Third Party & Independents Archives

The Establishment Has A Real Bad Case Of Fleas

I’ve gone along here for months trying to get a handle on Cruz and Rubio as to their ‘reason for being’ and who are their powerful friends. Cruz claims to be outside the establishment (corpocracy), has stood alone in filibustering congress and seems to have only a couple of legislators who befriend him. Rubio is quite the opposite, clinging to the corpocracy and being proud of it.

And, then, and then, it comes to me as a double header. Headlines (gisted): Ex-Senator Phil Gramm was supporting Rubio until he dropped from the race. Gramm then picked up on a fellow Texan , Ted Cruz to support. Right there in black and white.

If those few words don't send shivers down your spine you are a better man than me.

The 2008 recession/depression and follow on daid economy can be laid right in the lap of Phil Gramm. This below url lays it out way better than I could so please do a thorough read and get back - - -


http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/01/ted-cruz-and-the-wall-street-connection/

Man, if that don't curdle your whey - - -


Hillary, Neil Bush, John McCain, Phil Gramm, Rubio and Cruz all get honorable mention as birds of a feather. Gramm is going to serve as Cruz's economic adviser. I parrot the words with which the author ended the article - - God Help Us All

Run Trump, Run.

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by Roy Ellis at April 9, 2016 8:23 AM
Comments
Comment #404125

The Repub voters finally seem to be getting SO, so, so sick and tired of the FOR-SALE, establishment, career politicians that a large portion of the electorate is (instead) considering Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.

And though Bernie Sanders may be a career politician too, a large portion of the Dem voters are leaning toward Bernie instead of the Hillary Clinton who is perceived as being more aligned with the establishment, which may be another sign of voters sick and tired of the most FOR-SALE, establishment politicians.

The voters have the power to do the one simple thing they were supposed to be doing all along: vote smarter
But, the problem is (and has been for a long time) that it is difficult to vote smart to choices are all so bad, and the majority of politicians (if not all) are so, so FOR-SALE.

We’ll see, but don’t get your hopes up too much.

At any rate, we have the government that we elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, corrupt, incompetent incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 10, 2016 12:00 PM
Comment #404128

Cruz is the worst. He is primarily owned by Wall Street and the fossil fuel industry. In particular, he is owned by Goldman Sachs, who along with Citi gave him a million dollar low interest loan to run for the Senate, hired his wife for a big paycheck, and currently gives a lot to him too.

By the wildest coincidence, Cruz campaigns for financial deregulation and the repeal of Dodd Frank, which would be very profitable for Goldman Sachs and Citi. Cruz pretends he is fighting for small businesses and the little guy, but he is most definitely not. He is a Global Warming Denier who regularly pockets the contributions from the fossil fuel industry.

As grossly unfit as Trump may be for the White House, at least he is not owned by the financial industry, and at least he will not screw the public in order to line his own pockets and the pockets of his benefactors.

I realize politicians pander, including Trump, Hillary Clinton, and others. But at least they make a passing effort to act in the public’s interest. Cruz is completely unscrupulous. I’ve never seen a politician lie on such a scale, on such a regular basis.

Posted by: phx8 at April 10, 2016 3:32 PM
Comment #404129

Roy you are right but it seems to me it is a sad sad day when we agree Trump is the best candidate the repubs can offer to the American people. The American people must self fund elections for the Congress IMHO as that is where we see the most corruption. Well at least in the last 8 years of Obama.

Now I know you might want to bring up Benghazi as a scandal but the scandal is the repubs who insist upon continuing the investigation. The corruption we need to address is the undue influence money has on our elected officials. At the state level as well as the federal level.

My self I think we need to take heed of the way Iceland deals with corruption in government. Lot to be said for putting the banksters in jail and bailing out the victims of the 2008 economic collapse. Lot to be said for massive protests when the politician is found with off shore accounts like the latest PM.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 10, 2016 3:58 PM
Comment #404130

The situation is getting uglier even as we speak. Some GOP delegates are unbound and their votes are for sale. Others will be on the market if a second ballot occurs. The corruption is going to another level, and that is really saying something. There is nothing to prevent a candidate from buying the GOP nomination! Ted Cruz is supposedly leading the charge to the bottom and Trump is already objecting to the dirty politics. Looks like Trump will need to loosen his wallet if he wants to buy delegates at the rate Cruz is already doing.

The money for Cruz comes from four billionaires: 1) Robert Mercer, a NY hedge fund billionaire whose primary interest is maintaining his special tax treatment, a carry forward interest rate of 15%; 2) private-equity partner Toby Neugebauer, a fossil fuel man and a big beneficiary of Puerto Rican tax laws, and 3) The Wilkes Brothers, also fossil fuel magnates who care about social fundamentalist issues such as abortion.

Posted by: phx8 at April 10, 2016 5:47 PM
Comment #404132


All this agreement in the middle column. Maybe the folks have seen enough, been thru enough to lend an ear to reform.

d.a.n is daid on in that the proper way to achieve reform is for the citizens to educate themselves and get out and vote in large numbers.

Historically voters have failed miserably to do their job. Only about half the citizens vote and probably all are guilty of re-electing incumbents over and over again no matter how corrupt or corpocratic. Excuses could range from ‘my vote really doesn’t matter’, ‘elections are rigged so it doesn’t matter if I vote’, their long tenured and powerful incumbents will bring home the bacon to their local, or, perhaps they are just to lazy and don’t see voting as a priority.

I’ve been holding out for enough people that care about good gov’t to form a new 3rd party founded in some rules to prevent the party from ever being co-opted by the money influence and taking on the mission of gov’t reform. Certainly, we don’t need ‘just another 3rd party’. Would take corpocracy about a couple of months to own it lock, stock and barrel.

Corpocracy has done a real good job for years in keeping things quiet re debt, trade, economy, immigration and so on - - -

But, events have worked to bring some issues to the front burner. Inequality, with 1% owning 40%, open borders, resulting in drugs, people smuggling, terrorism and, immigrants competing for fewer jobs. Trump coming on the scene re immigration along with events like ‘the killing of Kate’, the San Bernadino terrorist act, and other related evens. The Corpocracy (dems/reps) looking to protect their cronies thru the use of delegate and super-delegate votes. That many millions more voters have shown up at the polls to push candidates that are ‘outside’ the corpocracy. The latest event drawing the ire of citizens is the ‘Panama Papers’.

A bevy of events have drawn people’s attention to the plight of gov’t. It is being said that a lot of Indies and a good number of dems and reps will support either Trump or Bernie. Additionally, millions of new voters will cast ballots in November.

I see no way for a good outcome in November. The country will be more divided politically and economically. I can’t see anybody with a majority in any quarter.

As much as I would like to see the next few years bring forth a new voting force to remove incumbents from office in large numbers, I am more hopeful that a new 3rd party with some rules will be founded.

We have seen the effect of a new influx of voters on the system. But, keeping gov’t clean requires informed people going to the polls in large numbers every year. I’ve my doubts about that over the long term.

I like the idea of a 3rd party operating from unbreakable rules, where office holders could be tossed out of the party if they don’t abide by established rules. A party with rules, that rejects the money influence and works for real reform would soon become a powerful influence agent against the other two major party’s, IMO.

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by: roy ellis at April 10, 2016 10:19 PM
Comment #404146

Thank you for taking the time to provide us with your valuable information. We strive to provide our candidates with excellent care and we take your comments to heart.As always, we appreciate your confidence and trust in us.

Posted by: Nandhini at April 12, 2016 2:42 AM
Comment #404180

I try not to ignore my instincts, and I think Ted Cruz is possibly the most dangerous choice.

Trump is a blow-hard braggart, with a long list of faults.

Bernie is a self-professed Socialist.

And Hillary is a liar (e.g. Benghazi, Sniper fire at Bosnia, Chelsea jogging at trade towers on 911, etc., etc., her lies would fill volumes).

