By Mark E. Smith
One of the local weeklies just ran an editorial saying that they’re feeling pretty good about this election. Here’s what I wrote back, which I don’t really expect those Democratic cultists to publish:
To the Editor:
In your December 26th editorial, you write: “Had Romney been elected, we’d have seen an accelerated shift of wealth to the top strata of society, perilous deregulation, unprecedented military spending, a further dismantling of the social security net, more institutionalized disregard for science, and at least one new right-wing justice on the Supreme Court.”
As it happens, that’s just what we got during Obama’s first term and will get more of in his second. Obama gave bigger bailouts to the rich than Bush did and is now about to give them even more by driving us over a fiscal cliff of his own making, shifting even more wealth from the 99% to the 1%.
As for deregulation, Obama has clearly been on the side of corporations instead of on the side of the people, even breaking the 30-year moratorium on new nuclear plants while we’re all still being bombarded with radiation from both Chernobyl, which was never and cannot ever be properly sealed, and Fukushima.
Defense spending increased, probably because Obama not only continued the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, replacing US troops in Iraq with more expensive private military contractors, but started new wars in Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, and Syria. Even when these wars are waged with local or CIA-imported proxies rather than US troops, the cost of the drone bombs continues to increase.
Obama is attacking Social Security and Medicare in ways that no Republican had ever dared.
Disregarding the science that has proven genetically modified foods to be so harmful that many countries have banned them, Obama appointed a former Monsanto Vice-President, Michael Taylor, as his food safety czar.
And as for that Supreme Court justice, take a look at Obama’s new Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel. If you think Romney could have found a more right-wing Republican to appoint, you’ve definitely had too much rum-spiked eggnog.
The truth is that both parties are funded by the same corporations and have to adhere to the corporate agenda of their major funders or risk losing the billions of dollars which sustain their political party and enable it to compete with the other party. Those billions are what they’re competing for. No matter how people vote and no matter who is elected, we can only expect more of the same. I stopped voting and became an election boycott advocate when I realized that globalization and environmental catastrophe were against my interests and the interests of the planet, and that I could no longer authorize anyone to do such things in my name. When you know beforehand that the only possible result of an election will be more income disparity, more war, and more climate change, it isn’t really an election anyway, and unless that’s what you want, you really shouldn’t vote.