Would you argue with the unemployed that the economy has picked up? No. Of course not. They're unemployed. Nobody wants to tell someone who is suffering that most people aren't, so they should be happy. Obviously, that would only make the suffering even more unhappy.
Consequently; the Democrats are in a bind. Even though the recession ended in June of 2009, the Democrats are unwilling to brag about it. Their reason is simple. The press isn't backing them up. If someone on President Obama's staff were to stand up and say “hey, everything is alright now”, all the press would have to do is go interview a few poor people, and the Democrats will look like fools. In fact, I'm sure it's already happened.
But the fact remains; the recession ended in June of 2009, and hardly any of us realize it. Which is very curious. Not at any time in my life do I remember a situation like this. The press seems hesitant to report that the economy is out of the dumps. This is not normal. As soon as any previous recession ended, the press always seemed to cheer on the economy. But now, it seems all we hear about is the impending double dip recession. And for a while, all we seemed to hear about was the potential for double digit inflation. And at least so far – that hasn't happened either. So, why so glum?
It appears that the mass media wants people to be uncertain about the economy. This runs totally counter to what their advertisers typically want. Usually advertisers want you to think the economy is doing OK so you might be more willing to spend more money. However, something seems very different this time – and very ominous.
Could it be that history is now being rewritten as it happens in order to manipulate the mid-term elections – and ultimately the future of our Nation? What if this is a coordinated effort? And what if they have captured far more of our future than we realize?
Let's try a little thought experiment. What if Aldus Huxley and George Orwell had both actually predicted parts of the future of America with their books Brave New World and 1984? What would this future actually look like? What would some combination of the two predictions mixed in with American culture and a “laissez-faire” economic policy actually look like?
Well... if the powers that be did a good job, it would look rather normal – at least for a while.
For a while we might not think anything happened – at least not anything of significance. We'd continue to vote and shop and watch TV. We'd continue to think Americans are the good guys. And for a while, we'd continue to believe that our society's problems could be fixed by our elected “representatives.”
In other words, the Brave New World and 1984 scenarios could have already (at least partially) come true for us – if we have not quite noticed how far along we are.
Going back to the actual year 1984, things weren't the same. There was the Soviet Union back then. We Americans were convinced that those subjugated by the Soviet Union were already living the dystopian life written about by George Orwell. (And I still believe they were.) But with Ronald Reagan as President; many of us were convinced that America would stay a free country – with checks and balances – and a populous committed to fight for our freedom.
Yet, back in 1984, a major political upheaval was going on right here; the “Reagan Revolution” (which was actually more of a counter-revolution to the changes of the 1960s and 1970s). There was deregulation, tax breaks for the rich, Cold War escalation, and of course, big money in politics.
Big money hadn't been happy with President Jimmy Carter. When Carter allowed Ralph Nader and his team of lawyers help write many of the Nation's new regulations; well... for a short time big money had to live by some rules... and evidently, they didn't like that.
So, big money helped Ronald Reagan get elected.
(They tell me you get what you pay for.)
President Reagan deregulated the airlines and then fired all the air traffic controllers, destroying its Union (and weakening all other Unions). Now, flying ain't what it used to be and Unions barely make a difference for most of us.
President Reagan deregulated the financial institutions, which led to the Savings and Loan crisis and bail out.
And President Reagan effectively deregulated the monopolies, by not enforcing anti-monopoly laws. This led to what looks a whole lot like an Oligarchy in America.
Now combine all that with the fact that (if you pay attention), every day you can hear some U.S. Congressman talking 1984 style double speak – and even telling outright lies. And does the press challenge them? Not very often. In fact, you have to wonder when Fox has paid two million dollars (in contributions to the Republican Party and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) to get Congressmen and candidates to talk like that.
Though it doesn't have to be this way, something has changed. We're not in democratic republic land any more. No. This now looks a lot more like a corporatocracy.
But what does a corporatocracy look like?
Well... if the powers that be did a good job, it would look rather normal – at least for a while.
But the transfer of wealth to the wealthy can't look normal forever. Eventually, the economy breaks down. And then; the culprits have to blame somebody else. We recently saw this happen after the financial breakdown of 2008. A Democrat was elected as President because of how poorly the Republicans handled the economy. And now, two years later, there are Americans who have been convinced that this is all the Democrats' fault.
Of course, the economy is more complicated than that. The Democrats do share in some of the blame for the loss of our Nation's manufacturing sector and the financial breakdown of 2008, but they are not the primary culprits. That should obviously be the primary fault of the free market fanatics. It was the free market fanatics who allowed (or even perpetrated) the transfer of American jobs offshore. It was the free market fanatics who changed our laws to allow what was effectively gambling with our 401Ks. And it was the free market fanatics who monopolized everything, leaving us with numerous “too big to fail” companies that will have to be bailed out when their poor management gets them into trouble.
And what do the powers that be claim is the answer to these issues? Free market economics, of course! (Hey, it's making them richer.) And what are the powers that be doing to see that their invisible hand on the “free” market continues to treat us like an invisible fist? They're trying to manipulate our elections.
We have an election soon for Nevada U.S. Senator that will face the Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, against Republican/Tea Party candidate Sharron Angle.
Now, before we go any further, I need to explain my position on the Tea Party. I truly respect Representative Ron Paul. I respect his interpretation of the Constitution. And though I don't always agree with Ron Paul, I believe he provides needed input in Congress. If the Tea Party still represented the ideals of Ron Paul, I would be far more inclined to believe that the Tea Party now exists to improve our Nation.
But the Tea Party movement has been stolen, co-oped, and infused with the special interests of the greedy rich. What Sharron Angle stands for is; Wall Street gambling with our Social Security, tax breaks for the rich, the health “care” industry maximizing their profits instead of our health, banking without regulations, and essentially corporate anarchy in the name of Libertarianism. Or in other words; I believe that Sharron Angle is more than willing to allow our nation to slip into third world status to benefit the wealth of a few – hypocritically, in the name of freedom.
But that's not how a number of my neighbors feel. They practically see Senator Harry Reid as the anti-Christ. In fact, many of them have posters out on their neatly mowed lawns that say; “Vote for anybody BUTT Harry Reid.” Now that's a commitment. Anybody? Anybody?!!! What could Harry Reid have possibly have done so heinous that these people would be so angry at him? ...I'm still waiting... Nobody seems to have a rational argument for being so angry at Harry Reid. Which would leave me dumbfounded if it were not for the so obvious reason why they are angry. Their anger is not rational. It is emotional. We're talking almost mob mentality here. And it has been surreptitiously been brain-washed into them by a biased press.
Years of negative comments about Harry Reid on Fox “News” and negative commentaries and cartoons in the local Nevada newspapers have made an impression.
Mass media brainwashing should not surprise us. The advertising industry has made billions influencing our behavior for decades now. And as far back as a century ago, Lenin knew that to control the masses, he needed to control the press. Here in America, the government doesn't control the press, private interests do – but that can be just as dangerous.
Our little local weekly newspaper out here in Rural Nevada (Ely) is not actually what it seems. No one in town owns the paper. It is owned by a company out of Las Vegas, Stephens Media. But Stephens Media is owned by an investment group out of Arkansas, Stephens Group. And Stephens Group is owned by a very rich family in Arkansas with the last name Stephens.
Stephens Group has a number of investments. But a significant portion of their portfolio is in fossil fuels and fossil fuel power generation. Hmmm..... Maybe that's why all of Stephens Media newspapers once proclaimed there is no Global warming, and now claim it couldn't be man-made. And maybe that's why all Stephens Media newspapers in Nevada have generally depicted Senator Harry Reid as evil. (Stephens Media has even sued Reid's Democratic Party – but didn't sue the Republicans for the same thing.)
Isn't Senator Harry Reid trying hard to bring solar power generation to Nevada in a big way? Doesn't he believe that it would be better for Nevadans to export power than to import it? I believe he even called Nevada potentially the “Saudi Arabia of solar power.” There are even new power lines being built into Rural Nevada to carry out some of that solar power. Unfortunately though, Stephens Group isn't invested in solar power. They're heavily invested in solar power's polluting competition. So you might suspect that they'd want to stop Harry Reid – even if what he plans to accomplish is the right thing to do.
There is a pattern here. It appears that this all comes down to rich people invested in an outdated, polluting, destructive industry trying to manipulate our government to keep on favoring their bad investments over better ideas.
Now think about this; why would some multi-billion dollar investment group care about a little local weekly newspaper in Rural Nevada? If every person in town bought a paper every week, that wouldn't amount to $5,000 a week – gross. Our little weekly paper isn't going to make anyone rich. And the Stephens are already very rich. It isn't about the money. Could it be about the influence?
Here's a clue. Stephens Media owns almost every newspaper in Las Vegas and almost all of the newspapers in Nevada Southeast of Carson City. That's almost half the state of Nevada. Now that's power to influence. If they wanted to, these rich people in Arkansas could influence elections in Nevada. If they wanted to, they might even be capable of taking down the most powerful man in the Senate.
Could you imagine the chilling effect on the Democratic Party? If the most powerful man in Congress (with a long reputation of honest, moral, and responsible leadership) could be brought down by an obvious Corporatist posing as an Independent; then no Democrat would be safe. The Republicans could win over Congress without actually having to win any more seats. Because, like after the 1994 mid-term Congressional election rout, the Democrats would just act more like Republicans afterwards.
So, we have a motive.
Have you ever heard of the “Club For Growth”? The Club For Growth is a Political Action Committee (actually a super PAC) that endorses and raises millions for candidates that support the Club's limited government, anti-tax, free market ideology. It is not a grassroots organization. No. It is an organization funded by rich people that wants our government too weak to control their actions. It is effectively another astro-turf organization intent on taking over our government so that its supporters can have free reign to run their exploitative industries however they want to and to keep all the money for themselves. And guess what... most of these PACs are packed with the heads of polluting, exploiting, job exporting, and multinational corporations. In case you haven't figured it out yet, these are the bad guys.
One of the biggest contributors to the Club For Growth is Jackson Stephens Jr. – from the Stephens family that owns Stephens Group that owns Stephens Media that owns our little local newspaper in Rural Nevada.
So, we have a record of manipulation of politics.
Which brings us back to Sharron Angle and Harry Reid. The Club For Growth has heavily funded the Sharron Angle campaign. Our local newspaper has spent years attacking Harry Reid. The same family from Arkansas is behind both.
So, we have what looks like immoral behavior. But it isn't illegal, because our government has been "limited" – by you know who.
A quote from the Stephens Group website sort of sums it all up; “We like businesses that have an unfair advantage. That advantage is usually intelligence or hard work” (italics mine). This actually sounds like they're bragging that they don't play fair.
Is this really the behavior we want from those who ultimately control most of what we in Nevada know? HELL NO!!!
Actually, I love our little local newspaper. And I fear that if Harry Reid loses, the big money who want small government won't have a financial reason any longer to keep our little local newspaper going.
… to be continued.