This post isn't a question. It's an unsupported opinion. Romney would have been beholden to the concentrated corporate wealth which funds movement conservatism, which seeks to preserve anti-competitive monopolies in our largest sectors, heath insurance and energy. And he would have rekindled the war on terrorism in order to scare well-meaning patriots into supporting an interventionist foreign policy. Bush II. Is Obama better? Barely.
At the end of the day, under either Pres., we live in Ronald Reagan's America: Big business and big money control Washington through an unprecedented lobbying and election-funding machine. And then, when voters experience the corrupt effect of the private sector's ownership of Washington, the news media, also owned by the wealthy private sector, blames something very thing which they own: government. The whole point of the modern Republican Party is to fool people about who really controls Washington. This allows them to enjoy the benefits of centralize power without being accountable for how much their policies have hurt the middle class, and the needed demand for robust domestic consumption
At the end of the day, under either Pres., we live in Ronald Reagan's America: Big business and big money control Washington through an unprecedented lobbying and election-funding machine. And then, when voters experience the corrupt effect of the private sector's ownership of Washington, the news media, also owned by the wealthy private sector, blames something very thing which they own: government. The whole point of the modern Republican Party is to fool people about who really controls Washington. This allows them to enjoy the benefits of centralize power without being accountable for how much their policies have hurt the middle class, and the needed demand for robust domestic consumption
Last edited: