American People: Hypocrites?

You don't get elected calling the American people hypocrites? That is correct, and I don't recommend any candidate do it. Therefore, it is lucky I am not running for anything.


Want an example of what I am talking about? You need go no further than Harry Reid. Polls (those worthless, evil things) say that Americans--by a huge majority-want to throw ALL of the "bums" (traditional politicians) out. But do they VOTE that way? Only in my dreams. Who is the very essence of an "old-style", corrupt politician? Right. Harry Reid. And he was opposed by the very essence of a "non-traditoinal" politician: Sharon Angle. Sharon Angle made the mistakes you would expect from a person who is not a savvy politician, and who does not know how to talk political speak. And the people of Nevada let the media crucity her for it (as the people of America let the media crucify Sarah Palin before her, and may let the media crucify Herman Cain after her). Yes, it is not really Sharon Angle who FAILED (although she was not a good candidate, from a TRADITIONAL point of view). It is the people of NEVADA who failed. They had a chance to get rid of Harry Reid, and lthey did not take it because the media convinced them to be "afraid" of Sharon Angle. Hell. Any RATIONAL person would get rid of Harry Reid FIRST, and THEN worry about getting rid of Sharon Angle (if needed). Did I just call the people of Nevada, and even the American people, irrational? Damn right. Escept it is not realy me. It is those polls that the media so evilly lie and die for which are calling the American people irrational hypocrites. You cannot say that you want to "throw the bums out", and then say that you are "afraid" to "throw the bums out" because the media has made you nervois about the new bums.


I don't know yet whether I think Herman Cain would make a good President, but I would definitely vote against him against the present "bum". And I would dearly love to see him President (even though I have not endorsed him for the Republican nomination), for the very reason the media is able to pick out statements Herman Cain makes as not vague and smooth enough for a really savvy politician. Cain actually SAYS things--sometimes things that he should not really say--because he is not a traditional politician. If you let the media crucify him for that, then you WANT "politics as usual" (no matter what you SAY). Yes, President Obama says things more ridiculous than Harry Reid has ever said every single day, but he does not say those ridiculous, false things in the clumsy way that Herman Cain says what he says (plus, of course, Obama faces no challenge to what he says, even from Republicans, in contrast to Cain). Yes, you ARE a hypocirte if lyou tell pollsters, or yourself, that you don't like "politcs as usual", and then get down on every person who is not "politics as usual". The result of this hypocrisy is that we get the same TRAITORS--politicians, including Tea Party politicians, with no real principles--every election. Listen to Newt Gingrich. He is EXPOSING this, without seeming to realize that he is exposing HIMSELF (especailly before he realized that he had no chance to actually win).


Nope. If you American people out there want to stop being hypocrites, you have to stop letting the MEDIA tell you that someone is disqualified from being elected because they make clumsy statements indicating thaey are not smooth politicians, and if they take CHANCES by poposing bod ideas that may have flaws. We KNOW that "plitics as usual" has FAILED. That means that we MUST give something else a chance. And then we MUST hold the new people accountable: not for PERFECTION, but for at least moving in a new direction that shows promise.


Why did President Obama get elected? Even Obama and the media said this: He represented HOPE and CHANGE. He lied. He promised something different than polics as usual, even though he had been PART of "politics as usual" his whole life--including in the United States Senate, as part of the Democrat majority, at the very time our economy collapsed. It has turned out-as was really obvious to thinking people from the beginning--that Obama REPRESENTS leftist "politics as usual". Right now, TAXPAYERS are paying for the Obama CAMPAIGN to get relected. And the Obama apologists are saying that "every President does it" (usies his office to campaign for reelection, by saying he is on pubic business). And it is true. Every President does do it. It is "politics as usual', as is EVERYTING Obama is doing ("jobs bill" and all). That was exaclty how the disastrous Obama health care bill was rammed through--not to mention the failed "stimulus" PORK bill.


No. I will continue to call you American peole out there HYPOCRITES, with more justice than Rick Perry talking about Mitt Romney (see revious article), so long as you sAY you don't want "politics as usual", but continue to ACT in exactly the opposite manner. "Politics as usual" is smooth and a little comforting--see George Orwell's "1984". It is easier to go along with the usual propaganda than it is to be a REBEL (not like the leftist koks "occupyng" Wall Street, but a reabel from orthodoxy).


You might have guessed that I consider myself a rEBEL, and have so considdered myself since I supported Barry Goldwater in 1964 (when I was no older than 17). Since that time, it is only Ronald Reagan who has not disapponted me. It is not that Ronald Reagan was perfect. He was not. I am sure you agree that even I am not perfecct (lol). But Ronald Regan BELEIVED IN SOMETHING, and could actually communicate conservative beliefs in a way that people understood. I miss him more every day. That remains why I like Herman Cain, although I do not yet know if he has the stuff of Ronald Reagan. you can imagine Herman Cain calling the Soviet Untion, correctly the Evil Empire. You can imagine Herman Cain joking, as Regan did when he did not realize it was an open mike, that "the bombs will begin falling in 15 minutes" (or words to that effect, meaing that he was about to order a war). Reagan was not afraid to say things, and he had a sense of humor that was not timid and afraid. Does Romney have a sense of humor? Prry? Bachmann? Cain DOES, and he has a tendency toward honesty (that, unfortunately, he may lose as he gets the feeling he might actually win). No. I AM a rebel, and I apprecaite other rebels against "politics as usual"--being wiliing to forgive them isolated stupid statements. I just wish more of the American people actually felt that way, and were willing to stand by their convictions--even if it makes them uncomofortable at times.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).