Try to look at it from their perspective. Soon you realize, like John McCain before him it’s best if Romney loses. After all, if he does, what have they to lose?
“They?” Who are “they?”
When I say “they,” I don’t mean the Romney campaign, or even the Republican Party. I mean the Kochs, the Waltons…
(“Good night John Boy!” “Good night Mama.” “Good night Daddy Sam… Daddy? Mama, why isn’t Daddy Sam saying anything?” “Cause he’s dead, stupid, that’s why we were able to start selling all that cheap Chinese crap. Old fool actually talked about selling mostly American goods. ‘America?’ HA! Why should we ‘patriotic’ uber rich give a $#@! about…”)
I’m “referring to” the financial movers and shakers who really own the country, especially in a time when money has been declared speech. Those whose only real stuff ‘investment’ in America is mostly stuffing mega-buckaroos into campaign pockets and expect obedience from the elected in return.
“But, Ken, they have been doing exactly that with Mitt. Obviously they want him to win.”
The current popular view is that they are buying the election so Mitt will win. But what if they’re buying it so he’ll lose: all to make several BS points into perceived “truths:” shift the meme’? If Mitt loses we’ll hear, “See, see! You’re all wrong! Despite all this money he lost!” Everyone will expected to move on, and I suspect they will. Citizen’s United and “money is speech” will be considered toothless: nothing to worry about.
Which is exactly what they want, I suspect: “move on, ignore the manipulators behind the curtain.” Because, of course, they are anything but “toothless.”
The pins are set up, the card deck fixed, what we will have election day, in boxing, is known as a “fake.” The real punches come later.
Now, let’s get to Mitt himself. One must ask, if Romney goes down, what do they have to lose? Not much that’s all that problematic, but they do have a lot to gain. Things they might lose…
1. A problematic image: extremely rich guy buys election with corporate buddies, confirming several of the public’s perceptions regarding Citizens United: perceptions like “money is speech” and “corporations are people too” both make a mockery of our basic rights and our supposed “representative form of government.”
2. They’d lose Mr. Plastoid Richie Rich: uncomfortable in his own skin, phony laugh, disliked by the believers, who bumbled his way across Europe now and on the national stage, then bumbling through the presidency: proving what many suspect. Do you really think they want to take a chance on that and have to play constant interference for Richie Rich Romney?
Now if he loses, there’s lots to gain…
They’ll gain time to time to re-frame the meme’ regarding who’s to blame, and how insignificant Citizen’s United and the right to buy all the free speech you want is.
Even though that re-framing will be untrue, false: lies.
And they get to keep, more than anything else, a president more interested in compromise than principle.
“But, Ken, what about Obamacare? What about cutting tax cuts for the rich?”
Good luck with the last, post election. Either Obama will drop it like the election year issue it has become, or it will be compromised away by Mr. Compromise himself in yet another attempt to work with the radical stand their grounders, froth at the mouthers, on the Right.
Oh, you mean Romneycare? The very policy proposed by Cons during the Clinton administration to divert Hillarycare? The one that makes rich health insurance companies richer, and a mandatory customer base? Better than nothing? Yes, though marginally so.
The corporations win. Romneycare is a bonanza for huge businesses laughingly called health care organizations, and anything that can be claimed to have gone wrong will be blamed on the guy they frame as anti-rich, anti-mega corporation.
Of course they never say “Mega Corp.” No, if you listen to their BS rhetoric, all biz is Mom and Pop. Obama can be painted anti small biz, like he is now, while he tries again and again to work with those who have all the decency of monkeys who throw feces at those who attempt to feed them.
If Romney loses they gain a president willing to compromise, play ball and they can splatter with rhetorical excrement. They gain a former VP candidate ready to be further groomed to be big P: he who hates unions, he who is even more the intellectual, heart and soul property of the Kochs.
Romney wins: they gain a suspicious public and if things continue to screw up economically, and they absolutely will, they get a shisen load of blame. And, as of now, they gain a VP who will further confirm present tense suspicions. It’s like throwing 10 gallons of gas on a fire, not a tenth of a teaspoon.
They need time to soften Ryan image, make damn sure they’re not blamed.
Even if they are to blame.
Does anyone think in the next four years, if Obama wins, Republicans will back down? Let him get a damn thing they don’t want done? Even if it’s saving legless kittens stuck in trees, or blind puppies about bumble across a busy highway? Of course not, why should they when the mainstream media allows them to get away with standing in the way of such efforts, while blaming failure on those they stand in the way of?
If anything they’ll become more obstructionist, more demanding and, you damn well know it, there will be more compromises from Obama… and the right wing owned mainstream media will continue to paint both sides the same, at best.
It has been said over and over that Obama is playing chess while they play checkers. To contradict those who claim everyone else is playing checkers, not chess, I think for “everyone else” who opposes him it’s a game of chess too: and they see further ahead than Obama does.
The only hitch here is if Obama finds a post election year spine and offers real change after November, and other elected Dems follow the lead. He becomes a second Roosevelt “welcoming their hatred,” or better.
I need a pause for laughter.
Ha, ha, ha…
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha…
OK, I can continue now.
No, this all sounds like “a plan” to me if you’re out to assure checkmate: eventual and perpetual Republican rule. And I’m pretty damn sure it all sounds like “a plan” to them too.
We’ll find out after the election.
Inspection is a column that has been written by Ken Carman for over 30 years. Inspection is dedicated to looking at odd angles, under all the rocks and into the unseen cracks and crevasses that constitute the issues and philosophical constructs of our day: places few think, or even dare, to venture.
Ken Carman and Cartenual Productions
All Rights Reserved