Well, no, that’s not entirely true. Actually, for 228 members of the House of Representatives your anger and outrage mattered. Why it mattered is unclear, but let’s presume they themselves were opposed to the bailout or they feared what you, the voter, would do if they didn’t oppose it.
But, then the media hysteria and the calls for Congress to get something done and get it done NOW by Bush, Paulson, Obama, McCain, and other leaders put the sock in the mouth of the angry populace.
Some put the sock in their own mouth agreeing that something had to be done about the credit crisis and the financial turmoil threatening small businesses and that something, after Monday’s stock market drop, could be this bailout bill and then more legislation to address the situation.
The infuriated and outraged were heard last week. The cauldron that holds the populist uprising that politicians must reckon with now, after this election, and beyond that is bubbling over the rim. But, what has become of the infuriated and outraged?
In the face of defeat, there was no planned reaction. There was no plan to descend upon Washington and Wall Street and give them a taste of the populist uprising.
The logical response to this bailout should have been to set up a “Camp Casey” in Washington to bring to a halt the pillaging and plundering of the lower and middle classes in America for the benefit of the top 1% in America. But, what’s holding the people back?
The same thing that prevented more people from going to Denver to protest the war prevented thousands from heading to Washington and Wall Street to oppose the war: Barack Obama.
Antiwar forces afraid they would hurt the campaign of Barack Obama repeated the mistake they made in 2004 when John Kerry was running and campaigned against a big antiwar march during the Democratic National Convention (DNC) this year.
Now, it is even worse. Forces aren’t campaigning against a reaction to the bailout of Wall Street. They aren’t reacting to this “cash for trash” proposal for two reasons.
One, those that would react have their hearts and minds invested in this election and yearn for Barack Obama, the incarnation of hope and change, to be elected so that some kind of opening can be opened for progressive change.
Two, those with hearts and minds invested in the election of Barack Obama do not wish to admit that Barack Obama was 100% in favor of the Wall Street bailout.
I’ll write that again.
Those with hearts and minds invested in the election of Barack Obama do not wish to admit that Barack Obama was 100% in favor of the Wall Street bailout.
And why admit it? Admitting it would require a rational reaction. Instead, Americans who support Barack Obama would rather show nepotism to their favorite beliefs.
Ayn Rand called it “blanking out” and further described it as “the willful suspension of one’s consciousness, the refusal to think---not blindness, but the refusal to see; not ignorance, but the refusal to know.”
Americans upon mention of Obama’s role in the Wall Street bailout blank out. Like a computer, their system reboots upon mention of any positive effect Obama may have had in getting the bailout passed.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
