Szandor Blestman dot com

A viewpoint free from corporate influence

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Time now to Step up the Rhetoric

E-mail Print PDF

I don't watch the state of the union address, ever. I hear the highlights. I get the Reader's Digest version. But I don't sit there and hang on every word like so many other people do. I know what most politicians are like. I don't worship or admire them. When they're talking, they're lying, when they're silent, they're stealing or plotting to steal. That's especially true, in my opinion, at the highest levels of the federal government. I don't trust them when they're fighting and I trust them even less when they're in agreement. I don't know about you, but I'm tired of being lied to.

I don't know why anyone would want to subject themselves to listening to Barack Obama, or just about any of the so called political leaders in Washington DC these days. All that spews from their mouths are lies and collectivist drivel meant to mollify those who are demanding government reduction and an end to the massive corruption. Sure, Mr. Obama talks a good game. He makes pretty speeches and says all the right things, but his actions speak so much louder than the words his speech writers put together, and he does have damn good speech writers. For all the good intentions he speaks of, his actions have netted less than nothing for the common folk of this nation.

What we have in congress and in the executive branch of the federal government are a bunch of millionaire lawyers working for a a bunch of billionaire corporatists whose strings are pulled by a group of elite trillionaire central banksters who believe they can and should own everything. They tell you how much they are going to do for you, but then they make certain that everything they do profits them. The money is all being funneled to the top while those at the grass roots level are being starved of cash and limited in their options. Do you really think these people give one whit about you?

Pretty words do not make up for up for ugly actions. A man who beats his spouse can tell her he loves her as he blackens her eyes and breaks her will. We all know who Mr. Obama really works for. Ok, maybe not all of us, but I would hope that most of us can tell. He works for the corporate interests, not the interests of the "little" people at the bottom of the food chain. It seems to me that he wants to make sure that hard working people who want to make an honest living are no longer afforded that opportunity and have to depend on big government to survive.

It is difficult, however, to escape the speech last night as so many people are talking about it. There was quite a bit of praise for the speech, but I don't know that it had any substance. It struck me as nothing more than a mesmerizing trick woven by an oratorical magician. It seems to me that it was constructed by someone who understands human psychology and was attempting to bring a warm and fuzzy feeling to a populace that has grown weary of uncertainty and economic turmoil. It was meant to shine a positive light in the darkness of a negative reality, but in my eyes the light is dim as its energy source has been drained. Perhaps that's because I have seen the light of truth.

There were a few things about the speech last night that bothered me. The first troublesome aspect happened before the speech even began. The corporate media decided to make a big deal of the seating arrangements. They focused on a decision to seat Republicans and Democrats next to each other rather than in separate sections as if that was a big deal. I suppose they wanted to show solidarity of the two parties to work together. That is only good if they work to reduce their own power, which I doubt they will. Please. If there's anything that would help it would be to have the two parties so opposed to each other so that no new laws are passed and government stagnates. I think many of us have known and I have said all along that we really only have one party with two faces, not two parties with different principles. If they actually split the congress into groups that mattered the vast majority of our congress critters would be sitting on the collectivist, globalist side of the aisle while maybe a couple dozen would be sitting on the individualist, constitutionalist side.

Another thing that bothered me a little was when Mr. Obama started talking about high speed rail. First off, he said he was going to give it to us. Really? Is he going to pay for it out of his own pocket? Using his very own money? Is he going to then let us ride it for free? I had no idea he was so wealthy. I realize that the Rothschilds or the Rockefellers or some other central banking family might be able to afford such a venture, but I didn't think the Obamas could. How very generous.

I doubt very much that's what he meant. He meant he was going to take your money, taxpayer money, and sink it into a rail system that a very few well connected people will profit from but won't have to risk their own money building. Those people will then take that money out of the system and will likely not have to pay taxes because, as we all know, the truly wealthy, like royalty, know how to game the system and bribe bureaucrats so that they don't have to pay taxes. I didn't even know there was such a demand for rail travel. I thought the already subsidized rail systems in this country were in financial trouble because no one wants to use them. Wouldn't the marketplace have already provided this service if there was enough of a demand for it to make a profit?

Oh, but apparently there will be a demand because people aren't flying anymore to escape the pat downs at the airports. Ha ha. That was a big joke to the privileged sitting in the audience who likely don't have to go through such invasive measures when they fly. But isn't that just like a government solution to a problem? Rather than cutting government, getting rid of the TSA and letting the private airlines take care of security issues, the government decides it needs to spend billions building high speed rail systems. Not to mention they will likely have to have the TSA provide security later at the rail stations because, well, those terrorists are everywhere, you know, and everyone would rather be secure than free.

The other theme that caught my attention was that we need to come together and agree. We need to tone down our rhetoric. We need to stop complaining and just let government do its job. That's because they're building a better future. It's a vision they can see, but many of us can't.

Those who don't agree need to just shut up and let those who know best lead the way. That's because angry political rhetoric can make crazy people pick up guns and shoot others. Just look at what happened in Tucson. It couldn't have been just some drugged out nut who didn't know what he was doing, it had to be someone who was angry because of the political rhetoric he was hearing. It is extremely troubling that the political class is even thinking about restricting first amendment rights because of this incident. We've seen such restrictions before in history and it never turns out well. In fact, this is one of the most horrifying possibilities to American sensibilities (even though presidents such as Lincoln and Wilson have engaged in such activities) and rulers of other countries have been demonized for arresting and jailing political dissidents.

I disagree completely with Obama's collectivist, globalist vision for America. I don't believe that growing government is a solution. I will go as far as to claim that as government has grown and freedom has shrunk over the past few decades, the quality of life has diminished in the United States of America. In my life I have seen a drastic reduction in the middle class and prosperity in this nation. As government has grown so has corporate influence. This has failed to grow or even maintain the prosperity the common man once enjoyed in this nation. This has led to the "too big to fail" meme, further empowerment of the government and corporations, and declining wealth creation worldwide.

It's time to step up the rhetoric, not tone it down. The types of collectivist solutions Mr. Obama and his ilk offer have been tried and have failed. His collectivist solutions are the same solutions that have been applied and have helped societies decline in the past. His collectivist solutions have helped cause the collapse of nations. It is not about Republican versus Democrats, it is about collectivism versus individualism. It is not about the left versus the right, it is about tyranny versus freedom.

We need to frame the issues in those terms and stop letting the corporate media use the conservative/liberal paradigm to divide and confuse. We need to point out their fallacies loudly and peacefully. We need to continue to exercise our freedom to speak our minds no matter the obstacles they throw up. Most of all, we need to do so peacefully and let them initiate any aggression. We might have to take a few lumps, but we are already winning hearts and minds. When they start swinging and show their true tyrannical colors and intent, I believe the revulsion of the common man will be powerful and public opposition to such tactics will be strong. I hope it never comes to that, but while Mr. Obama continues to charm and deceive with his words while turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to public opinion with his actions, peaceful evolution remains elusive.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.


Comments (0)
Write comment
Your Contact Details:
Gravatar enabled
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img]   
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.
Last Updated on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 20:51