Obama's Hope and Change Will Just Kill More Plumbers

Obama's Hope and Change Will Just Kill More Plumbers
White House (Wiki Image By Matt H. Wade)

Before you go thinking that I am supporting the Mitt Romney / Paul Ryan Ticket you should know up front that I AM NOT. As a matter of fact, I AM NOT SUPPORTING OBAMA OR ROMNEY at this point. I am leaning very heavily towards giving my vote to the former Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson. Many will say that I would be throwing my vote away, however I will reserve the right to change my choice at the last minute. And I can guarantee you that I will be waiting until the absolute last second before casting my vote. But right now I cannot in good conscience vote for either candidate as they will only perpetuate the status quo of their respective broken-down political ideologies.

Both Democrats and Republicans have refused to protect the interests of the people as they have slithered comfortably into bed with the Special Interests and Lobbyists. And anyone who has taken the time to read the fine print of all that political clutter now inundating our mailboxes can clearly see that the candidates from either side of the aisle are being backed by Big Money Interests. As an Illinoisan, I am offended that "outside sources have been, and continue to be, pouring millions upon millions of dollars" into our local and state elections.

The saying that "all politics are local" is very real and very important. So it goes without saying that with so many outsiders now trying to control our destiny the people of Illinois should be rejecting them wholesale. Matter of fact, the increased actions of these Big Money Interests should finally become the tipping point where voters here say "enough is enough already." I mean isn't it bad enough that we have been under the dictatorial thumb of Michael Madigan and his corrupt cadre of legislators for nearly 30 years? But let's not kid ourselves either, the US Supreme Court has erred badly by allowing "unlimited money" to make its way into the process. We don't need more political insiders adding their two worthless cents into our affairs.

Goddammit Already!

Getting back to the presidential election, I think people need to reject President Obama because he was given his chance and quite frankly - he failed. You know I once said that Barack Obama had the stuff to be a really good president but only  if "this messenger of change and hope could separate himself from the real shakers and movers of the Democratic Party." Well not only did he not take full control - he allowed those divisive forces to call the shots in his first two years, if not longer. Yes, it is true that the man inherited an economy in the shitter. But unlike the fact twisting political pundits - I am not convinced that that was entirely the fault of former President George W. Bush. Sure Bush must take some of the blame - but we cannot forget that it was former President William Jefferson Clinton who set into motion the Collapse of the Real Estate Markets with his reckless policies. That is what ultimately brought the economy to its knees!

Of course, Democrats (and President Obama especially) like to infer that the economy and all her woes are somehow attributable to the 1%, that by the way suspiciously only includes Republicans. Well Mr. President, don't be ignorant - yes it is definitely the 1% - but it clearly made up of both Democrats and Republicans! So to infer otherwise is disingenuous (although you have gotten quite good at that in your first term).

If President Obama truly wants to be the agent of change and a man of hope then he needs to begin with telling the truth first. But in true Chicago fashion he just says fuhgettaboutit! Spinning bullshit and avoiding any mention of the fact that nearly every member of the US Congress have succumbed to the enormous amounts of money being handed out by the special interests is something he just won't do for fear that his own re-election war chest would suffer. So instead of calling an ace an ace and living up to his words that re-election isn't what drives him - he continues to follow a path that will destroy the middle class and more importantly drive owners of small business into bankruptcy.

And if you don't believe me just ask one of the "Joe the Plumbers" his policies have killed:

 

You know, the only thing voters should be asking themselves next week is if they are really better off today than they were four years ago. That is the only question that should influence who they will vote for. President Obama simply does NOT deserve to be re-elected and although I intend to vote for Gary Johnson for my own reasons - Mitt Romney could still wind up with my vote at the last minute because he has at least earned the same chance that was given the current agent of change who failed in his endeavor.

 

Comments

Leave a comment
  • I for one do not believe a vote for Johnson would be "wasted". However, even if Johnson took five percent of the popular vote it would not be a "lesson" for either party.

    Despite being accused of being a Republican toad, I am more in the Libertarian camp than any other. Both parties represent the statists. The Donkeys want race to the statist finish line and the Elephants want to lumber on slowly to the same end.

    However, who is to blame here for the love affair politicians have with statist government? Why it is us, of course. We have become a nation of "takers". Why not? Somebody shoves something "free" in your face and tells you you must jump through the blue hoop for it, you do it. And you keep making sure by your vote that you keep getting your government cheese and leaping through the blue hoop held by the nice man or woman.

    The problem is the entitlement state. This election is what I call the end of the "civil war" that has been going on since at least FDR. The presidential candidate that wins can declare victory. It is either going to be the Fast Takers for Obama or the Slow Takers for Romney.

    Either way, the Republic is down for the count, and it's a long one.

  • In reply to Richard Davis:

    Richard Thank You for your wonderful, and blunt, assessment. Yes the entitlement culture is definitely a problem (a big one at that) so there shall be no debate on that score. Although I am not "all in" on the Libertarian side - I do agree with more than not. Our nation, as you rightly surmise, is down for the count and that angers me because "we the people" let it happen.

    As for Gary Johnson - well 5% is what has been predicted and can see it as the race winds down - people will probably decide to pick the lesser of two evils hoping their vote will make a difference for whichever candidate they are backing. I would, however, love to see a third party emerge with the capability of garnering 25% because that is what it would take to make things serious enough for the other Yo-Yo's to pay attention.

    Again - thanks for your good comment. Very much appreciated!

  • Michael, as a PS, I find it telling how you have to begin your piece here: by automatically placing the devil mask on Romney. Says something about the majority of participants on Chicagonow and those who post comments. Tolerance is not generally their strong suits. . I don't see the same openings for those defending the President.

  • In reply to Richard Davis:

    Not sure if I "had to" - it is just if you look back into my post history I was very displeased with a Romney / Ryan ticket as well as his flip-flopping. You see I am a moderate independent and unlike others on the extreme I don't really mind Romney's record - so far as being a moderate goes. Really, it isn't a sin but I don't like the Ryan choice as his plan doesn't address the insane spending on the military complex and how he and others try to pin the deficit on the entitlements - not true. If you add up all the defense spending that occurs in other departments of government in addition to their own allotment - defense spending wins out hands down.

    Anyhow I probably subconsciously began my post because of my past posts regarding the ticket. But I have been accused of being everything from an extreme liberal to an extreme conservative - when in reality I am just a "tweener." I believe in discourse because without we remain stalemated and that just doesn't benefit anyone. As for the other Chicago Now Bloggers - sorry I really don't follow anyone politically except for maybe Your Doubting Thomas or Aaron Lowe on any consistent basis. I do enjoy other non-political bloggers especially Portrait of an Adoption (man she is good too). But to answer about the majority I suppose I must be unwittingly guilty by association. But I assure you - based on my history here i am probably considered the rebel by others. Again thanks so much for reading and commenting - I really do appreciate it.

  • I'm usually labeled a shill for the Elephants, but in truth I consider myself radical redux, with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison being role models.

    I post political, and I get the venom of political posters and non-political posters. I don't care. In fact, I kind of enjoy watching most of them foam at the mouth and then launch personal attacks.

    I would like to see a plurality of parties, too, but the deck is stacked against independents and new political parties.

    Romeny has flip-flopped on his positions, but I am more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, versus Obama, who is an outright liar.

    The country would be better with a President Gary Johnson rather than Romney and certainly Obama, but as a country we are too far gone with the entitlement culture to turn on a dime.

    Actually, I think it will take a national default to change the idea that one can beggar thy neighbor forever and not run out of neighbors or money.

  • In reply to Richard Davis:

    Richard it seems we share some of the same role models. Like you, I get it from both ends too because I actually believe that (a) we need discourse and (b) I give credit where credit is due regardless of political affiliation. Of course I also chastise both parties. Naturally that incites people to accuse me of being everything and nothing. Oh well. Glad I have some company in the sane department - thanks. And yes like you I think we would be better off with Romney (at this point at least for a term). I am, though not entirely pleased and have reservations. So be it I guess - Obama has to go at this point. Thanks for reading and commenting.

  • I voted on Oct. 22, so now I don't care. However, I am teed off that PACs have run out of places to spend their money, so now have invaded sports radio.

    You may as well vote your conscience. If Romney wins, but doesn't accomplish anything, is it going to be in 4 years "well. I support Andrew Cuomo" (or some other hereditary monarch) because there isn't any other choice?

  • In reply to jack:

    Glad you voted Jack and I also share your frustrations. Coumo? Yeah I suppose he wouldn't be a bad choice, them again neither would Jeb Bush. At least both know (and are willing to) how to work both sides of the aisle. Too bad we can't pull LBJ or Teddy Roosevelt out of their graves though - they would have made people work for a compromise - period.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Supposedly Andrew is different from King Mario I, but at least Mario was voted out when his pandering got too obvious. Still no hope of doing that in Illinois.

    As far as pulling LBJ out of his grave, apparently a 10th Dist. candidate did, but he appears to be a creepy politician, and I mentioned that I had already voted.

    I thought you were in the 11th CD, but checking the interactive map, it doesn't appear so (at least plugging in Plainfield). You can correct me; maybe you are in Joliet and thus in the 11th.

    It seems like there are creepy candidates on both sides of the 8th and 11th [Biggert may be more willing to work across the aisle], but again, from the Department of Redundancy Dept., I don't have a vote in either, so let them go after each other, except on my TV.

  • In reply to jack:

    Yeah I get the feel that Andrew is different than his father. At least from what little I have seen and read. As for creepy - yes I know - scary. Of course I was only implying that LBJ and TR were no nonsense kind of presidents and if head-wringing were in order, well they did what they needed to do to get things done.

    I am in the 11th, at least until January when the remaps kick in. But since this election for those being seated in January I get the honor of choosing between the yo-yo's contesting the newly drawn 11th.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    The map indicates that the most southerly part of the 8th is Yorktown (roughly I88 and I355), and the district is basically Schaumburg, Hoffman Estates and Elgin. Maybe you goofed and meant 11th.

    When I was in Niles I was surprised that there were 10th District signs there, but apparently the 10th District was extended south to Dempster and some street in the Os. Hence I told someone who I think is registered in Niles that she couldn't blame Schakowsky any more. However, Morton Grove at Dempster and the Os is still in the 9th.

  • In reply to jack:

    No didn't goof - I am in the 11th but the election is predicated on the new remap which seats with the swearing in of newly elected in January. Kinzinger was the incumbent but the ballot has the new candidates for the redrawn district.

    General election candidates (per ballotpedia and the sample in my hand as I type)

    Democratic Party (United States) Bill Foster
    Republican Party Judy Biggert
    Republican Party Diane Harris (Write-in)

    p.s. sorry I see the goof I made in previous comment where I said yo-yo's in the 8th (meant to say newly drawn 11th) Changed it sorry.

  • In reply to jack:

    p.s. Adam Kinzinger is my current Congressman. Although I have a Plainfield address I am technically in corporate Joliet.

Leave a comment