been battling it out, forced to stumble over answers and flip-flop towards the creation of a policy platform which would woo conservatives, and fight back against the so-called socialism of “Yes, we can!”
The rise of Dr Ron Paul, who came second in the recent New Hampshire primary, is indicative of a Republican Party, and America, in dire need of a new direction. Paul, a man who views the disbursement of pocket money to children as an extension of nanny state dependency, is an avowed ‘pro-life’ libertarian. He wants to end foreign military intervention and believes in the legalisation of drugs; he also wishes to reduce the size of America’s government. A Ron Paul Administration would scrap social security for the poor.
With an end to foreign wars, and the return of thousands of America’s troops, it is not difficult to see Ron Paul’s possible term in office resurrecting the proudly individualist post-WWI America of the 1920s. This was a time when unemployed soldiers, having just returned home from Europe’s trenches, formed giant squatter camps to protest government’s reluctance to provide welfare to an increasingly impoverished country.
It would take Roosevelt’s foray into Keynesian economics and a new world war to get America moving forward after the Depression. Barack Obama is in a position to implement a similar wave of domestic investment schemes to create jobs. But he’s proven to be an establishmentarian; Obama has not raised taxes for America’s wealthiest (the so-called one percent?) and the corruption that pervades Capitol Hill is as firmly entrenched as before.
But it would be foolish to think Obama has not initiated schemes to improve the lives of all Americans; he delivered on his 2008 promise to institute universal healthcare, and was summarily condemned as a socialist by hordes of ‘Don’t tread on me’-flag-bearing housewives and conservative ideologues. Despite the fact that Obamacare, as it’s become known, served as part of Obama’s winning election platform, the American electorate angrily turned against it as soon as it became law.
The electorate is now seemingly aware of America’s escalating government debt, and Obama’s slow reaction to this issue has spurred voters (even those identifying themselves as the occupiers of Wall Street) to consider the politics of Paul, Bachmann and even Rick Perry – a man who was unable to name the three government agencies he’d like to axe as President.
Primary voters are participating in an election which will most likely result in less government intervention in the economy, but will signal the re-commencement of increased intervention into the private lives (read: bedrooms) of ordinary Americans. The incessant flip-flopping of Mitt Romney, the most likely GOP candidate in 2012, is indicative of this – his former liberal stances on gay rights have turned rigidly conservative. And Rick Santorum, a former lobbyist and proprietor of all that is wrong with American politics, believes only in dignity – not equal rights for all.
Only in the land of the truly free would the vacuous and vapid, intolerant and incongruous, corrupt and corruptible, and decidedly hypocritical have a serious chance of winning the battle to become the leader of the free world.
Lord have mercy on us all…
Follow Thorne on Twitter!
Share this:
Like this: