One should always be prepared for the worst. Considering that we have a dumbed-down public who votes emotionally rather than rationally, it is quite possible that Barack Obama can win a second term by simply scaring Americans into believing that they will lose their Social Security, their Medicare, their Medicaid, their food stamps, and all other federal goodies, if a Republican is elected president. Those who remember the 1964 presidential election may recall the scare tactics used by the Lyndon Johnson campaign to frighten Americans into thinking that should Republican candidate Barry Goldwater be elected president, it would be the same as "tearing up" their Social Security card. Americans are now so addicted to government entitlements, that the idea of limited government probably frightens them. They actually want unlimited government. The more the better, they think, and by November 2012 most Americans may decide that Obamacare is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Thomas Sowell, in a recent column, noted that liberal Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt won four elections for the presidency (1932, ’36, ’40, and ’44) despite the fact that the economy was in a depression, unemployment was high, and money was tight. The Democrats blamed it all on the Republicans, naming the shanty towns built by the jobless "Hoovervilles." In 1935, they enacted Social Security, which has become the most sacred entitlement in American history, saving millions of the poor from starvation. What kind of a heartless Republican can be against that.
The erosion of our freedoms continues as the Department of Justice is criminalizing activities that it deems may be detrimental to public security. Among those activities are “lying on the Internet” and “uploading videos that break YouTube’s terms of service,” as well as any other action determined to “contravene a website’s usage policy.” “In a statement obtained by CNET that’s scheduled to be delivered tomorrow, the Justice Department argues that it must be able to prosecute violations of Web sites’ often-ignored, always-unintelligible “terms of service” policies,” writes Declan McCullagh. The DOJ has expanded its Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) to indicate that an agreement with a website’s terms of service would be identical to signing a contract with an employer, and as such, any such violation should provoke the same sort of punishment. Passed by Congress in 1986, CFAA was originally intended to stop hackers from breaking into computer systems and to address all federal computer-related offenses. The Department of Justice now seeks to greatly expand the use of CFAA to target a number of different “violations.”
Evidence shows that CNBC manipulated its online poll following a debate and that its action is part of CBS policy to ignore certain candidates and prop up others. This has placed CBS and CNBC under harsh scrutiny. However, according to Murray Sabrin — professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business at Ramapo College in New Jersey, 2008 Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate, and regular writer for LewRockwell.com — the main motivation behind the media’s bias against Ron Paul has been Paul’s harsh criticism of the Federal Reserve.
We probably all agree on the worthlessness of the New York Times. For starters, it publishes propaganda it barely bothers to disguise as news, relentlessly pushing its various agendas from a totalitarian State to sodomy as “marriage.” Its style and conventions are hidebound and stodgy. And despite the worldwide failure of the Big Government it has promoted for decades as well as its own slide into irrelevance and bankruptcy, it remains disgustingly enamored with itself.
According to CBS News, "the number of people in the U.S. living in poverty in 2010 rose for the fourth year in a row, representing the largest number of Americans in poverty in the 52 years since such estimates have been published by the U.S. Census Bureau." MSNBC said, "The U.S. poverty rate remains among the highest in the developed world." Let's look at a few poverty facts. Heritage Foundation researchers Dr. Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield laid out some facts about the poor in their report "Understanding Poverty in the United States: Surprising Facts About America's Poor" (9/13/2011). Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. Nearly three-fourths have a car or truck, and 31 percent have two or more. Two-thirds have cable or satellite TV. Half have one or more computers. Forty-two percent own their homes. The average poor American has more living space than the typical non-poor person in Sweden, France or the U.K. Ninety-six percent of poor parents stated that their children were never hungry during the year because they couldn't afford food. "The Material Well-Being of the Poor and the Middle Class Since 1980" (10/25/2011) is a research paper by professor Bruce D. Meyer of the University of Chicago and The National Bureau of Economic Research and professor James X. Sullivan of the University of Notre Dame. In it they report:
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that a good catch phrase could stop thinking for 50 years. One of the often-repeated catch phrases of our time — "It's the economy, stupid!" — has already stopped thinking in some quarters for a couple of decades. There is no question that the state of the economy can affect elections. But there is also no iron law that all elections will be decided by the state of the economy. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was re-elected for an unprecedented third term after two terms in which unemployment was in double digits for eight consecutive years. We may lament the number of people who are unemployed or who are on food stamps today. But those who give the Obama administration credit for coming to their rescue when they didn't have a job are likely to greatly outnumber those who blame the administration for their not having a job in the first place. An expansion of the welfare state in hard times seems to have been the secret of FDR's great political success in the midst of economic disaster. An economic study published in a scholarly journal in 2004 concluded that the Roosevelt administration's policies prolonged the Great Depression by several years. But few people read economic studies.
Days ago, reports revealed that Ron Paul is in a dead heat in the Iowa caucus with Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich. Since then, Paul has also gained support in New Hampshire, where he is now in second place in the polls. A Bloomberg News New Hampshire poll reveals that Paul currently sits at 17 percent in New Hampshire, surpassing the new GOP frontrunner Newt Gingrich, who garnered 11 percent of the vote, and Herman Cain, who received just 7 percent. The only candidate ahead of Paul is Mitt Romney, who sits comfortably at 40 percent.
When it comes to the requisite familiarity with crucial issues of domestic and global importance, some are suggesting that the current GOP presidential front-runner might be “faking it.” Particularly in the areas of foreign affairs and domestic security, there are those making compelling arguments that perhaps the former Governor of Massachusetts is out of his league.
Imagine a world in which Americans weren’t remotely as susceptible to media manipulation as they currently are. Let’s call it “America 2.” In such a world, Americans would be more disposed to “think for themselves,” as we say, to think just a bit critically about the images and sound bites to which they are bombarded daily. The measured skepticism with which they would treat the media, especially its coverage of politics, would cultivate within them intellectual and moral virtues that, in reality, are sorely lacking among a good portion of the electorate. In this possible world, Americans would be far more fortified against intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy than are their counterparts in the real world.
It has been all the talk on Wisconsin political blogs, talk shows, and editorial pages for the past several months. Now it is official: on November 15 virulent opponents of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker officially launched a recall drive against him, in what can only be described as a vindictive attempt at political payback for his success at reining in collective bargaining for state employees. But just who Democrats will choose to run against the popular conservative state leader — should they garner the half a million or so needed recall petition signatures — is still up in the air.