Brazen Contempt for the Intelligence of the Electorate: An Open Letter to Barack Obama
To: Barack Obama
We all want respect from our fellow man--i.e., we demand it as a right. Yet, respect is a two-way street. Correct? That is, when elected officials dissemble or deceive those who seek honest answers to questions directly affecting the lives of the rank-and-file in America, then those elected officials have, essentially, gone beyond incivility and demonstrated contempt for the intelligence of Americans.
We, the People, no longer feed at the corporate media disinformation trough, i.e., we have reliable, web news resources with substantiated reports and disclosures. For example, OUR news resources:
1) are NOT beholden to AIPAC and neo-Zionists, who wantonly and arrogantly attack the civilian population in Gaza for twenty-two days, with American tax-payer subsidies--OUR dollars--engaging in what amounts to crimes against humanity.
2) are NOT oblivious to the fact that the EFCA Bill will emerge stillborn, having been eviscerated by K Street largesse, i.e., DC legislators having run for political cover when they formerly endorsed a bill which would empower American labor.
3) are NOT unaware of the fact that economists like Nobel-Laureates Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman, and Dr. Michael Hudson, e.g., have been purposely disallowed MATERIAL, MEANINGFUL ACCESS to the process of planning and recovery of America's economy. Their protocols prescind from the neo-liberal agenda of playing kowtow to Wall Street and corporate and finance industry interests and prerogatives: hence their conspicuous absence. And, hence, the fact that the remedial protocols of this unprecedented economic crisis are more politicized than reached by an open, non-politically biased review of ALL avenues of recovery.
4) are NOT unmindful of the DOUBLE-STANDARD which inheres by not prosecuting those members of the preceding administration who peremptorily advocated the use of interrogation procedures known by the civilized world to be torture. Not to put too fine a point on this, what do you feel this does to the "rule of law" which you've cited as de rigueur in a functioning democracy? Said another way: we can traffic in terms like "rule of law," "due process," and "habeas corpus" because they possess weight, i.e., gravitas, and therefore, enable us to "manage" the rank-and-file. But, when they are obviated for expedience sake, the terms quickly fall from grace, and we argue in favor, then, not for rule of law or habeas corpus but, rather, our new "forwardlooking" legal ethic. To argue this way, in fact, is a GROSS INSULT to the intelligence of every adult man and woman in America--as well as the global community--both eagerly anticipating the "Change you can believe in" model of US polity.