They
Live To Run (Your Life)
by Rick Fisk
by Rick Fisk
DIGG THIS
It is striking
when watching the media-anointed choices for President, how much
emphasis is put on their ability and desire to run things. Speaking
to a crowd of 200 in San
Diego, Rudy Giuliani said, "The leading Democratic candidates
have never run a city, they've never run a state, I don't think
they've ever run a business of any size." Rudy is running to run.
I doubt that he'll get very tired in spite of this. He has a real
passion for running people's lives. Just
ask New York fire fighters.
There's a lot
of running in politics. The candidates run for office (hurry!) and
there's a running theme in the media: "Who is most qualified to
run your life?" (Vote here!)
Doesn't it
seem strange that a guy who made millions with his post-911 security
company, would want to temporarily leave his company to be President?
I mean really, if you had a successful business, why take a job
that pays about 10% of what you could make in the private sector?
For most politicians, I think it's the running. When you run people's
lives, there are just never enough lives to run. When you've run
the lives of seven million, stepping down to a cadre of three figures
is a real let down.
Hillary got
a taste while she was the First Lady. She was no Lady, but you know
what I mean. She can't wait to get back there. Bill can't wait to
hire some interns. But isn't that what our powerful people do well?
They tell the gardener to "freshen up that spot over there," the
maid to "clean more in the crevices," and the driver to "hurry up."
Apparently that sort of thing is impressive to a good number of
people.
I don't mean
to bash the rich. I've known some rich people who were among the
most down to earth, caring and generous people I've ever met. But
these politicians, they're not like that. If there's any "generosity"
involved, it's with other people's money. In the real world, this
is not referred to as generous. It is called thieving, fraud or
extortion preceded by choice four-letter words in most circumstances.
Hillary Clinton,
John Edwards and Barack Obama are all proposing "universal" health
care plans. Hillary's plan, as breathlessly reported
by sycophant-cum-journalist (or is it the other way around) Joe
Klein, is "astute" in that it demands every citizen buy health insurance,
while giving employers tax credits if they provide health insurance
for employees. Like mandatory automobile insurance, you'd be required
to buy mandatory health insurance. It's for the safety of others
you know. What if you didn't think you needed insurance and then
got into an accident? You couldn't possibly just pay the bill, says
Klein.
But an estimated
one-third of the 47 million who don't have health insurance are
people who can afford it, mostly healthy young people who don't
think they need it. They do, of course; the rest of us subsidize
their care when they show up at the emergency room after a skateboarding
accident.
See, even the
media is enamored with people who want to run your life. Statements
like the one Klein makes here are total fabrications to justify
tyranny, but people read it and believe it. You would think that
Democrats would blush at such an overtly fascist plan; the real
winners in Hillary's plan are health insurance providers and employers
who will no longer have to offer health insurance as an incentive.
You lose. The other mandate in Hillary's plan is that insurance
companies have to cover everyone. If you think health care costs
are expensive now, just wait until something like this is legislated.
Newt Gingrich
wants to run your life. But he needs you to pledge.
If he gets 30 million by November 13, the anniversary of the day
in 1979 when Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy, then he might
deign to run to run your life.
"You can't
bring all your good ideas if you don't have the resources to communicate,"
Gingrich told reporters Thursday at a breakfast in Washington.
I apologize
for the colloquialism, but the only response to this blatant huckster
that I can manage is: What a putz. Newt Gingrich is the Dark Lord
himself, who has the audacity to claim (again) that we need a change
in Washington. Here's the rat who ushered in the neoconservative
era, lecturing the rest of the GOP about how it should distance
itself from Bush. Trust him. He would never steer you wrong. When
he says that the Republicans should change their ways, he really
means it this time. Why, every plank in the "Contract with America"
was enacted wasn't it? Oh....not even one?
Speaking of
Hucksters, Mike Huckabee, a man who has never seen a day of military
service, wants to send more soldiers to die in Iraq to obtain "peace
with honor." He wants you to pay for it because, as he said in New
Hampshire, we all need to pay for the mistakes of a few power-crazed
neoconservatives who have hijacked this country's foreign policy.
If we didn't all share in the costs, we might have to place the
blame squarely on those who actually ordered the aggressive invasion
of Iraq. Isn't this ironic? Ron Paul can explain the concept of
blowback and it is characterized as "blaming America." Which is
more appropriately characterized as blaming America; Ron Paul's
statements on the dangers of faulty policy, or the forcing of Americans
to finance and die in wars which they do not approve? Actually,
blaming isn't the appropriate word. Another colloquialism is required
here: "screwing America" – as in, I'd rather vote for a guy who
blames America than a guy who advocates screwing America.
Pause. If this
were a movie, the soundtrack would have, up to this point, been
some sort of industrial buzzing noise so annoying that it drives
you to smash your head against your keyboard.
Queue the elevator
music. Calming and nondescript. Now that we have mentioned Ron Paul,
there is something to be highlighted. Ron Paul doesn't want to run
your life. He neither believes he is qualified to do so, nor does
he believe that the constitution gives him the authority to do so.
He's right. But more important is how he's run his own life and
how he's actually voted while in office. His record is quite plainly
superior to any of his so-called competitors.
For instance,
when Newt Gingrich was explaining to his seriously ill wife, that
he needed to find his bliss and screw his secretary (you're next),
Ron Paul was past his 30th year of marriage having already put his
kids through college without the aid of the federal government student
loan program. When Hillary Clinton was telling the media that Bill
Clinton was a "hard man to keep under the porch," Carol Paul
was putting together a family cookbook which Dr. Paul credits for
pushing his candidacy in the 14th district over the top. And this
year, with very little money and armed only with ideas, Ron Paul
kicked off one of the most stunning political campaigns we will
witness in our lifetimes.
Contrary to
the Benny Hinn of Republican Politics, Newt Gingrich, you bring
"all your good ideas" first. Then the money comes. Ron Paul's candidacy
will prove historic. Newt Gingrich's will prove a flop and about
as spendthrift as John McCain’s and Mitt Romney’s campaigns have
been. This is because neither Newt nor the rest of the Ron Paul
challengers understand the power and attraction of freedom. Perhaps
they do, but they certainly wouldn't want to go around promising
any of that. How could they run your life if you were free?
September
22, 2007
Rick
Fisk [send him mail] is
a 44-year-old software developer and entrepreneur. He is married,
has 3 children and resides in Austin, TX.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
Rick
Fisk Archives
|