Who cares? It's all lies.

I don’t know why I care as much as I seem to about this sodding campaign—care enough, at least, to express my opinions about it. I entirely agree with Bageant that it really doesn’t matter which branch of the Republicrat Party occupies the throne. Business will proceed as usual regardless of which one it is because business will continue to be run as usual behind the scenes (and more and more these days right out in plain view) by the corporate masters who own the government. They may not be in total control of the government on social issues, such as gender issues, abortion, and immigration, but they’re in total control of anything that involves money, and nowadays there aren’t many issues that don’t involve money. Health care? Controlled by Big Drugs and the insurance racket. Fuel costs, energy conservation, and renewable sources? Controlled by Big Fossil Fuels. The Iraq/Afghanistan war (or any other war, for that matter)? Controlled by the Military-Industrial Complex. Education? Controlled to a surprising extent by publishers of schoolbooks. Employment and the economy in general? Controlled by the whole vicious cabal, which is supposedly legitimized by the priesthood of economists, who practice the most lame-brained hodgepodge of meaningless mumbo-jumbo, psychotic fantasies, and muddled and illogical bullshit ever to be called a “science.” All of it controlled by the plutocrats who pull the strings of the puppets they prop up as a façade. So, all this inspiring blather about “change” is so much farting in the wind, and the people who are indulging in it probably know it. McLame certainly knows it, and is cynical and mendacious in even talking about it. Obama probably knows it but may be naïve enough to think he can change the system; I can hardly accuse him of being cynical and mendacious. On the other hand, I hate to think he’s that naïve. Take your pick. His alleged inexperience, which his opponents use as a cudgel, hatchet, and blunderbuss against him, is, in my opinion, one of his greatest virtues, even though it may the reason for his naiveté. “Experience” basically means experience in working with the plutocrats, which invariably makes one cynical and corrupt. McLame, of course, has lots of experience and a “track record.” Boy, does he ever! Don’t look too closely at his experience unless you have a barf-bucket close at hand.

So, who cares who wins? What real, fundamental difference will it make? I hate to say it, but I don’t think even the Great Brown Hope will be able to make any, not because of his inexperience but because the plutocratic cabal will keep him from doing so and will impede and frustrate his every move in that direction; and if he gets uppity, they’ll disembowel him and eat his entrails while he’s still alive, like African jackals do with their prey. (And then there’s always the threat of assassination.) So, when I call those who promulgate the rhetoric of change mendacious, that’s just a euphemism for lying. They’re all lying liars, to quote Al Franken. Obama may be more or less sincere, out of naiveté, when he talks about what he intends or hopes to do, but when it comes to the Republican attacks on him, and their defense of their own records and agendas, the air becomes heavy with the smell of shit. Muskrat Hunt has at least two posts in which major news media frankly and repeatedly use the terms lies and lying (MSNBC’s “Countdown” in “Debunking McCain” and “Talking Points Memo” [focusing specifically on Palin] in “McCain/Palin = Bush/Cheney”). If the Elephants suffered the Pinocchio syndrome, they couldn’t move without stabbing each other with their noses. And a note of farce enters the comedy when the opponents accuse each other of lying about their lies: “You’re a liar when you call me a liar!” “You’re a liar when you deny lying!” And since I don’t believe anything any of them say, I refuse to listen to them. When their propaganda pops up on the cyclopean mind-controller, I change the channel; and when every channel is broadcasting their lies at the same time, I just switch it off.

The one exception, ironically, is the TV ad for Marilyn Musgrave. Precisely because she’s the target of Muskrat Hunt, I couldn’t help being curious about what the object of so much invective could have to say in her defense. It’s a real tearjerker. “Secondhand clothes, and meals from a Salvation Army. A childhood devastated by a father’s alcoholism. Marilyn Musgrave knows about hard times, because she’s lived them. [All this voiced over pictures of sad, crying children.] Today, you’ll find Marilyn helping the homeless [footage of her doing housing construction], the hungry [footage of her working in a soup kitchen], the broken and battered [footage of her counseling a woman in what may be a safe house]. In Congress, Marilyn stands for what’s right [—for the rich and powerful], working with Democrats and Republicans to oppose the President’s cuts to Medicare and veterans.” I don’t know enough about her record to know how much of this is lies, but my guess would be, most of it; and the inspirational footage is obviously posed for the occasion. But remember, the Russians thought Stalin was their savior because he controlled the image of himself portrayed by the media. They can all be assumed to be lying. Always.