Politics and Common Sense: “Oil and Water?”

Theme of the Republican National Convention

One of the two political conventions to nominate the next president of UNITED STATES CORPORATION is done, with one to go. Before the cameras, the entire world could see behind the façade of unanimity within the Republican party.

Control? Yes. Force? Yes. Unanimity? No.

Determined not to risk allowing even a dose of common sense to be broadcast into the few households or bars that may have been tuned in, Ron Paul delegates were ostracized, and their votes unilaterally hijacked by way of rule changes enacted at the convention prior to the customary roll call.

Ugly Winners: Ron Paul delegates are dissed by “the majority.”

That’s the way this band of people get what they want, as they want it. I’m not singling them out. There’s still one convention to go. With regard to enacting policies that respect ALL people, there’s not much to distinguish one group from the other. The system thrives on divisiveness and fear. However, we don’t.

The bureaucrats don’t thrive by dutifully exploiting the American people. They’re just as likely to get caught by the effects of the mindset that rules them as the next guy. For example, I’d bet cancer researchers get cancer in numbers that are disproportionate to their percentage of the population. Many of our social and political problems are so because of good “worker bees,” trying to make a living, doing what they’re told, which means job security.

The ones who thrive off our fear and political dysfunction are above the bureaucrats’ pay grade. Whomever the president will be, he will first have to be approved by the real “bosses.”

As a criteria, respecting ALL people sounds like it would be unworkable as a political platform or military strategy, but that very idea was presidential candidate Barack Obama’s appeal; at least it was for me. I could care less about his skin coloration. To quote myself from A Freed Man: An Emancipation Proclamation, “We’re ALL a single shade of HUMAN.”

Mr. Obama spoke to something that is within all of us. Unfortunately, the rigors of running a CORPORATE ENTITY into the ground with its own board of directors – it’s not congress, and definitely not you and me – took over. Again, Mr. Obama was continuing what George Bush started before him, Bill Clinton carried on before him, and George H. W. Bush before him, etc.

These presidents wouldn’t have been “electable” if they didn’t “play ball.” But it’s time for us to wake up and see what’s going on. It’s time for a new game.

  • No war, PEACE
  • Clean up the environmental mess we’ve made
  • Value every human being
  • Heal ourselves, instead of practicing disease management
  • Health care because WE’RE HUMAN, not because it’s business
  • End the additions to, and neutralize existing toxins in land, sea, air, and within human bodies

I see the introduction of new crops and growing techniques in our future, and many new technologies emerging that allow us to restore natural balance and harmony both to the planet, and to our personal ecosystems.

Many new jobs will be available for those who want to participate in this major reformation project. But it won’t be by “force.” It also won’t be because it’s the only way to “survive.”

Imagine having all the “money” you need to acquire whatever your heart desires. Need a Gulfstream G650? You got it! Suppose everyone could have just what they want, and don’t have to “rob Peter” in order to do so. Peter can have a Gulfstream too if he wants. Don’t presume everyone will want Rolls Royce, but if getting one is no big deal, there are many who will gladly make theirs available to others.

Imagine how life would be if everyone was that powerful, and free. It would change behavior in many ways.

If we muster the collective will to make the world and every nation within it a safe, friendly, healthy place, it would be a great boom for tourism, commerce, and trade.

I’m not suggesting that everyone MUST do it. However, everyone who is inspired to do so, can. One doesn’t have to wait on anyone else to embrace and embody this vision. We wouldn’t need to use secrets, executive privilege, and political duplicity the way it’s routinely done today. Below is a case-in-point.

A dose of nuclear prospective.

Within the following four-minute talk by Texas congressman Ron Paul (see video below) lies what seems to me to be the real reason behind the sabre rattling that has been directed at Iran by both president Obama and Mitt Romney, as well as Israel.

The publicly expressed reason for the concern is Iran’s efforts to create a nuclear weapons program. They don’t have one, but these people seem intent on fueling Iran’s reason for needing one. Israel acts as though it’s itching to use preemptive military force against Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

There’s too much readiness to act against something that hasn’t happened and could be unlikely, which suggests that they’re afraid of something that IS happening.

All of the “protectors” in this discussion speak of the Iran’s danger to the region, having operated a nuclear program in secret for two decades, and, according to this New York Times editorial, having persisted in investing in it since 2002. Since they haven’t succeeded yet, that danger isn’t apparent.

So how have we handled this situation? Offer to step up diplomatic, cultural, or commercial relations?

Not hardly.

We threaten to pose a bigger threat. We threaten to get meaner, to force submission to our will. We threaten to cause damage to property and loss of life. That’s what military actions do. We position ourselves to give them and the rest of the world reason to be rightfully wary of us. We who have used nuclear weapons, threatening another country that doesn’t have any.

When asked for his position on this matter, Republican nominee Mitt Romney once said that he “supports Israel’s efforts to defend itself.” How can a preemptive military strike of any kind, in the absence of a prior military action, be construed as “defensive?”

To be clear, Mr. Romney stopped short of going on record in support of a unilateral military strike by Israel against Iran, but would “respect Israel’s right to take such action.”

That’s a master politician for ya. What I’d like to know is what is Iran’s rights in this equation? The reporter never asked that question, or it wasn’t published, perhaps because they don’t want you, the public to consider the rights of other human beings and nations to feel safe in their own lands.

But then, our government is going to great measures to encourage us not to feel safe in our own. My concern is not what Iran may do against the United States or Israel. My concern is that UNITED STATES CORPORATION IS doing/sanctioning/allowing, under the broad umbrella of GOVERNMENT policies and actions, against the American people.

If this was truly about nuclear weapons development, Israel could turn things around by simply assuring Iran that it is not, nor will it ever be, a threat militarily, as long as Iran takes no actions against it. Indeed, such actions could defuse the incendiary rhetoric, but I believe they are intentionally escalating it for the reasons mentioned in the video below.

It’s about the sanctity of the U.S. dollar, and the Fed’s license to print money out of thin air… a practice that must come to an end… very soon.

Common sense…

I stumbled upon this one and got a good laugh.

Great editing job…
Please follow and like us:

Written by 

Related posts

Leave a Comment