Voters Ain't Buying What Biden Is Selling: Time To Look Elsewhere?

 

A New York Times/Siena College poll came out on July 12th with some more bad news for President Joe Biden. According to the poll, President Biden's job approval rating was a paltry 33%. Worse is that 64% of Democrats want someone other than Biden leading their party and to be their presidential nominee in 2024. Only 23% want to see Biden nominated.

Digging further, 1/3 of those surveyed said age was key factor in Biden being replaced on the ticket. At 79 years, he is already the oldest person to hold the office of President. Many also cite Biden's apparent lack of mental acuity as well. Some of those polled said that watching Biden on TV reminded them of watching of a "zombie".

Biden is known to routinely suffer from serious memory issues, verbal slips, odd behavior and other SNAFUs, leaving his aides and staffers scurrying to "clarify" what he was saying, intending to do, or explaining away his "jokes".  Others point out that he uses a cheat sheet to get through speeches (which has occasionally been flashed to the cameras) as well as use an earpiece with someone nearby feeding him the answers, not to mention routine use of teleprompters.

Again, hinting as his age being a serious problem, 12% of the Democrats surveyed thought it was time to have "someone new" as president.  Meanwhile,10% of those polled said that Biden wasn't "progressive enough", while a mere 1% disagreed with on domestic issues. 

According to the poll, about 75% of the population think the country is headed in the wrong direction, while just 13% are satisfied with things as they are. That's the worse result since about 2007 when almost 85% disapproved on the country's direction.

To make matters even  bleaker, the nation's largest political bloc, Independents, are equally dissatisfied with America's political and economic direction. The poll indicates that 3/4 of Independents disapprove of President Biden's handling of the country. Not unexpectedly, the majority of Republicans think Biden is doing a terrible job as president. His disapproval rating among Republicans is 87%!

If there was any good news to come out this poll, it's that 92% of Democrats said they would vote for President Biden if he was running against former President Donald Trump (the same poll also projected that in race between Biden and Trump, Biden would squeak by with a 44% to 41% margin of victory),  and that brings us to how Republicans currently feel about "The Donald".

According to the same poll, approximately 51% of Republicans surveys said that wouldn't vote for the former president if the GOP primary was held today. The polls indicated that about 25% would back Florida Governor, Ron DeSantis, while 7% would back Texas Senator Ted Cruz and 6% favored Trump's former Vice President, Mike Pence.

Nikki Haley tied with Pence, also with 6%. Haley is the current ambassador to the United Nations. Her claim to fame was during her tenure as governor of South Carolina and ordering the Confederate battle flag to be removed from the State Capitol. Bringing up the rear in straw primary was Mike Pompeo with a polite 2%. Pompeo was Trump's former Secretary of State and director of the CIA.

Interestingly, the January 6th protest failed to register as a serious issue among Republicans polled. 75% said that then President Trump was simply exercising his legal right to contest the outcome of the vote and wasn't responsible for the actions of the protestors.  This may be one of the main reasons the Democrats and corporate owned media has remained focused on destroying Trump's character and bleed him dry financially so well ahead of the 2024 election cycle.

Nevertheless, despite the relatively favorable numbers among potential Republican primary voters, it's worth noting that among voters under 34 years of age, a strong majority---64%----said they wouldn't back Trump. Among those with at least a bachelor's degree, 65% said that Trump wouldn't be giving their support either (32% said they'd back Governor DeSantis, while 12% had Nikki Haley's back with 10% hanging on to Pence).  Notably, 58% of those without a college degree said they would stick with "The Donald".

So, if Biden backs out of running in 2024, who are the most likely Democrats to run for the top job? Well, obviously, the most likely prospect would be Biden's Vice President, Kamala Harris. However, Ms. Harris' job performance has been as dismal as her boss's. With having the distinction of having the worst job rating of any Vice President (her current disapproval rating is 64%),it's unlikely she'll get any serious support in a bid for President.

Next is the perennial candidate for president, Bernie Sanders. If Bernie runs again, he should at least received some sort of award for perseverance. This would be the third time the self-proclaimed "democratic socialist" will try to take a bite at the golden apple. It would also say something about his character.

In the 2016 Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton, Bernie and his campaign were (for lack of a better word) royally screwed over by the Hillary campaign, the Democratic Party, the Democratic powerbrokers, and all with the help of the mainstream media. The results were a total and utter farce.

The result of the blatantly rigged election resulted in the ultimate removal of not one, but two chairwomen of the Democratic Party (Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Donna Brazile), and yet, aside from their removal, were rewarded for their efforts by the power elite (if nothing else it displayed the brazen clout of the ruling Oligarchy).  

Further behind is Pete Buttigieg and Gavin Newsom. Buttigieg is Biden's Secretary of Transportation. He is relatively young; in his early 40's. He's been a member of the Truman National Security project since 2005, which is a progressive institute focused in national security and foreign affairs issues. He is the former mayor of South Bend Indiana, and if elected, he would be America's first openly gay president.

Gavin Newsom is the current governor of California and former mayor of San Francisco, the hometown of Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi who is also his aunt by marriage (which may be reason enough to look elsewhere). Newsom, who has a net worth of some $20 million dollars, comes from one of four of the most powerful political families in San Francisco, has been the subject of several recall efforts during his tenure as governor, including most recently in 2021 over his support of sanctuary for illegal immigrants. The effort failed. He is currently running for reelection which will be held on November 8, 2022.

Next in line is Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. A progressive, she finished third in the 2020 Democratic Primary. Senator Warren is known as strong supporter and friend of former President Barack Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.  Although she has frequently publicly criticized corporate money in politics,  Warren began accepting corporate money from "Super Pacs" in February 2020 , which has included Microsoft, Apple Inc, Alphabet Inc, IBM, and AT&T among many others. She currently has just over $142 million in her war chest.  

Other possible contestants in a Biden-less 2024 Democrat Primary could be New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, and North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper. Of course, we can't rule out the possibility that Hillary Clinton might make a third run for the Oval Office. If she does, she'll be around 76 years old, still younger than Joe Biden, who'd be 82 if he runs.

But Hillary carries some seriously personal and political heavy baggage. She has also lost much of her former luster (her most recent approval rating, from 2019, was just 36%). Still, she has the credentials (and dirt) plus access to more than enough money to buy the presidency. If only she could get her personality and past history out of the way!

So, what about the Republicans? Assuming "The Trumpster" bows out, who else besides DeSantis, Cruz, Haley, or Pence might considering wading into the deep end of the swamp? Well, unfortunately, the bench on the Republican side isn't every deep.

Aside from the names mentioned earlier, South Dakota's Kristi Noem is mentioned as a possible prospect. However, with roughly a year to go before early campaigning begins, Kristi lacks name recognition and the big dollars needed to buy a presidency. The same goes for fellow Republican Tom Cotton.

Cotton is a U.S. Senator from Bill Clinton's home state of Arkansas. Although he's still relatively young at age 47, he's graduated from Harvard University, served as a Captain in the Army where he was a member of the 101st Airborne and qualified as a Army Ranger.

He served in Iraq and Afghanistan, earning a Bronze Star, Army Commendation Medal with Oak Leaf, a Combat Infantry Badge among others. He also served  a term in the U.S. House of Representatives. He has maintained a "A" rating with the NRA and is a strong opponent to amnesty for illegal immigrants. He opposes Roe v. Wade and the Affordable Healthcare Act ("Obamacare").  His view on foreign affairs is considered to be "hawkish".

Lastly, Cotton is known as one of Biden's most vocal critics. It should also be noted that he isn't much of a Trump supporter and has stated that the "insurrectionists" of January 6th should be "brought to justice". However, Cotton's twin Achilles heels are that he still suffers from a lack of name recognition outside of his state and lacks that all important access to the Corporate PAC teller. Cotton may not run in 2024, but I'd keep an eye on him. If you like conservatives, he's a player to watch.

So there you have it. Should Joe Biden run again? If not, who do you think should? What do think about a second term Trump or has his time past? One name not mention as a possible presidential candidate is former Congresswoman from Hawaii, Tulsi Gabbard. I think she would make a good choice, but she's not shown any signs of getting back in politics as a candidate.  

America is in serious trouble. I don't know if we can survive another term by either Biden or "The Donald", but our other choices at the moment don't look especially promising. What do you think?

 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!  

 

 Most Democrats Don't Want Biden in 2024, New Poll Shows

Half of G.O.P. Voters Ready To Leave Trump Behind, PollFinds

55% of Americans disapprove of the president

Favorability rating of Vice President Kamala Harris in theUnited States, as of July 2022

Who will run for President in 2024? Rumored Republican andDemocratic Candidates

Leaked emails show how the Democrats screwed Sanders

DMC betrayed Bernie Sanders and the rest of America

 

 The 10 Republicans most likely to run for President

 

 

 

Understanding What Divides Us and Why

 

A recent national poll of just under seven million respondents showed that 35% of Americans identify as Conservatives. 25% as Liberals while a whopping 45%  said they were Moderates. It appears that Americans, as a whole, don't like what either of the two corporate owned parties are peddling. 

Of course, no doubt, that almost every elected politician in Washington who sees this poll would automatically claim to be a "moderate" if that meant hanging on to their office. They change positions faster than a chameleon walking on plaid!

RepresentUs, a nonpartisan advocacy group, published an interesting survey which showed how Americans ranked themselves based on their political views. According to the survey, there are nine distinct groups. 10% are flag and faith conservatives (Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, etc). 7% are dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. 11% are populist right wingers (Tea Party, etc). 12% lean conservative. 15% are "stressed sideliners" or nonpartisans. 10% lean liberal. 16% are dyed-in-the-wool Democrats. 13% are Establishment Liberals. Finally, 6% are extreme or "progressive" Left Wing (Antifa, etc).

So, you can see that even by this breakdown, 37% are moderates (and, although the survey didn't indicate, likely Independent since Independents tend to lean conservative on some issues and liberal on others). Meanwhile, 35% are Left Wing while 28% are Right Wing.

I guess it's not surprising that the majority of Americans consider themselves to be moderate. Moderates, and their willingness to see both sides of an issue is what has historically moved this nation forward.  We've never really been a nation of extremism until relatively recently. Then again, both parties, in their collective race to the bottom, have virtually purged their membership of moderates.

The only time you see either party come anywhere near the middle is during the general election, and that's just to appeal to the "Great Middle" and get their vote. After which, both sides gravitate back to the outer edges of reality and to the extremists on either side.  So, who is the "middle" anyway?

Traditionally, the middle was what governed this nation. In recent history it's been individuals like Truman, Eisenhower, Rockefeller, and John Kennedy.  Today, it's the Independents, the largest voting bloc in country. As of the end of October 2021, Independents made up 44% of registered voters while Republicans and Democrats were basically tied at 26% each according to a Gallup poll.

I think Independents see both parties for what they are---two flea infested wings of the same old corporate vulture. That's why they've jettisoned their malignant dogmas. While each party likes to finger point at the other, both are responsible for the shape America is in, including the corruption, cronyism, and increasingly extremist behavior. Both sides have sold out the Republic and transformed us into a neo-fascist Corporatocracy.  They have created a surveillance state which is one crisis away from becoming a police state.

 Corporate lobbyists are responsible for writing the overwhelming majority of legislation, and then shepherding it through the various Byzantine maze of committees and subcommittees, greasing palms and adding self serving amendments along the way. They fund campaigns, party coffers, and line the pockets of those willing to go along with the status quo. They control our foreign and domestic policies just as they control the media and use it as their propaganda arm. We can't keep going on like this.

They create and exploit divisions among the citizenry. The more we're divided, the easier we are to control and manipulate while they pull the puppet strings. And all that "infighting" you see on television? That's one corporate interest group competing with another. Anything positive we get out of it, the crumbs, is purely happenstance.  Of course, they put on a show when election times rolls around to make it look like they're doing something and it's "the other guy's fault", but that's all it really is, a show.

Given what both parties have done to us and our country, is it any wonder that the overall Congressional approval rate, as of the end of October, was just 21%? In practically every other country, politicians would be packing their bags and heading for the nearest airport out with that kind of approval rating.

The good news I suppose is that the rating is up from 18% a few weeks earlier. Nevertheless, Congress has been maintaining pathetically low levels for decades. But, in their defense, while we've been giving them low approval ratings, they've been giving us low performance ratings in return!

According to the same poll, the approval rating for Democrats was just 33%, but don't gloat Republicans. Yours was just 5%. As for "Sleepy Joe" Biden, his approval rating tanked to 38%.  His Vice President, Kamala Harris, didn't do much better. Her approval rating was 27.8%. As an aside, 44% of Independents disapprove of Biden's job.

 Also, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi's approval rating was 38%, though 72% of Democrats like her while McConnell's approval rating was just 30% of which 62% of Republicans like the job he's doing.  It's worth noting that while the majority of America's support the infrastructure bill (61%) before Biden, only a quarter of them think it will benefit them in any meaningful way.

All this makes me wonder why we've allowed it to continue. You know, despite these embarrassing approval ratings, we still elect well over 90% of them! Even the old Soviet Politburo didn't have that rate of reelection! It seems to me that the ones we should be upset the most with isn't Congress or whoever is the president. It's us for continuing to reelect this den of thieves.

Did you know that, according to another RepresentUs survey, that despite their lackluster approval ratings, 45 member of Congress still violated the Stock Act of 2021, including Senator Diane Feinstein, Senator Rand Paul, Representative Dan Crenshaw, and Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz? The act was to prevent insider trading by members of the House and Senate.

 By the way, you should remember Debbie. She was fired in 2016 for helping Hillary to rig the Democrat Primary against Senator Bernie Sanders. But no worries. She was hired the next day to work directly on Hillary's failed presidential campaign, and how she's in Congress. Amazing how they land on their feet isn't it?

Here's a little factoid for you to consider. For the 535 members of Congress, there are 11,524 lobbyists representing corporations and none that represent average Americans. Of that 11,524 lobbyists, Big Pharma has approximately 1,350 of them (roughly 3 per Congressman), and they're not bashful about spending money. This year alone they've spent $263 million on Congress.

While 83% of Americans favor federally negotiated drug prices, Big Pharma doesn't. Since 2003, it has spent over $3.8 billion dollars to make sure it doesn't happen, and you know how many bills have been passed to regulate drug prices? Zero. Nada. Goose egg. But then again, as I've said, it's the lobbyists who write the bills, so what do you expect?

Here's another factoid for you. Consider it a bonus. Of all the industrialized nations in the world, we have the highest incarceration rate of any of them. As of 2019, there was 2.1 million people behind bars. That's more than China, Russia, Cuba, India, Mexico, Rwanda, or any of the Muslim nations like Iran, Turkistan, or Pakistan.

If states were ranked as countries, 25 states have a higher percentage of prisoners that the first country on the list, which so happens to be the U.S.. The state with the higher incarceration percentage is Louisiana, followed by Mississippi and Oklahoma. Kentucky is seventh. We have to go another ten more states before we get to the next country, El Salvador!  Why is this? Why should one of the "freest" nations on earth have the highest incarceration rate on the planet? 

For the fifth straight year, the United States has been ranked as "flawed democracy", which is just one step above a failed democracy. We are currently ranked 25th in the world of freest countries, and we've continued to drop regardless of who is president or which corporate party has the majority in Congress.

By all other measures, such as quality of life, longevity, happiness, healthcare, education, and so on, we're consistently ranked, at best, toward the bottom of the top tier or in the second tier. Surely we can't keep going on like this.

It reminds me of the Ancient Roman Republic which, despite having the most powerful military in the world, was rapidly decay internally due to corruption, a powerful political and economic oligarchy, invading tribes, a deteriorating infrastructure, as well as economic instability, rising taxes and public debt (it also sounds a lot like Weimar Germany in the 1920's, just prior to the rise of the Nazis).

Something tells me that living under a new Caesar or Fuehrer won't be a lot of fun, especially given the level of technology, hereto unseen in history of Mankind, and the fact that we're already a surveillance state in place; just one crisis (real or manufactured) away from a police state.  All you need to do is look around...or down at your Smartphone or up at your computer screen.

Let's not forget, they already have a propaganda wing in the form of the media, which has been actively attempting to control, divide, and manipulate us for decades now. It will take tremendous personal fortitude to see through the manufactured BS; more than it did in Fascist Spain, Argentina, Germany, Italy, or Soviet era Russia, Hungary, Poland, East Germany, or modern China and North Korea.

Americans, though, are a unique breed. Most of us are not just the descendants of immigrants. We're mostly the descendents of misfits who simply didn't fit in with the established status quo. We wanted to do better. We wanted to believe what we wanted. We wanted our own land or our own business. We wanted to say and read and think what we wanted. We wanted to exist with as little government interference as possible (today that would include corporate interference too).

Even those who came here against their will, having been kidnapped or captured and sold by their own people are a helluva lot better off than the best of those they left behind. America is still the first choice for those seeking a better life (though it's not exactly as billed). The main problem is that they don't want to do it legally or they think they're entitled to an automatic pass for some reason. So claim that "no one is illegal", which is true, but their actions may be. That's why we have laws. 

Nevertheless, there's still much we can do to reclaim our country and restore the Republic. As I've often pointed out in my articles, we can still reverse our decline into some sort of modern servitude to the Corporate state which will affect all of us regardless of political registration, ideology, gender or orientation, religion (or lack thereof), where we live or went to school, or the color of our skin.

Those are manufactured divisions anyway whose sole purpose is to keep us fighting each other while the ruling Oligarchy grows like a cancer and becomes stronger while the media continues to tell us what to think, who to hate, or who to blame for whatever make believe slight they conjure up.

The truth is that we alone are responsible for what to think or believe. We alone are responsible for our decisions, good or bad. We control the means to achieve our success. There's no one to blame but us for our failures without need of their readymade excuses and scapegoats. We have the right to live where we want (assuming we can afford it) no matter what we look like, believe, or love.

At the same time, we have the right as human beings to associate with whomever we want without fear of some artificial construct (aka "political correctness"). That goes for what we say, read, or watch too. We owe no one an apology or "reparations" for the past anymore than we can guarantee the future. We only have the here and now to determine our actions.  

We owe no dogma our loyalty. Dogmas, political or otherwise, only create barriers and differences. The only loyalty we owe is to Truth, Honesty, and to ourselves. As the great Hebrew sage, Hillel, once famously said, "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor", to which I would add my own quote "what divides us makes society and ourselves vulnerable and weak  while what unites us makes us stronger as a society and as individuals".  Perhaps we're finally waking up to what's hateful to ourselves and others.

 

Congress Approval Lowest in 2021 as Democrats Turn Negative

Gloomy landscape for Democrats in midterms as Biden's approval rating drops to 38% in USAToday/Suffolk poll

U.S. Congressional Leaders Unpopular on the Balance

 

Culpability: The Protest on The Capital and Who Is Responsible

Mea Culpa. It's a legal term which means accepting responsibility for one's actions. Despite four years of creating a volatile---even hostile--- environment, not once has the corporate media, including social media platforms, newspapers, or the networks stepped up and accepted responsibility for their actions; for creating a climate of fear. For dividing Americans and America as they fan the flames of descension but ignore responsibility for the fire it creates.

Not once has the likes of Nancy Pelosi, AOC, Schumer, and others offered a sincere apology to the American People for fostering and inciting hatred of the President and their disdain for not just his supporters, but of anyone who disagrees with them. Remember the sarcasm of Pelosi throughout his State of the Union address? Remember her publically ripping his State of the Union speech in half and throwing it away? Whatever happened to simple common courtesy or at least respect for the office?

The feigned "shock" and "outrage" from Washington officials smacks of second rate Vaudevillian shtick. Despite professing ignorance of the American People's anger, they throw around empty words like "the People's House", "it's not us", or how protesting a corrupt Congress or a broken political system is somehow "Un-American".  How could they not have known? Perhaps they were too wrapped up in their own self-importance or insulated in the vacuum of their self-serving bubbles.

How is it they condemn ordinary the working or middle class or small business owners for wanting not just their lives backs, but for wanting a political system which works: one where, at the very least, their vote---their voice---still counts for something? These Americans were protesting what they believed to be a fixed election following four years of being told their President was a fraud; that his election wasn't the result of individuals tired of a broken system which serves the wants and whims of a wealthy class of elites, but the result of "Russian collusion".

Yet, these same hypocrites never condemned the riots and looting of this past Spring and Summer.  No, they never spoke out against the arson, the violence, the vandalism of public and private property or the destruction of historic monuments. Instead, they asked why there wasn't more protests in the streets? They encouraged the rioters. They egged on the looters.

Was President Trump to blame for what happened on January 6th? Yes he was, at least in part. Certainly the language he used in his Tweets and texts didn't help. Trump wanted to show support for those who stood by him these last four years. He encouraged his supporters and others who were fed up with Congress to come a show their support, not just for him, for an America which is passing away before their eyes.

Did Trump encourage violence or to act out? No. That, it seems, may have been the result of Antifa and BLM who, according to some witnesses, were bused in to disrupt and discredit the protestors. Sadly for all, it seems to have worked.  But we're not hearing that part of the story. Perhaps it just doesn't fit the narrative. Even if not, who, if not the media and certain members of Congress, are not responsible for creating the climate of anger and mistrust? There's plenty of blame to go around. It's not all President Trump.

So, now we are hearing about calls to impeach President Trump again. However, this would be under Article 25...for alleged sedition.  The goal is not to remove the President from office. There's not enough time for that. No, the goal is to ensure that Trump can never again run for a federal office...like for President in 2024. They want Trump not just discredited, but destroyed so that he will never be seen a symbol of resistance by the people. 

Senate Majority Leader...I mean...Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell seems pleased with the results of the election, though not necessarily his loss in position. He seems even more pleased with efforts to impeach President Trump. In fact, he's gone as far as to openly support the idea since, in his opinion, it will go a long way in purging Trump supporters and the like from the Republican Party. Long live the Establishment, be it Democrat or Republican I suppose.  

The ruling elites of the Corporatocracy also want to send a message that no outsider will again challenge their grip on power. Anyone who runs for office must be a loyal adherent to the Status Quo; their party affiliation matters not. Both serve the same moneyed interests, and that's the way it will remain.

The inauguration of Joe Biden will take place as scheduled. It was always intended to. But it will be much more than Biden taking the oath of office and becoming the 46th President of the United States. It will represent the restoration of the Status Quo. The Oligarchs will be back in power after four years in shadows. The neo-fascist Corporatocracy, which has replaced our Republic, will be open for business as usual.

Biden will offer an olive branch and a call for unity, but don't assume that its meant to represent some form of compromise. His speech will be full of colorful phrases designed to press all the right buttons along with some subtle warnings. He'll utter empty words "family" , "patriotic", and a plea for us to "come together" aimed at making us feel nostalgic. What he is really saying is that we're back in charge and we intend to remain in charge.

It's said the history rarely repeats, but it often rhymes. January 6, 2021 marked the day that America crossed its Rubicon. Except there was no Caesar to cross its shallow river and restore the Republic or remove a bloated and corrupt Senate. The dice were cast, but this time it was the Oligarchs who won.

Like those of his kind, Biden will seek to mend fences and build alliances to help him secure his power. Stability is always the primary requirement for the corporate state. He will offer appeasements to whatever group he thinks will provide him with that stability.

I expect he'll open the southern border to illegal immigrants and call for so-called "reparations" to those who claim the bitter wounds of 160 years ago is the reason for their failures and not the result of failing to take advantage of the opportunities available to all. Something tells me it won't be enough. He may offer an alternative to the National Anthem or make America officially a bilingual nation.

He may impose a tax on the 2nd Amendment while curtailing the First. He's already hinted at it.Then too, he's always supported tax breaks for those of his social class over the last 47 years, so there's no reason to think that won't change. Zebras, skunks, and politicians rarely ever change their stripes. 

Corporations too will benefit as they always do when the elites are in charge of the public pocketbook. Those who countries which continue to support the Status Quo will benefit nicely as they always do, though the masses seldom benefit.  

As for the rest of us, the unwashed masses, we may see some crumbs thrown our way to buy our acquiesce to the corporate fait accompli.  It seems that protesting in the Capital is now prohibited in the Capital lest our followerless "leaders" cower under tables and behind locked doors. Should we endeavor for a kinder and more gentle outrage?

You can count on distractions too. They will need "something" to divert our attention from their sleight of hand now that they're back in business.  Bread and circuses have worked well these past 2000 years. No reason to stop now.

Meanwhile, the insincere indignation which barely conceals a gleeful cackle from the corporate media and political establishment will continue, at least for now. But don't hold your breath expecting their admission of guilt for their part in what's played out so far.

 

Dancing With the Devil: The November Elections

What do you think will happen if Donald Trump is reelected President? What do you think the outcome would be should Joe Biden win in November? Given the derisive climate we are living in, those are two questions we need to seriously think about. In fact, in a October 2019 Georgetown University poll, almost 68% of those surveyed said that we are quickly heading for a second civil war. That's a scary prospect folks.

The first civil war was the bloodiest war ever fought by this country. Some 620,000 died with another million or so either missing, wounded, or dying from their wounds or disease. About 420,000 died in World War II; 58,000 died in Vietnam. Given the size of our population and today's technology, can you imagine what the death toll could be? Ghastly would be an gross understatement, especially when you consider that we have a much higher percentage of people who are considered seniors, in nursing homes, or requiring medical care of some sort than at any time in our history who would affected.

Nevertheless, let's briefly consider the two scenarios. Ever since Trump's election in 2016, the establishment media has been waging a political assassination campaign against him. At every turn they have been trying to find some way to discredit or remove him, be it claiming Russian collusion, insider deals and bribery, to falsified "leaks" and whatever else you can think of.

The Democrats have been trying to undermine him at every term. The contempt individuals like Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and a myriad of others have for Trump is palpable to the point of being embarrassing. Even prominent Republicans have been critical of the president, violating Ronald Reagan's old political maxim, "Thou Shall Not Criticize A Fellow Republican". Loyalty is a fickle thing in politics.

Meanwhile, since the 2016 election, there has been growing street violence. Groups like Antifa have been using old style "Brownshirt" street fighting to attack anything or anyone who disagrees with them. BLM, which started off seeking social justice for black individuals, has morphed into a radicalized Left wing political group more akin to Antifa than not. Other, even more radical groups, including several militia-like organizations which threaten violence have started forming.

In addition, a new Left formed on college campuses, social media, and elsewhere. Their goal is to deny, wherever possible, the opposition an opportunity to speak. They have attacked speakers (including those who had been invited to speak), trashed stores which sell anything opposing their views. They have harass individuals on social media in an attempt to silence them while going after subscribers, commenters, or even advertisers who support them. Freedom of speech for some but not all.

Since March, the violence has increased due to the deaths of several black individuals resulting from police shootings. Most of these incidents are still under investigation, but the tone has been set---charge them or the city will burn, which carries the obvious implication that their guilt and conviction should be foregone conclusions. So much for a fair trial.

Former 2016 Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton has already publicly stated that should Trump win, Biden is to, under no circumstance, accept the results. Hillary has stated that they will need additional time to "ensure" that all votes are counted, which could take months. Presumably, this means they'll all be properly---and legally---counted before January. This brings up another issue, the votes themselves.

Because of the COVID-19 virus, many locales are encouraging mail-in voting. Of course, this creates the opportunity for all sorts of mischief such as lost ballots, altered ballots, disallowed ballots, or maybe even the dead voting! For those who "insist" on voting in person, this will likely be made as inconvenient as possible.

Traditional polling places will be closed and people will be herded into large buildings to vote amid constant reminders of the dangers of COVID-19. That may be enough to keep a lot of people home. As Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin once said, "It doesn't matter who votes. It only matters who counts the votes". Ole Uncle Joe knew what he was talking about.

So, Trump wins, then what? At first, not much. The media will downplay it and point to the votes yet to be manufactured...err...counted. However, as days drag into weeks, the patience on both sides will wear thin. There will be an increasing number of confrontations; many of them violent. When it becomes obvious that either Trump still wins or that fraud is afoot, that's when gloves will come off quickly.

The Far Left will go all out. There will be no middle ground. No compromise. There will be violence in the streets, be it cities, the towns, or the suburbs. The media will censor much of it as it has thus over the past several months. The economy, already hobbled by COVID-19, will largely come to a screeching halt (except possible online). It will be simply too dangerous for many people to go out.

There could be blackouts as electrical substations are attacked. Water purification plants could be attacked as well. Hospitals and pharmacies could be periodically attacked. In short, think Beirut. Read up on or watch videos about the "Color Revolutions" in Eastern Europe or the "Arab Spring" to get a good idea of what to expect.

Meanwhile, expect to see local police set up at key locations, especially major streets and expressways which will be subject to roving roadblocks by protestors. The state police will be out in force (most of them deputized as federal marshals). The National Guard will be out too. As looting and riots increasing, "shoot to kill" orders will be issued. Some states may even tell their citizens to move to certain secure areas or be prepared to defend themselves best as they can. It like literally look like a war zone.

After a few weeks of this, many of the least committed on both sides will start to settle down, leaving only the most extreme (of which there will still be plenty), but a general sense of normalcy will slowly evolve. Ultimately, Trump may be forced to resign "for the good of the country" in what will be a thinly veiled coup staged by his own party. An interim "caretaker" President will be installed. The media will hail it as brilliant statesmanship but everyone will see it for what it really is. The ruling Oligarchs of the Corporatocracy will use the chaos to restore order and everything else to their liking.

We will enter a long period of "normalization" which is code for protracted martial law. Various rights will be "temporarily" suspended for our "own good". Of course, we will never see those rights ever again, at least not in the same form. The New Order will begin. "Your papers if you would please".

What if it goes the other way and Biden wins? What happens then? You will immediately see the corporate media proclaim a "mandate by the people". There will be an immediate demand that Trump concede regardless of the status of mail-in ballots. They will want to secure the election as quickly as possible to avoid any delays or possible dispute of the results.

You will see the Left go bat shit wild. Yes, there will be massive celebrations in the streets, but in conjunction with these there will a great of celebratory violence with the usual vandalism, burnings, and lootings. On a slightly deeper level, you'll see Leftist groups start going after those who supported Trump and the Republicans (with the exception of large donors who just as likely donated to Biden and the Democrats).

Meanwhile, the Far Right will cry "foul" and take to the streets. Voting locations will be quickly secured by not just police but also by Right wing groups. There could be direct clashes with the Left while the small conservative media eggs them on. Indirectly you could see demand from all quarters of the Right for an immediate recount. Lawyers will file their previously prepared briefs to bring the whole process to a halt. Again, the economy would be affected through fear of potential violence.

As before, the local and federally deputized state police will be out in force along with the National Guard. The Democrats will assert the legitimacy of the election while the Right---conservatives and Republicans---will demand a recount first. Ultimately, martial law will be imposed under the pretext of restoring order and normalization, thus ushering in a New Order.

It's highly possible that during the chaos, that there is a massive wave of illegal immigrants, be they from Latin America, Asia, or the Middle East (especially terrorists hiding among the influx). This surge could overwhelm already strained social safety nets of cities and states throughout the nation but mainly in the southwest, Oregon, and Washington State.

Hostile foreign powers could use the chaos to make whatever nefarious move they've been harboring such an invasion of South Korea by the North, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, a possible toppling of the government in Iraq by pro-Iranians, or attack on Israel by Iranian backed terrorists.

Of course, any combination of the above could potentially happen. It's also possible that aside from a few protests or minor riots, a bit of looting, and some political posturing that not much of anything happens. That's the best case scenario I think. However, it's more likely that the post-November election will bring about a new course for America, whether it's a more polite form of corporate fascism from the Right or a more direct form from the Left. "How do take your revenge my dear---sweet or bitter?"

One of the things which has made the American Experiment so unique in history has been the peaceful transition of power. Given America's deep divide, fanned by the corporate media, this election will put the American Experiment to its toughest test to date. As long as we remain divided, only the Corporatocracy will win. In a "winner take all" electoral system, sometimes the losers are the weepers.

What Have We Learned Since the COVID 19 Outbreak?

Viruses and diseases have been with us since time immemorial. Wherever we've gone, it's been right there with us, in our food or water, on our clothing, our pack animals, or in our boats. Now it comes with us by plane. Some want to curtail or even stop our trade with China; claiming that we're to dependant on the Chinese. Perhaps that's true.

It would certainly be to our advantage to return many of our manufacturing jobs back to America but China isn't the only place where our jobs went (Mexico, India, and South Korea come to mind). However, that won't stop the development and spread of viruses or other diseases. Besides, as economically integrated as the world is, it would be impossible to separate from other countries without severely impacting every economy, including ours.

Some claim that the COVID-19 virus is a biological weapon sent here by the Chinese. After all, they claim, China may be a trading partner; even a important trading partner which just so happens to own much of our national debt, it is also a major economic and political competitor. China has long been on a quiet spending spree to buy up key natural resources to fuel its own phenomenal economic development, albeit at the price of destroying or polluting its own environment. And while it has embraced a certain amount of capitalism, it remains a politically close society; a Communist country whose swore goal is the overthrow of Western democracy and the suppression of freedom in whatever form that takes, including religion---any religion---for the sake of political conformity.

It's true that the virus originated in the Wuhan Province of China, which just so happens to be where a military bio-lab is located (we were told as you'll recall that it originated there as a result of someone eating contaminated "bat soup" as you'll recall). Perhaps it was a strain which accidently escaped from a lab, but then again, perhaps not. Now the Chinese government is trying to blame it on the CIA; an infected tourist who may or may not have knowingly carried the virus. The fact of the matter is that we'll never know for sure.

Another fact is that China has been just as heavily impacted as everyone else (if not more so) whatever the origin of the virus. In tracking the origin of diseases and viruses, it's often near impossible to determine the actually starting point since the first symptoms may not occur for weeks or months after the original exposure, and by then the original person infected ("patient zero") could be hundreds or thousands of miles away, infecting who knows how many others. So, practically speaking, what do we know? What have we learned since this outbreak?

We learned what are considered "essential" jobs and who are "essential" employees, and to the surprise of many, it not upper management. It isn't, for the most part, jobs which required four year degrees. In fact, the majority of these "essential" job didn't require any higher learning at all. I'm talking about garbage men (and women) who pick up our trash every week. I'm talking about the farmers and farmhands who grow our food or those who insure we have clean water.

I'm talking about those who work in fast food restaurants cooking the food and working the drive through windows as well as those who bring food to our door. I'm also talking about those who stock the shelves not just at night, but are currently doing it all through the day just so we'll have something for our families. We can't forget the cashiers either, nor those who make sure we have electricity to cook our food, watch TV, surf the internet, or charge our smartphones so we can play video games all day.

I'm also talking about the all important trucker who is busting their hump to make sure that the stores receive what we need. Without truckers, most of America doesn't eat. It doesn't get the cleaning supplies, clothes, sheets, medicine, or whatever else we need to survive. It includes those working in warehouses, and stockrooms, as well as those working on some production line turning our sanitizers or masks.

We still depend on the police, the firefighters, EMS, and hospital workers---from the doctors, nurses, and lab workers to those doing the laundry and housekeeping who provide clean sheets and sanitary rooms and those working in the kitchen and making sure everyone eats, and on those who are filling our prescriptions.

We're finding that with schools being closed, the most essential individual in any child's education is still the parent. Yes, teachers are important, but without the parent's contribution, it's often a wasted effort. Perhaps home schooling will play an even more important role in the future. We're also rediscovering that with churches being closed, that faith doesn't reside in a building but within each of us.

We are learning all over again about just how dependant we are on each other. We are reminded that we are social animals; that politics, religion, or other self imposed barriers matter little in the long run, and this virus is a harsh reminder that we, as a species, are in this for the long run. We've learned that it's the ordinary worker, the ones we give little thought to, who are keeping us going.

Thanks to this virus, we've also seen Humanity at its selfish and greedy worse. We've seen people hoarding paper towels, toilet paper, sanitizers, and cleaning products, not to mention OTC medicines. It would be one thing if they were buying it to help others, but they're not. They are buying it for the sole intent of taking advantage of the disadvantaged such as seniors, the handicapped, and those unable to get out to shop.

They are in affect stealing from others by creating an artificial shortages, which in turn causes everyone up the supply chain to work longer and harder to replenish stock, which ultimately drives up prices for everyone. Of course, they will be more than happy to sell their hoarded products for a handsome profit to the very people who can afford it the least. I find no sense of honor, let alone compassion in this. The noblest thing we can do is to help those who are unable to help themselves, especially in time of crisis, even if that means not buying more than we think we need.

We've also learned something negative about our "social" nature. Despite repeatedly being warned to stay indoors as much as possible and the emphasis on social distancing, we are witnessing individuals doing just the opposite. Just recently we had thousands of high school and college students head to the beaches for an extended Spring Break. Many of them openly dismissing the warnings; claiming that "this is our time".

Well, perhaps it is "their time". Now that communities have closed all the usual Spring Break hot spots, a number of these self-centered "young adults" have become infected. Better yet, they're now demanding to be treated first. Frankly, too bad. Youth may be known for its zeal, but not necessarily for its intelligence (which typically improves with experience).

But it's not limited to youthful ignorance. It cuts across all age groups just as it does all races, religions, and (most) income brackets. We've seen people enmasse show up to watch the docking of the USS Comfort Hospital ship, going to the park, and at other events with large crowds. If we're to slow this spread of this virus down, we're going to have think about how we interact with others for their protection as well as ours.

We've also seen as unessential Washington can be. We've seen how partisan politics continues to influence something as basic as putting together a relief package for the nation. Be it sneaking in money for illegal immigrants, funding the Kennedy Center, or providing more corporate welfare, and neither party is more guilty than the other.

This should send a clear and unmistakable message to the American People that Washington doesn't represent our best interests (as if we actually need yet another reminder right?). It serves the needs of the very wealthy; the special interest groups who make up the ruling Oligarchy and finance modern politics.

