Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Romney Wins in N.H....

and we are surprised, why?

Since I've had many years to witness elections in this country (the first I really remember is Eisenhower, although I was just a lass of 7), lately I've started to have a suspicion that the whole process consists of smoke and mirrors.  In light of the fact that we have three branches of government, the frenzy over who will be president seems a bit over the top.

The sight of masses of people trying to get the attention of this candidate or that candidate, as though they are rock stars, is unsettling.  It's always unsettling to see adults behaving toward any human being in such a manner, and it's not at all dignified. 

I listened carefully to Romney's speech (video below) and everything he has said has been said before - over and over.

I think Shakespeare was on to something when he said:

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Macbeth Act 5, scene 5, 19–28

From Jeffrey Tucker at Whiskey and Gunpowder

Jeffrey Tucker is the executive editor of Laissez Faire Books. He is past editorial vice president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute and past editor for the institute's website, Mises.org. Tucker is also an adjunct scholar with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy and an Acton University faculty member.

Elections and the Illusions of Choice 
The political season has unleashed its predictable frenzy, much to the delight of people who make a living off it. But to what end? There are only two types of politicians who end up holding office, wrote H.L. Mencken: “first, glorified mob-men who genuinely believe what the mob believes, and secondly, shrewd fellows who are willing to make any sacrifice of conviction and self-respect in order to hold their jobs.”
That about sums it up. The plus side of elections is that sometimes the debates, discussions, candidates and parties, raise fundamental questions about what kind of society we want to live in. That’s the best we can hope for.
But there is a downside to all this hullabaloo: it gives the impression that the mere existence of the electoral process gives “We the People” a fundamental choice about the kind of state we want. This is not true. The politicians we elect are veneers or facades. They are bandits, but they do not constitute what is called the state. This goes for just about every developed state in the world for the last 200 years.
The whole election process leads people to believe that the state is embedded in its leaders. Not so. In France, this system ended with the execution of Louis XVI; in Germany, with the ascent of Bismarck; and in Russia, with the Bolshevik Revolution. The personal state died in the U.S. pretty early on, as even Thomas Jefferson discovered when he became president in 1801; he felt himself powerless to do anything.
The modern state lives outside the will of a particular leader or administration. Voting and elections only change the temporary managers, but do not touch the core of the problem.  read the rest and ponder
and from Frank Salvato at Big Government:

 Promises, Promises: The Reality of Campaign Speak

 As the campaign cycle progresses, we are going to hear a lot about what one candidate or another is going to do about this or that. We will, to the point of weariness, be inundated with campaign promise after campaign promise, albeit, between gratuitous attacks, both political and personal. This is politicking, and the American electorate, for better or for worse, has come to accept a certain amount of it from the people in the political class. But expecting grandiose pledges and believing in the unattainable, well, those are two different things. It is the truly foolish who believe half of what a political candidate says he can deliver, and the blame for that foolishness must fall on the shoulders of the individual voter.   read the rest


No comments: