<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; FONT-SIZE: 10pt
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19328"></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title=tanstl@hotmail.com href="mailto:tanstl@hotmail.com">David Sladky</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, November 08, 2012 9:09 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> The Special Interests Won Again</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=4>Servants and Masters <BR></FONT>
<H1>The Special Interests Won Again</H1><FONT size=2>by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
<BR>The election that was supposed to be too close to call turned out not to be
so close after all. In my opinion, Obama won for two reasons: (1) Obama is
non-threatening and inclusive, whereas Romney exuded a "us vs. them" impression
that many found threatening, and (2) the election was not close enough for the
electronic voting machines to steal.<BR>As readers know, I don’t think that
either candidate is a good choice or that either offers a choice. Washington is
controlled by powerful interest groups, not by elections. What the two parties
fight over is not alternative political visions and different legislative
agendas, but which party gets to be the whore for Wall Street, the
military-security complex, Israel Lobby, agribusiness, and energy, mining, and
timber interests.<BR>Being the whore is important, because whores are rewarded
for the services that they render. To win the White House or a presidential
appointment is a career-making event as it makes a person sought after by rich
and powerful interest groups. In Congress the majority party can provide more
services and is thus more valuable than the minority party. One of our recent
presidents who was not rich ended up with $36 million shortly after leaving
office, as did former UK prime minister Tony Blair, who served Washington far
better than he served his own country.<BR>Wars are profitable for the
military/security complex. Israel rewards its servants and punishes its enemies.
Staffing environmental regulatory agencies with energy, mining, and timber
executives is regarded by those interests as very friendly behavior.<BR>Many
Americans understand this and do not bother to vote as they know that whichever
candidate or party wins, the interest groups prevail. Ronald Reagan was the last
president who stood up to interest groups, or, rather, to some of them. Wall
Street did not want his tax rate reductions, as Wall Street thought the result
would be higher inflation and interest rates and the ruination of their stock
and bond portfolios. The military/security complex did not want Reagan
negotiating with Gorbachev to end the cold war.<BR>What is curious is that
voters don’t understand how politics really works. They get carried away with
the political rhetoric and do not see the hypocrisy that is staring them in the
face. Proud patriotic macho American men voted for Romney who went to Israel
and, swearing allegiance to his liege lord, groveled at the feet of Netanyahu.
Obama plays on the heart strings of his supporters by relating a story of a
child with leukemia now protected by Obamacare, while he continues to murder
thousands of children and their parents with drones and other military actions
in seven countries. Obama was able to elicit cheers from supporters as he
described the onward and upward path of America toward greater moral
accomplishments, while his actual record is that of a tyrant who codified into
law the destruction of the US Constitution and the civil liberties of the
American people.<BR>The election was about nothing except who gets to serve the
interest groups. The wars were not an issue in the election. Washington’s
provoking of Iran, Russia, and China by surrounding them with military bases was
not an issue. The unconstitutional powers asserted by the executive branch to
detain citizens indefinitely without due process and to assassinate them on
suspicion alone were not an issue in the election. The sacrifice of the natural
environment to timber, mining, and energy interests was not an issue, except to
promise more sacrifice of the environment to short-term profits. Out of one side
of the mouth came the nonsense promise of restoring the middle class while from
the other side of the mouth issued defenses of the offshoring of their jobs and
careers as free trade.<BR>The inability to acknowledge and to debate real issues
is a threat not only to the United States but also to the entire world.
Washington’s reckless pursuit of hegemony driven by an insane neoconservative
ideology is leading to military confrontation with Russia and China. Eleven
years of gratuitous wars with more on the way and an economic policy that
protects financial institutions from their mistakes have burdened the US with
massive budget deficits that are being monetized. The US dollar’s loss of the
reserve currency role and hyperinflation are plausible consequences of
disastrous economic policy.<BR>How is it possible that "the world’s only
superpower" can hold a presidential election without any discussion of these
very real and serious problems being part of it? How can anyone be excited or
made hopeful about such an outcome?<BR><B><I>Paul Craig Roberts</B> is a former
Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and Associate Editor of the Wall Street
Journal. His latest book, Wirtschaft am Abgrund (Economies In Collapse) has just
been published.<BR></I></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>