After months of rhetoric and political campaigning, the smoke has finally cleared on the media frenzy that is the US Presidential Election. Once the winner of the race was announced, supporters at the Obama Campaign headquarters in Chicago jubilantly celebrated. The haze of American flags, pop music, and confetti worked wonders to mask the absence of any real political substance throughout the election process. Cheering supporters shouted “four more years” as President Obama took to the stage to deliver his victory speech – complete with highly emotional grandiloquence, two mentions of the US military being the strongest in the world, and of course – a joke about the family dog. After an exorbitant $6 billion spent by campaigns and outside groups in the primary, congressional and presidential races, Americans have reelected a president better suited for Hollywood than Washington. A 2010 ruling by the US Supreme Court that swept away limits on corporate contributions to political campaigns has paved the way for the most expensive election in American history, in the midst of an economic crisis nonetheless. [1]
In the nation that gave birth to the marketing concept of branding, it is to be assumed that politicians would eventually adopt the same techniques used to promote consumer products – enter Obama. After eight years under the Bush administration, America desperately needed change. Instead of any meaningful structural reform, America ushered in a global super star whose charm and charisma not only resuscitated American prestige, but also masked the continued dominance of deregulators, financiers, and war-profiteers. Obama’s most valuable asset is his brand, and his ability to channel the nostalgia of transformative social movements of the past, while serving as a tabula rasa of sorts to his supporters – an icon of hope who is capable of inspiring the masses and coaxing them into action – despite the Obama administration expanding the disturbing militaristic and domestic surveillance policies so characteristic of the Bush years, and channeling never before seen authority to the executive branch.
Alex's Journeys
bjjangles
cesarzambrano
ggita32
gogofishgreen
Ken McMurtrie
kristalklear
patricktech
yuma progressive
Hey Kristalklear. It (the past being obummers most lethat weapon puts all of the people in this group who live in the past in the position they have chosen to be in. When the Christian god comes what I can hear him saying plainly is that they all voted and wanted the past, the lie and the lesser of 2 evils (which is evil). So what do they insanely think god can do when they make these choices all by themselves with their eyes wide open. Your point about them living in the nostalgia of transformative social movements of the past means they cannot accept the present and live in the now. Therse are supposidly educated people am I right. Very bad show on their part to not recognize so many of the road signs, like the lie, and the past as being used against them.If I would have to say that their god would say to them Hey man you accepted the false and you voted for evil. You then hoped for and elevated the trash that you want to be saved from. Evil is evil and I do not know you. Your name over the years have not been placed in the book of life. I do hope you are doing well.
Hi P Lucass,
Some say the US has just a two party political system and needs a third, I disagree. As the post mentions we have only a one party system, a broken and very evil one indeed.
Crystal
I totally agree with what you said about only one party made up of the same idiots who are solicited to and obey the same principles set out for them by someone else. I seriously dont think anyone in the government of the United states has the ability to even make a rational and not a personal decision. they have never did anything for the people except to fool them and sway the weak minded. Seems like 40% of the people voted in the last election for both candidates. Now that these are the ststs that means only about 20% of the people voted for the winner. Am I wrong in saying that the lie is with them saying they represent all of the people or am I just blowing smoke. We know who they represent in actuality but why cant people see that 20% voter count for the president is not even legal at all or am I missing something. 80% of the people did not want either party representing them.
Your figures spell it out & your right….they know who they are really representing (working for). That makes them liars when stating they represent all people. Politician are probably not even representing 20% in reality