Our choices more than usual this election.

So IF you had to rate those 4 from (1)least-worst to the (4)worst, here’s what I’d have go by:

(4)Worst: Ted Cruz
(3)next to Worst: Hillary Clinton
(2)next to least Worst: Bernie Sanders
(1)Least Worst: Donald Trump

It’s that simple for some people (at the moment).
But after the nominations, it will be between a Dem and a Repub.

Most Dems are still going to vote Democrap.

And most Repubs are still going to vote Repugnican.

And the independents are going to decide the election (again).

At any rate, we have the government that we elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, corrupt, incompetent incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 14, 2016 10:17 PM
Comment #404181

The reason change comes so slowly and painfully is mostly because of the majority of voters who blindly pull the party lever every election. They love their party more than their country, so the simply pull the party-lever. To the party-loyalists, it is all about “The Party”.

There is really no big difference between Democrat and Republican Incumbent Politicians.
Unfortunately, the only major difference between the IN-PARTY and OUT-PARTY are the two equally destructive extremes that each go to, and we just watched 8 years from one extreme to the other extreme:

Extreme #1: One extreme wants regressive taxation, unfettered capitalism, little (if any) government regulations, and freedom to explore and wallow in almost every manifestation of unchecked greed.

Extreme #2: The other extreme wants a nanny-state with citizens increasingly dependent on the government; with massive cradle-to-grave government programs (which are usually severely mismanaged) that nurture a sense of entitlement and dependency on government; tries to disguise envy and jealousy as demands for equality; wants to grow government ever larger (despite the already current nightmare proportions); rewards failure and laziness; and perpetuates the myth that we can somehow all live at the expense of everyone else.

Other than those two equally destructive extremes above, consider the numerous destructive similarities …

It will probably come down to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

So, it is up to the independents who are not as inclined to blindly pull the party-lever.

At any rate, we have the government that we elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, corrupt, incompetent incumbent politicians with perpetual 90% re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 14, 2016 10:28 PM
Comment #404191

d.a.n, I agree with your statement on two extremes and also on your ranking of the candidates. I do think Trump gets a ‘least worst’ rating because we don’t really know how he will act as president. He could very well turn out to be a Franklin Roosevelt, a man for the times, perhaps.

Even if he doesn’t win I think he has raised significant issues that will linger on into the next presidency. As has Bernie, to his credit.

Trump put out a statement today to the effect that ‘the establishment has supported corporate business interests at the expense of the people. And, Bernie wants to see Hillary’s speech she gave to GS. All good sounding stuff but will it take legs after the election or is it just more populist ranting during silly season.

Some things we do know for sure. Like, the establishment/corpocracy is totally in for globalism, a pound of cheese costing the same around the world, and so on - - -

They are heavily invested overseas and have worked to create regulatory/enforcement bodies to carry out international trade. The establishment would not blink an eye if China grew at 9% yearly while the US grew at 2% for another 50 years or so. As I can futureize, it might take longer than 50 years to gain the efficiency they are looking for thru globalisation.

So, Donald and Bernie are throwing up a red flag and the folks are right there with them, for the most part.

Small exemplar: today’s WaPo relates that due to good growing conditions there has been an overproduction of wild blueberries in The US. The FED plans to spend $13M to help with ‘flagging prices and oversupply’.

I bought a 3” x 3” sq by 1 1/2” deep carton, 6 oz’s, of Chile blueberries for around $4.00 at walmart. That’s something like 3 cents a berry.

We are paying Brazil some hundreds of millions for subsidizing US cotton growers which was against WTO rules/regs.

Freddie and Fannie are now authorized to reduce homes loans for some 33k having trouble making mortgage payments to ‘help minimize foreclosures’.

Seems like ‘supply and demand’ economics are out the window and ‘price control’ is in.

Otherwise - - -


Posted by: roy ellis at April 15, 2016 10:39 PM
Post a comment