The only reason we got anything out of this so-called "relief package" was the knowledge that the American People might... just might...actually stand up and doing something about a relief package for the elites only (I'm thinking of a repeat of Obama's 2008 Wall Street bailout), and yet special interest groups still made out like bandits. Now, another relief package is being considered and Congress is again looking at ways to reward its special interest benefactors with our money.

We've also seen some of our greatest fears as Americans starting to take shape. For years there has been those who've warned about the slow development of a surveillance state; the forerunner of a police state. We've witnessed the development of technology, which many have welcomed with open arms while not considering its other, possible nefarious, uses. We've assumed that "our" politicians, regardless of their party, were immune to the clarion call of dictatorship which has crumbled countless other nations throughout time. After all, we have a constitution to protect us.

However, recent events, mostly at the local or state level, have shown that politicians, regardless of party, are just as drawn to the allure of absolute power as any other tyrant down through history, and no would be dictator would ever dream of wasting a perfectly good crisis! We know we're already an Oligarchy. The government is not run for our benefit. It serves the needs and wants of a very small group of wealthy individuals and corporations. For them, it's always been about control, be it assets, resources, or the populace.

Whether or not we take the next and perhaps final step into a full fledge police state, there can be no doubt that there's no going back to what we were pre-virus. The government, and those who control the government, have been taking careful note about how we've reacted to this crisis; who obeyed and who were the ones who spoke out. They've seen how we've responded. What were the strengths and weaknesses to our social system, especially our supply chain. How much did we depend on social media as opposed to corporate mainstream media or just how prepared the average American is for a crisis.

They already know that most Americans---80%---live from paycheck to paycheck. They've seen that there was no outcry or even whimper when the primary elections were temporarily suspended (there was more of an outcry when the baseball and basketball seasons were postponed). They have taken note of our restrained reactions to seeing National Guard troops out, to curfews and to restricted travel.

As Lewis Carroll's "Alice" in Alice in Wonderland said, "It's no use going back to yesterday, because I was a different person then". We are all different than we were before this crisis. The question is what we, "the People" will learn from this crisis, be it the tendency of politicians, businesses, ourselves, and each other.

The COVID-19 Bill: The Largest Stimulus Package in U.S. History

After almost two weeks of partisan bickering, it appears that we finally have a bipartisan agreement on a two trillion dollar stimulus package aimed at jump starting the economy following a near total shutdown of everything thanks to the COVID-19 virus. President Trump has already said he would sign the bill into law as soon as it hit his desk. This was also the third attempt to produce a bill which everyone could get behind.

This bill, the largest in U.S. history represents almost half of the current federal budget, includes individual payments up to $1200 per person (individuals making over $75,000 may be required to pay back part or all of it) plus $500 per child, $130 billion dollars for hospitals plus tax credits for "charity" assignments, a $500 billion dollar loan and loan guarantee fund plus $150 billion dollars for state and local governments to use as part of their stimulus program. In addition there will be a $367 billion dollar loan fund set for small businesses which will include a six month loan forbearance which will allow a temporary break in payments.

Of the $500 billion dollar fund, $425 billion will be earmarked for businesses, states, and local governments. $50 billion will go to commercial airlines, $8 billion to cargo airlines. $17 billion dollars will directed to companies deemed essential to national security. The fund will be administered by the U.S. Treasury Department. Additionally, the stimulus package also includes an extension of unemployment benefits for individuals laid off as a result of closures due to the virus and paid sick leave.

The package includes $25 billion in emergency funding to keep to U.S. Postal Service going (there was fear that the shutdowns could wipe out the USPS by June without the extra funding). The Department of Defense will be getting an extra $8 - $10 billion dollars in emergency funding as well. $450 million will be earmarked for food banks and food stamps. The bill will prohibit internet and utilities cut offs, along with providing more power to the FTC and state Attorney Generals to go after price-gougers (shame it doesn't include hoarders). Consumer debt payments will also be temporarily suspended.

The bill is the result of intense negotiations between Democrats and Republicans in both the House and Senate. Attempts were made by both sides to tack on funding for non-essential projects designed to help Congressional special interest groups such as money for abortion clinics, a provision to aid illegal immigrants and one to allow student loan forgiveness (repayments can be temporarily suspended), money for unions, and funds for expanded measures pertaining to environment protection were introduced by the Democrats.

Meanwhile, the Democrats demanded concessions from the Republicans that none of the money would be allowed to provide executive bonuses or for stock buybacks (as was done under Obama's 2008 Wall Street bailout) and restrictions on lobbyists. They also held out for extra funding for schools and universities (mainly to provide meals for students while the schools are closed) as well as WIC, child and earned income credits. While the Democrats didn't get the $15 an hour increase in minimum wage they wanted, they did get four billion dollars in funding to allow states to carry out election projects such as early and absentee voting under the Election Assistance Commission.

I suppose there's truth in the old saying that a "good crises should never be allowed to go to waste". Here we are, a month into the crisis, and we're just now getting a stimulus package put together. If Congress had done their jobs the way they were suppose to have, we would have had a package weeks ago and be that much closer to getting the economy back up and running. Instead, we had the usual petty bickering while both sides tried to sneak perks in for their favorite corporate special interest. Of course, I suppose you can't blame them. After all, these corporate sponsors fund their campaigns and keep them in power. It is them, not us, that they represent. So in that sense, they were looking after their constituents.

This is another reason that presidents, governors, and mayors should have line item veto power. A stimulus bill, no matter how imperfect, could have been on the president's desk weeks ago, and with line item veto authority, all those "add-ons" could have simply been removed with the stroke of a pen.

Another way to go about it is simply to require one measure per bill with no add-ons. Period. It would make it much harder to sneak through "pork" projects that taxpayers would be forced to pay, thus exposing more of the corruption by those who try. It would also cut back on lengthy bills, making them far more manageable easier to read and act on. No more, as Nancy Pelosi once said, "we have to pass it to see what's in it" nonsense.

Hopefully Congress will finally do their jobs and get a comprehensive emergency stimulus bill submitted to President Trump. From there, it has to be implemented which could take just as long as it did in Congress. Still, even the knowledge that relief is on its way will help. Meanwhile we all need to stay safe and follow the recommended guidelines. Remember, this too shall pass and we will come out of it stronger than we were before. If you want to know more about the stimulus bill, I've included some links below.


Senate, White House reach $2 trillion stimulus deal to blunt coronavirus fallout

READ: House Democrats Offer Their Own 3rd Coronavirus Response Bill


How the House Democrats stimulus plan compares to the Senates

The Killing of Qassem Soleimani: Making the World Safer or Lighting the Fuse for WWIII?

I'll cut straight to the chase and right to the point. President Trump ordered the execution of a cold blooded terrorist. A man who was directly responsible for the murder of thousands of Iranians, Iraqis, Yemites, Afghanis, Yazidis, Kurds, and American servicemen and women as well as civilians. Iranian General Qassem Soleimani was involved in aiding the likes of ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Boku Haram.

They are responsible for the murder of hundreds, if not thousands, of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and even other Muslims, plus the kidnapping, rapes and selling of young women into slavery. The final straw for the U.S. was the murder of an American contractor, ordered by General Soleimani. From a moral perspective, the world is far better off by his removal. But is the world any safer? By removing this individual are we any closer to world or even regional peace?

There's no question that General Soleimani, who headed the Quds Force, part of the hard line Revolutionary Guards which serves as a cross between the CIA, the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) and Delta Force, was despicable; someone on the same level as a Tamerlane or Himmler. President Trump has received nothing but criticism, ranging from Speaker Nancy Pelosi and members of the Democratic Party to the print and electronic media to the talking heads on television.

Pelosi is miffed that Trump didn't tell her first about the pending attack. But then, President Obama didn't tell her beforehand about taking out Osama Ben Laden either and she was just fine with it. In fact, not only Obama, but George W. Bush had ordered the targeting of key ISIS and Al Qaeda leaders without alerting either Pelosi or Congress and everyone seemed okay with that. In fact, the media never said "boo" to either about it. Now why is that? My guess is that this is nothing more than an ongoing attempt at character assassination; of promoting public distrust of President Trump.

So, what was General Soleimani doing in Iraq on January 3rd in the first place (and at a public airport no less)? His presence there was supposed to have been forbidden by the Iraqis. Well, it turns out that he was there to meet with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandi, the deputy commander of the Iranian sponsored Popular Mobilization Forces, an umbrella organization overseeing the various pro-Iranian militias.

Al-Mudandi had arrived with a small convoy to meet with Soleimani and escort him to a safe location outside of Baghdad, presumably to coordinate plans for future terror attacks on pro-Western targets, including U.S. diplomats and military personnel. Al-Mudanhi and a driver were also killed in the attack. It should be pointed out that the drone attack which took out Soleimani came just days after a failed attempt to seize the U.S. embassy by pro-Iranian militias in Baghdad had ended (that attack was in response to an earlier U.S. air attacks killing 25 Hezbollah fighters).

In addition, under the direction of Soleimani, members of the Revolutionary Guards had seized or attacked several oil tankers in the Gulf of Hormuz, attacked a Saudi oil field, and shot down a U.S. surveillance drone (okay, that may have been justified). Pro-Iranians militias, operating through Quds Force, have also been active in Syria and supplying both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Giza.

So now what? Well, in keeping with tradition, Iran responded. They withdrew from the agreement restricting their development of "nuclear reactors" (wink wink) which, to be honest, they've not been following anyway. They also launched a limited missile attack on two American bases in Iraq (no one was killed or injured). Heck, they've even raised their "red flag of doom" on the Jamkaran Mosque in Qom to signify a pending war (this is Iran's largest and most famous mosque).

Nevertheless, while their flag stills flies atop the mosque, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said that "proportionate measures" have been taken and the matter is now concluded. He added that Iran didn't want any further escalation but would respond in self defense is provoked further. However, Iran's religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called the Iranian missile attacks a "slap on the face" of the U.S. hinted at possible, more "severe" attacks to come in the near future.

Iran has to be careful in its response. First, to overreact is to essentially admit that Western intelligence was correct about Soleimani's importance as the mastermind behind Iran's attempts to destabilize the region and export its brand of radicalized Islam. Iran, while acknowledging Soleimani as the head of Quds Force, has long denied any involvement in terrorism in the region. Their response must be measured; even downplayed. He must be treated a merely a high ranking general.

Secondly, despite American led sanctions, Iran depends heavily on its restricted oil exports to keep the economy going. Iran has close ties to Russia, China, and North Korea which has helped. So has its limited trade agreement with the EU (especially France, Germany and the UK), along with various Arab nations including the United Arab Republic (UAR). To engage the U.S. in a tit-for-tat conflict could easily disrupt Iran's current trade arrangements, which would plunge the country into an economic spiral for which it might not recover.

At the same time, a enlarged U.S. military involvement in the region could also trigger panic in the West and drive the cost of oil and gas to near record highs (some have predicted as much as $100 per barrel of oil). Despite having one of the strongest militaries in the Middle East, Iran wouldn't stand much of a chance against the U.S. However, Iran would be no Iraq. The Iranians are much better trained and equipped than Saddam's forces thanks to support from Russia and China.

In addition, Iran is the lynchpin in the "We Hate America and Israel" club. Muslims throughout the Middle East and elsewhere, while appreciating the removal of a despot like Saddam Hussein, resent the continued presence of Western forces in the region which is viewed as a "conquering force". They also disapprove of our continued support of Israel. A war could result in Iran being able to unite Muslims and turn it from a political/economic conflict into a religious one (and as any historian will tell you, religious wars are the most ruthless and bloody of them all. After all, you're murdering on behalf your god. How can you possibly compromise or surrender?).

I would expect Hamas and Hezbollah to attack Israel with weapons its stockpiled from Iran. Additionally, it would provide an irresistible opportunity for North Korea to act up as well with a possible attack against South Korea, launch missiles at Japan (which it hates as much as it hates us) or even Hawaii or U.S. territories like Guam or Midway. Who knows, maybe China would use U.S. preoccupation to retake Taiwan. After all, we can't be everywhere and with over 20 years of active military engagement, we're kind of pooped. Our military badly needs time to reset, overhaul equipment and replenish inventory. The burnout rate of military personnel is at record highs (as are suicides).

Lastly, there's home...our home, America. Although Homeland Security, U.S. intelligence agencies, members of Congress, and the media have long known but remained virtually silent on the point that there is the strong likelihood of the Muslim terrorist cells in the U.S and quite possibly Canada, the UK, Mexico, throughout Western Europe.

For that matter, Russia and China likely have terrorist cells as well. Both Russia and China have had ongoing problems with Muslim separatists. There are some 9.4 million Muslims in Russia; mostly living in the southwestern portion of the country. Russia's troubles with the Chechens started back in 1994 and is still going on, with thousands dead and no end in sight. China has been attempting to suppress the Muslim Uyghurs in the Xinjiang Province for a couple of decades now.

The Uyghur comprise almost 50% of the population in Xinjiang with large pockets throughout mostly western China, including the Hui, Kyrgyz, and Kazakh who are also mainly Muslim. Although no official numbers are kept, it's estimated that China has around 23 million Muslims---up to 2% of their entire population. However, the more pressure applied by the Chinese, the more they resist. Already, almost 1.5 million Muslims have been imprisoned in what Chinese officials called "reeducation camps".

A war or even a serious uptick in hostilities between Iran and the United States benefits no one. It would deeply affect not just the already fragile economy of Iran (and possibly topple their government), but further destabilize the region, and deeply affect the economies of Europe, the U.S. and the rest of the world. It could engulf the world in a asymmetrical war which could last decades and where there would be no winners.

It's even possible, if not likely, that the end result could be a nuclear war. At the very least, it could involve chemical and biological weapons regardless of any so-called "international prohibitions". I don't care what god you believe in, I can't imagine one who would want to see all of humanity either destroyed or reduced to subsistence conditions. We could only hope that aliens would come down and save us from ourselves.

But reality being what it is, this is about oil. It's about gas. It's also about its control and flow. As an aside, Iran had just announced the discovered of an new oil field capable of producing over 56 billion barrels of oil. Think that's a coincidence? The ruling Oligarchy is, as readers of A/O already know, all about the control of assets and resources, which, by the way, also includes us.

If they are unable to acquire control through normal business channels, then they will employ the resources of government, which they control, to achieve their desired consequences, backed by a media they also control, to manufacture a properly suited villain. Add a dash of nationalism, a pinch of fear and you've got yourself the recipe for a military "intervention". Whether it's called a "war of liberation", a "fight for freedom" or "spreading democracy", it's all about control and, of course, profit.

President Trump, whether you love him or loathe him, acted on the intelligence presented to him by his advisors and generals, along with their recommendations. Trump was and will always be a businessman. He's not an expert on foreign policy or military matters. Obama, with virtually no political experience and had been a local "community organizer" wasn't either. George W. Bush was a largely unsuccessful businessman and mediocre governor wasn't much better.

All three men acted on what others told them. This is where you'll find the ruling Oligarchy; the "Deep State". It lays within the system itself, which makes the situation all the more dangerous. We can only hope that those who advise the president, whoever that may be, are acting in our national interests with an eye toward preserving Humanity rather than towards short term power and wealth.

'Stick of dynamite in a tinderbox': Why General Qassem Soleimani was killed, and what may happen next

European Commission: Iran


Iran supreme leader says missile attack was a 'slap on the face' of the U.S. but it was 'not enough'.


Trump Says Iran Appears to Be Backing Down From Conflict After Overnight Strikes


Analysis: The different stages of Iranian support for ISIS

Following The Money: Politicians and Money

Follow the money. We've all hear the expression, which appears to have originated back around the time of President Nixon and the Watergate scandal; made popular by the 1976 docudrama "All The President's Men". Basically, it just common sense. If you assume that everything goes back to money, then no matter how obfuscated the events are or how many people are involved, if you can track the flow of money, you can pretty much figure out most any mystery. Let's take Congress for example.

Did you know that 50.8% of all Congress members are millionaires going into office? The rest are all pretty much upper middle class or "near-millionaires"? Bet you didn't know that nearly every member of Congress leaving office was at least a millionaire. The total wealth of the previous Congress was $2.43 billion dollars, which up 20% over the prior Congress. To put that in context, Standard and Poor's index and the Dow Jones industrial average rose only 10% for the same span.

In case that's still not clear, how about this? The median net worth of an average American household is $92,950 whereas the average member of Congress has a net worth of $511,000 (2016). Let's put it yet another way. The average member of Congress has a net worth equal to 18 average households. Still think they "feel our pain"? By the way, just 5.8% of all Americans are millionaires by comparison.

Thanks to the absence of term limits and party based gerrymandering, the "Citizens United" misruling by the Supreme Court, along with their enormous wealth has created our professional political class; something our Founding Fathers vehemently opposed. In fact, for every 13 members, there is a "one percenters" in Congress (someone whose income is in the top 1%). There are ten House members and three Senators whose individual net worth exceeds $43 million each.

How about party? Which of the two sides has the wealthiest members? In the Senate, it's the Republicans. They have an average net worth of $1.4 million which the average Democrat's net worth is $946,000. However, in the House, it's the Democrats who have most money, but not by much. The average net worth of a Democrat is $424,000 compared to GOP which has an average net worth of $401,000. Taken together, the GOP has 64% of the total wealth in Congress. Sorry, but I'm still not sensing any "pains" for taxpayers yet. Nevertheless, here's a little tidbit which I found interesting, and it deals with wage equality; a very popular campaign issue as you know.

The average female in Congress has a individual net worth of $682,000 compared to her male counterpart who has an individual net worth of $465,000. As an aside, seven of the top ten wealthiest female Congress members is a Democrat with Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) leading the way with a net worth of $58.5 million dollars. By comparison, Darrel Issa (R-CA) has a net worth of $283 million. In fact, just 12 members of Congress have more than 50% of the total wealth of Congress.

How about some other individuals to consider? Let's start with Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). She has a net worth of $18 million with most of her wealth coming from real estate. Rep. Joseph Kennedy III (D-MA) is worth $18.7 million; mainly from trust funds. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has a net worth of 10.4 million, which the majority of this coming from investments.

Rep John Yarmuth's net worth is $6.1 million with most of that coming from real estate. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has a net worth of $4.7 million with most of that coming from investments. Rep Tom Massie (R-KY) is a pauper by comparison. His net worth is just $800,000 with nearly of it coming from real estate. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is even poorer with a net worth of only $500,000 based on a mixture of real estate and investments. Nevertheless, none of these individuals are what most of us could consider to be "average" when it comes to wealth.

Here's something we also need to consider. First, an average member of Congress earns $174,000 a year (the Speaker of the House earns a bit more, $223,000). Congressional leaders earn around $193,000. The last pay raise Congress gave itself was back in 2009 (Congress has recently sent up a test balloon to increase their salary by $4000. The response thus far has been strongly negative). Secondly, most every member enters Congress already in the top 5% income bracket, meaning that most are already millionaires long before going to Washington.

Third, the majority of Congressional members come from the Business sector where they were typically senior officers (and owners) as well as sit on a number of well paying board of director seats. The majority tend to have come from banking, communications, technology, finance, pharmaceutical, and shipping backgrounds. A little personal tidbit about Congressional members is that they love playing the stock market.

The stock they most have in common is General Electric (probably because of its technology base and the fact that it's a key military contractor). In fact, 74 members of Congress have at least some GE stock in their investment portfolio. Their second favorite stock is Wells Fargo, followed by Microsoft, Apple, Proctor & Gamble, along with Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, and other financial institutions. I'm sure that the fact that these companies have the most active lobbyists has absolutely nothing to do with it.

While the overwhelming majority of these individuals can't relate to the average American, we should also show them a little love. After all, running for office isn't cheap. In 2018, the average amount spent to run for a Senate seat was $10 million dollars. For a House seat it was $1.3 million. Of course, this doesn't include what super PACs or political non-profits contribute, which thanks to the Citizens United misruling by the Supreme Court, added millions more to the total cost.

Of course, we have to remember that the vast majority of this money goes to incumbents and rarely to challengers. Once elected, the average Congressional member is expected to spend up to 5 hours a day raising money for their party and for their next election (typically only 3 hours a day is actually spent on the "People's business". That means a lot of schmoozing with deep pocket contributors and corporate lobbyists.

Add in a lack of term limits, and you have a professional political class; politicians who are totally beholden to their new bosses---the ruling Oligarchy. If you think about it, it's a lot like dealing with the Mafia. Once you take that first dollar or accept that first "favor", you're hooked. They've got you. Party means absolutely nothing. It's all about the money. Amusingly, the colors assigned to both parties, red for the Republicans and blue for the Democrats, when mixed is green, the color of money. Remember that!

Meanwhile, the average American is pushed further and further from their rightful place as the master; replaced by faceless corporations which has created an Oligarchy. Gone is the notion of a "Citizen Legislator" as proposed by our Founding Fathers. The master has become the servant (or more properly, the economic serf). Washington has long ceased to answer to us, the voters. We've been made all but obsolete; a necessary inconvenience to be appeased every so often. The question, as always dear reader, is what are we prepared to do about it? How much more are we willing to take?

If we continue to do nothing, it can and will only get worse. Let's not let that happen. Let's find ways to come together regardless of party, gender, race, sexual orientation, or any other manufactured division. That's what the Oligarchy fears the most. That's why they try so hard to keep us divided. We must demand full transparency in government; term limits; an end to Citizens United and real campaign finance reform; an end to party sponsored gerrymandering; ending the cozy relationship between politicians and lobbyists, as well as stopping the revolving door between government and Wall Street or K Street (K Street is where most lobbying firms are located).

Personally, I would like to see newly elected individuals resign from their political party as soon as they're elected and take an oath to represent everyone in their district and state. No more "dialing for dollars" on our time, paid for by our tax dollars. I would like to see a 12 year cap imposed on all federally elected candidates. This means capping the amount of time anyone can hold office. That's six 2 year terms for the House, two 6 year terms for the Senate, three 4 year terms for the President, and 12 years for the Supreme Court and all federally appointed judgeships. If you can't get done what you want in the 12 years, then perhaps politics isn't for you.

So, what do you think? Have you had enough of being manipulated? Are you tired of being turned into an economic serf? Tired of being talked down too or being treated like government knows what's best for you? Had enough of being lied to? Of having politicians ignore the voter's instructions? I could go on and on and you know it. Let's come together as a nation and retake our government back while we still have time to act.


Wealth of Congress: Richer than Ever, but Mostly at the Very Top

One Member of Congress = 18 American Households; Lawmaker's Personal Finances Far From Average

The Richest Members of Congress Built Their Wealth This Way

Most in Congress Are Millionaires, But Many Were before They Were Elected