WHO IS IN CHARGE? THE 1% OR THE 99%

Looking at the government since the inception of this country reveals a remarkable shift in the power structure.  The constitution and all it embraces indicates that the people, the 99% are in charge. In the past, individuals voted for representatives, which means represent them. In other words, the only why a person could become a representative of the people was to be elected by the people, the 99%. This fact guaranteed that the voters were in charge. However, over the last 236 years something bad has happened to our democracy. The 1% is in charge and people wonder how this happened. How can they go to the polls and vote but the people they voted into office do not represent them. I could point to any number of examples of issues in which a clear majority of people wants to change but they do not. For example, we have huge subsidies going to the highest earning businesses in America, the oil companies.  Yet, the House of Representatives voted down the bill to correct this.  Our representative, the people we voted for, voted along party line to keep the subsidies. Who do they represent?

I see the genus of Karl Rove overturning the work of the founding fathers. He has found multifaceted ways to establish his dream, a perpetually majority. His campaign to fulfill is dream of filling all republican federal judgeships and the Supreme Court vacancies with radical conservatives has achieved a majority. Who would have dreamed in 1776 that there would be a one-sided political party campaign for Supreme Court nominees? No one anticipated the idea of appointing low-level government workers with radical party cronies; regardless of who is president, the government would function according to the wishes of one party. Karl Rove was an ardent practitioner of this system with the blessing of George W. Bush, his puppet.

 In the area of political operatives, his effective campaign tactic of attacking opponent’s strengths and not their weaknesses has paid off but has turned campaigns in to virtual war zones. In addition, he instituted the idea in political campaigning of spending advertizing dollars to increase opponent’s negatives. He became skilled at weaving fringe groups into the campaign politics; all the anti-groups he could recruit to his cause: abortion, churches, gun rights, skinheads, racists, NRA, etc. He wove them into a coalition that advocates everything but his true radical conservative agenda; a brand based on Ayn Rand’s brand of conservative selfishness. Their candidates hide the truth of who they are. They would not be one supporter of this brand of Republican in government if voters knew there true agenda. How many of the 99% would vote for representatives if they knew the person they were voting to represent them would vote against their best interest but for the interest of the 1%?  

It took a 236 years and a lot of hard work by some very courageous people to build our beautiful democracy but it is taking one evil person to tear it down in a few campaigns. Karl is that evil person. The Supreme Court with its ruling on Citizens United, a product of his work, is paying the way. He and the Supreme Court he corrupted has turned the America system upside down and given the very rich, the 1% power over the 99%. In my blogs, I keep pointing out that he has had a lot of help from the very people he is hurting, that would be you!