U.S. PRIMARIES – KILL OR BE KILLED??

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditmailby feather

Random thoughts relating to the US primaries are certainly numerous, and the suggestion that insanity is present may be overkill, but then again, not really an exaggeration. There is nothing in normal life in the so-called “Greatest Country in the World” or any other civilized nation that remotely compares to this no-rules, no-holds-barred competition for political office. In no particular order; undisguised hatred, bias, exaggeration, racism, lies, unsubstantiated promises, threats of violence, disdainful personal insults and more are readily accepted and absorbed as normal steps to the Presidency of the United States of America. In reality; is the Divided States of America a more apt description??

One phenomenon that has become an accusatory term used by all members of the media and political parties is the “Establishment”. This group or entity is difficult to recognize because it seems to have no admitted members but is a prime target of its enemies. Many GOP candidates accuse their opponents of being associated with this dreaded, evil faction, and some contestants are unsure whether they are in fact worthy of the distinction, or even worse, if it is a positive or a negative. The GOP candidates that oppose the “Establishment” (whatever it is) proudly accept being hailed as “radicals” in this confrontation. (not to be confused with the “Religious radicals” that are a threat to national security.) One constant is that each individual guarantees that when elected they will be the single, most powerful answer to protecting the people of the US, regardless of prior experience.

Donald Trump is seemingly a puzzle to the media, because he has “somehow” gotten to dominate the polls leading up to the primaries, and it apparently cannot be discussed in enough forms or by endless TV and radio outlets. Trump gets more TV air time than any other human being on earth, willingly provided by all networks in the search for ratings, and the commentators on these shows seem unable to figure out why the other candidates are not nearly as interesting as the “Donald”. As an example; Don Lemon of CNN should be honest and rather than merely highlighting the “Day in Trump” segment of his program; he should call it the Donald Trump Show, because that’s what it is. Trump is the laughingstock of the free world; a narcissistic braggart that personifies buffoonery, but the media bow to his every wish rather than lessen ratings and profit. Curious about why Trump is leading the Republican race to the White House? Tune in to CNN for a couple of days, and notice the number of times commentators use their go-to line that Trump has “taken the oxygen out of the room” wherever he happens to be. (The other candidates literally cannot breathe……)

Accusations have run rampant during these past months leading up to the Iowa caucuses and beyond but expressing the truth doesn’t appear to be a requisite when candidates are “on the attack;” a term that has also been endorsed by the media. Hillary Clinton is an untrustworthy criminal; the country has been led by idiots; Ted Cruz is the only real Conservative in the race; Trump is a carnival barker; (OK; that’s true), Jeb bush has no energy; (OK; that’s true too), Obama has ruined the country in the past seven years; Obamacare is a disaster and has cost millions of jobs; Cruz is a Canadian and he borrowed money from the establishment base that he opposes; Religious freedom is under siege; etc etc etc. Competitive claims of just who is being honest (or not) is an exhaustive portion of the daily reporting of  political events and is willingly fueled by a media that reaps the benefits of the endless conflict. This overall process occurs only in the USA; the “Greatest Country in the World”, but is it not plainly embarrassing to most American citizens; solid, honest people that have decent thoughts regarding their families and neighbors?? Would normal folks not be better represented by candidates that are not involved in the political scheme for personal gain, but instead for the well-being of their citizens??

“Personal Ambition” is never admitted by any candidate, but to ignore the fact would be naive because a lifetime of wealth and comfort is to be gained by attaining any political office, let alone the presidency. As a simple example; please note the number of times candidates that are competing in a “quest to serve the people of the USA” use the “I” reference. Listen and try to count the number of times Trump says “I” while being interviewed. Do the same exercise with Cruz, Rubio, Christie, Clinton, Fiorina, Bush, even Kasich and O’Malley; it’s all about how they will personally shoulder the burden of responsibility.

A suggestion of a difference in attitude might be to isolate Bernie Sanders as the sole exception to the rule of “Pick Me!!! The obvious power seekers are unashamed in their search for individual gain, but does this man not portray a much different attitude; a selfless manner geared toward the betterment of American life for all……?? Isn’t he a “We” guy instead of a “Me” guy??

 

More questions to follow from……..

Curious Jack

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *