What Is Wrong With America?


USA Today
Miami Herald
Boston Globe
Washington Post
Washington Monthly
The New York Times
The Los Angeles Times
The Guardian Unlimited
The Baltimore Chronicle
Seattle Post Intelligencer
The Washington Independent
U.S. News
The Nation
Mother Jones
The New Yorker
The Rolling Stone
The New York Observer
The Raw Story
Daily Censored
Democracy Now
Global Research
Information Clearinghouse
David Corn
David Sirota
Joe Conason
Eric Alterman

Helen Thomas
Paul Krugman
Maureen Dowd
Thom Hartmann
Glenn Greenwald
Arianna Huffington
George Will
Peggy Noonan
Michael Barone
Christopher Hitchens
Charles Krauthammer
Online Journal
Counter Punch
The Consortium
Common Dreams
Crooks & Liars
The Brad Blog
The Daily Howler
Daily Kos
The Hill
Roll Call
American Politics Journal
Mark Fiore
The Daily Show
The Colbert Report

Saturday Night Live
The Center For American Progress
Progressive Democrats of America
The Progressive

Think Progress
Michael Moore
Media Matters For America
Media Channel
PBS News
BBC News
CNN News
ABC News
CBS News
NBC News

Countdown with Keith Olbermann
The Rachel Maddow Show

Air America
Ed Schultz
Brave New Films
Snowshoe Films
John Pilger
Greg Palast

Daniel Hopsicker
Project Censored
Center for Public Integrity
Pilots for 9/11 Truth
World For 9/11 Truth
Lawyers for 9/11 Truth
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Lawyers For 9/11 Truth
Firefighters For 9/11 Truth
Political Leaders For 9/11 Truth
Scholars for 911 Truth & Justice
Religious Leaders For 9/11 Truth
Medical Professionals For 9/11 Truth
Architects & Engineers For 9/11 Truth

What In The World Is Wrong With The United States of America?
A Nation Once Considered A Model of Democracy And Beacon For Freedom...
NewsFocus, By Tim Watts 031009

An Essay To Stimulate Discussion On What Ails A Once Great Nation

During the 2008 election, one mantra seemed to be prevalent across all major campaigns, Americans wanted "change." Whether Democrat, Independent, or even Republican, it seems that most had finally had enough. With the lowest ratings ever for a sitting U.S. president, the American people were united together on one thing, they all wanted change.

Ironically enough, America has already had eight years of change, but much to the chagrin of the populace, it has been for the worse.

For the first time in decades the United States held a sizable surplus in the late '90s, however, we have since fallen to an all-time deficit low of $10-trillion dollars, and still growing. As we spend over $10-billion per day on an illegal oil war in Iraq, while pouring a trillion dollars into the Wall Street bail-out and U.S. banking financial meltdown, the situation is horrifically and rapidly growing far worse.

Our Constitutional freedoms and liberty have been savagely brutalized with an outrageous assault from the Patriot Act. Our right to self governance has been seriously compromised with the Help America Vote Act and its highly vulnerable electronic voting machines, already proven by many computer experts to be easily hacked or secretly programmed to steal our votes.

Equally as alarming, for the first time in our history, we have now reserved the right to attack a foreign country, without provocation, through preemptive first strikes, now known as the Bush Doctrine. In conjunction, we no longer recognize Habeas Corpus and we scoff at the Geneva Convention. The country that has long claimed to be the protector of human rights is now arguably the most deplorable offender.

These are but just a few examples of what America has never stood for, but yet this is where we sadly find ourselves after the Bush administration. One can only hope that Obama's change includes undoing the questionable actions of former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The Media Has Let Our Democracy Down

One of the keys to taking back our country is to start with taking back our media. It is unfortunately in a very sad and perverse state at this moment.

The last fifteen years have seen a total takeover of our formerly hallowed and esteemed media. Many industry insiders recognize all too well what Reagan deregulation did to damage this long-standing protector and watchdog of our democracy. It took just eight years to whittle down the major media corporations from 50 to just six. That is not good.

Without a watchful media, we have no mechanism for accountability regarding the crap-shoot of politicians that we blindly vote for and send to "crooked-town" in the hopes of representing us on the Hill. The term crap-shoot is used for a reason, as it is obvious that many people now form the basis of their vote from atrociously skewed, spin-oriented half-truths that they get from distorted political ads on television, or they foolishly accept the political rhetoric thrown at them from the talking head TV pundits and numerous propaganda spewing talk radio hosts. Worse yet, some people actually vote on mere appearance itself, possibly the most dangerous idea of all.

A great portion of the media no longer delivers hard news, but rather, politically slanted, biased opinion instead. There is no other way to parse that. Those that don't realize this are most certainly vulnerable and are highly susceptible to the media manipulation and propaganda environment in which we find ourselves today.

We have sadly gone from over 100 large broadcast corporations to just over 50 in the early 90s. That number has alarmingly shrank to a mere six large corporations that now control every single bit of information that we perceive as news in this country. We are the most overly entertained society in the world for a reason. It's the old adage about watching that left hand, but missing the right hand that is going to knock you to the floor.

Make no mistake about it, we are being lied to in a grand way in this country. As unbelievable as it may sound, some of these pundits are so fixated on political talking points that they seemingly appear to be in on the deception, (money brings out the worst immoral character for some) but a great many are simply doing as they are told and directed to from the top of the media ladder.

Many refuse to entertain that the media could possibly ever be controlled, but what they don't realize is that there is a hierarchy of authority to follow and specific political viewpoints that are administered from the top down. Just as in the military, there is a chain of command and there are always obedient non-questioning soldiers at the bottom to follow marching orders with an obtuse trust and culpable naiveté.

Unless you start questioning the so-called news that we are being spoon-fed in this country, you will always think that life is running along as it should. Most in this country are duped because of this. The common notion is, "It must be true because I saw it on the TV." It is hard to find a statement that exhibits as much dangerous ignorance as this one.

You cannot undermine a true democracy unless you fool its people. You cannot fool the people unless you steal their news source and their media. Regretfully, that is exactly what has happened to us in this country. For those not intuitive enough to recognize this dark reality, they are sadly a large part of this perilous divide that now exists in our country.

Two-Party Monopoly Not What Founders Envisioned

The fact that we are now primarily a two-party system has been the most dangerous component in leading us to this division. Why we don't have more viable media supported political parties in this country is a sad statement on our alleged democracy. You are told that you are liberal or a conservative if you share a particular viewpoint or vote a certain way. That is a long-standing ruse which does not apply to a great many in this country. If people would only take the time to consciously and carefully examine their own personal beliefs, they might surprisingly find that they indeed share many beliefs from both sides of this intentional political trap.

The powers that be have purposefully captured the athletic mind-set that is so often embraced in this country, your team vs. their team. On election day, you now wake up to the ingrained concept that your team either won the Super Bowl or they lost, thus perpetuating the divide of resentment that exists in this country. The fact that some would not vote for a person of color, or gender, or a third party candidate is a sad indictment on not only our country, but also our very bigoted populace.

Few have the gumption to step outside of the political party lines that they have carefully been boxed into. If you filter everything you know through your party affiliation, that is a very dangerous spot to move to, because you now close yourself off to unbiased reason and will more than likely form a very myopic opinion as a result.

Manipulating "We The People"

Nothing drives people more than fear. It is well known by those in power and has been used against us in the last eight years of an arguably criminal Bush administration. I'm sorry if that statement offends many. It too can be divisive, unless of course you are willing to separate yourself from this political web that tangles us all. You need to think rationally on your own, free from the rhetoric that is indoctrinated into all of us through our political system and from an overly complicit manipulative media.

People literally have no idea what a powerful tool focus group research and marketing can be. Based on the work of Edward Bernays (with contributions from Ivy Lee) the field of public relations and marketing was born. Bernays was the nephew of noted psychiatrist Sigmund Freud. He exploited his uncle's work for his own profit, bringing the power of perception into the same arena as reality. Corporate broadcasting does not make a move without research and focus groups, the purpose of which is to identify people's perceptions and what they truly do know, so as to side with or influence those beliefs.

In marketing, there is one rule that is adhered to, "Perception is reality," because it deals with people's beliefs, their own personal reality, whether well informed or not.

Marketing researchers are able to examine myriad demographics and further explore subsets of each through the use of psychographics. It is very easy to determine a person's, or group's, personal tipping points on any given issue. Horribly enough, this tool has long since moved to the political arena. People such as Karl Rove, often referred to as the brilliant bastard, have become very adept at mastering these principles. Frank Luntz is another widely employed political researcher who is often used by numerous politicians and corporations to find these hot buttons that exist within the population.

The power of this extremely insightful tool can now be used to exploit and shape people's beliefs through a corrupt version of polling, known as "push polling," so named because it forces people to think they are being given information that is true, when in reality it very well may not be. For example, "If you were to learn that candidate X secretly murdered a person in the '70s, but was not convicted, would that make you more likely or less likely to vote for him?"

Now, that statement, more often than not, is untrue, however, many of those being polled will accept that hypothetical allegation as a perceived fact, thus forming a new perception of reality, all triggered by the disingenuous pollster. They are in essence "pushed" to this new perception, hence the name, "push polling."

The human population can be moved in many ways that they are cognitively unaware of. A common research example goes like this. Introduce the word "moon" and "ocean" to an attentive focus group. Later, you ask that same group of people to name a leading laundry detergent. For many the subconscious trigger is made and they will more often than not say "Tide," all because their subconscious realizes the connection between the moon, the oceans and the tides. The subject has no idea why they have arrived at their conclusion because they are not aware of the pre-programmed markers that exist within their own mindset. It is in this way that terms such as "terrorism' and "evil-doers" are skillfully used against us, subliminally forcing us to react in ways that we unknowingly have been conditioned to behave in.

Divided We Fall

Our forced two-party system has us right where the powers that be want us. The rich and corporate elite have a solid understanding of how to manipulate the masses through very powerful tools such as this, keeping us all in a divided state, where we are much easier to conquer when we're not aligned together in unison. The old saying, "United we stand, yet divided we fall" has greater wisdom than most in this country currently allow for.

In politics, they very much want us in that divide, because we are easier to control. That is why we are purposefully held in this two-party system, rather than embracing more than two political parties, thus keeping us from weighing all reasonable and responsible concepts for a better way of governance.

A true student of sociology will tell you that there is no evil in socialism, communism or capitalism. There is only inherent evil in the people that are allowed to rule over those respective systems.

Do not be fooled by the political dogma that we have all been indoctrinated with while growing up with state sponsored public education. There can exist bad socialism and bad communism, but nothing could be of greater danger than unchecked capitalism, for it is truly greed based with adverse effects for its lower and middle class, while having little regard for environmental standards, or the concerns of the many.

A Responsible Society

A true civilization takes care of all of its people. It does not denigrate the lower class, nor suppress the rights of the common man. A true civilization and society works together in a mutual way, achieving social progress that is for the benefit of all.

With that said, please consider a few radical precepts for an improved society, one which very well might better represent, "we the people." (All of us, rich and poor.) If you are capable of approaching this with an open mind, you may very well find that if we were to follow these simple concepts, we might no longer have the social disparity that is prevalent in this country today.


1) Election reform. We need free and open elections with ballots that cannot be manipulated beyond the voters intent. This means we need to undo the heinous HAVA legislation (Help America Vote Act) and take our election process out of the hands of the easily hackable electronic voting machines. Without the power to vote freely and unhindered, we have effectively lost the ability to participate in the democratic process and to shape our government for ourselves.

2) Tax reform. We need tax reform for all. It is not right for the poor and middle class to support an upper class that has clearly made its money off the backs of these two classes of our society. Conversely, it is not right for those that have earned a good living to have to pay more for the same rights and benefits that we all expect from this country. In short, there has to be a better way of taxation. That is indeed one of the many concepts that our forefathers left England and the monarchy for in the first place. Sadly, in over 300 years of history, we have not yet perfected the model that our forefathers so long desired. If we indeed had this, people would quit voting with their pocketbooks and would vote instead with their true moral conscience, rather than their own personal greed. This would eliminate the many bad politicians who are voted into office with no regard for character, but merely a position skewed towards the voter's wallets. This would be an important reform on its own.

One idea for tax reform floated by many, including former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura, is called a national tax. The gist of this reform goes like this: Citizen A makes $30-thousand, citizen B makes $1-million and citizen C makes $300-billion. Under a national tax, who pays the most tax out of those three people? The one that spends the most. That may sound like an ass-backwards way of taxation at first, but once you understand the principle you will get the basic beauty behind the idea. The person that spends the most gets taxed the most. It is an intriguing concept with merit that needs to be explored further. Another more simple approach might simply be using a percentage tax with no loopholes for the wealthy to escape. If you make a lot, then you pay a lot. If you make a little, then you pay accordingly. First and foremost, tax breaks for the wealthy must go.

First off, if you understand the Federal Reserve System you already know that our money is worthless paper. There is no gold or silver backing. It is a good faith currency that is called "legal tender." With this premise in mind, your only actual wealth comes from what you buy with that money. Now, with that said, if all three citizens, A, B and C spend only $500 of their income, then they all pay the same tax. It does no good for the much wealthier citizen B or C to sit on all that money, it is worthless to them, until they spend it. You can have all the money in the world, but you have no real wealth until you spend it or do something with it.

If we were to go to a national tax based solely on what we spend, that would be an excellent tax reform for America.

3) Regulate capitalism. This will most likely raise an eyebrow or two, but it is this writer's opinion that there need to be limits on our unchecked capitalism. Many will say this is heresy, without ever giving it a second thought, yet the concept is sound and easily understandable if you just open your mind to the notion and try to see the overwhelming benefit to a society. Those of us old enough to know realize much of this without having to really think. Why is a candy bar a dollar now rather than the nickel that it used to be? You know the answer already and your brain is subconsciously explaining that to you, yet few follow the reason and logic through to the natural conclusion.

While supply and demand are often the noted keys for moving our economy, greed has become an integral component in driving the price of goods ever higher under capitalism. The value of the U.S. dollar is also a very large  component in this markup. Everything in a mutual economy is tied together. When the prices rise, other goods do as well, in an effort to maintain a balance of affordability, but that model seldom ever resorts back to the lower price again and we eventually end up where we are now. The farmer pays more for grain and feed and the food supply rises in price. If the transportation to move that food to market also rises due to high gas prices, then the price of food goes up as well, etc, etc. This is indeed a very simple analogy, but one that is hopefully easy to understand for all. The aspect of blatant greed is undeniably the worst component to this horribly flawed concept of our economic system that we call capitalism.

When you can buy something for a penny and sell it for 400 times it's cash value, that is indeed a problem and a hallmark of unchecked capitalism. We are taught to eagerly embrace this concept in capitalism, yet we very well might possibly reconsider as we look back in hindsight and wrestle with the escalating price of retail goods over the years. Unchecked capitalism is not good for a moral society that cares for its own. Regulations on capitalism would indeed have a beneficial effect for all, making goods affordable without forcing an abhorrent increase of price, in an effort to keep up with rising costs. Setting standards for pricing, perhaps a percentage cap on product mark-up, very well may be an idea worth exploring.

4) Corporate regulation. We need limits on corporate influence over the state. Most do not know that our forefathers forbid corporations from existing beyond 40 years, as they realized the danger of them becoming wealthier and more powerful than the state or government under which they operate and prosper. We have turned away from that concept, instead embracing the corporation as necessary for life itself, while ignorantly allowing it the rights of an actual person. No longer are those behind the corporations financially liable for their own personal losses as a result of irresponsible business endeavors. That is the sole idea of a corporation and this concept sorely needs to be revised. More than that, the political stranglehold that these institutions have on our government is indeed one of the worst things to ever happen to our political system. Our forefathers recognized this danger long ago, thus imposing a limitation on the life of a corporation.

An 11th Constitutional Amendment was originally proposed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison that would forbid corporate monopolies in this country. The main idea was to make it illegal for corporations to take over or start up other corporations. These institutions were essentially banned from giving money to politicians, or casting their influence on our election process in any way whatsoever. They were also restricted to one single business purpose. The lifetime of a corporation was limited to roughly the same time frame of a productive person, which was approximately 20 to 40 years at the time. Corporations were originally mandated "to serve the public good." That is quite a twist from today's omnipotent corporate entity.

One last note on the subject...in this time of economic crisis it is beyond unreasonable for corporations such as Exxon to post a 58% rise in profits, with over $15-billion dollars in profit from just one three month quarter. (Those profits by the way, beat their old record which was set in the three months prior.) We were told there is an oil crisis, but when Americans see that oil companies are indeed rolling in this much profit, it is quite clear that their overhead and expenses are not as bleak as they claim. Considering that we are being held over a barrel on gas prices, (pun intended) one could understandably surmise that we are being blatantly robbed. The U.S. attorney general should step in and arrest these oil executives on extortion and racketeering charges.

A persuasive argument could be made for our government to take over this critical infrastructure industry, nationalizing it for the peoples' good, lowering the price, stimulating the economy, while applying any left over profits to our ever increasing debt.

When Americans are going broke pouring their living wage into their gas tank, with no valid justification, then the greedy oil executives should be held criminally responsible.

Another nefarious example of corporate greed would be the Wall Street companies and banking institutions who have accepted over a trillion dollars in bail-out money, only to sit on that money as 1) a cushion to fall back on, 2) pay out shareholder dividends, or 3) use that capital in the hopes of growing larger by taking over smaller banks and financial institutions with our taxpayer money. They too should also be placed behind bars.

5) Political reform. This is without a doubt tantamount to the success of our failing republic and the democracy for which it stands. Our forefathers said that "taxation without representation is tyranny," yet that is exactly where we are today, as the common man no longer has the ear of his elected representatives, losing out instead to the high paid lobbyists and political action committees that fight for the corporations, the ultra rich and special interest groups. Of particular note are those who leave politics to go to work for these lobbying groups, using their invaluable political expertise, influence and Capitol Hill connections for the benefit of but a few, rather than "we the people." This needs to be made illegal in this dying democracy. It is an unfair marriage of corruption and influence that undeniably does not benefit the many, but rather instead only those who are already well to do.

6) Media reform. The Reagan deregulation of our media was the death knell for our highly revered republic. Our watchdog of democracy has, as a result, been taken from us. The license to broadcast used to always be held in the "public interest." Sadly, that is no longer the case. It is now in the "corporate interest," with an undeniable financial bottom line which governs its direction and purpose. Before deregulation, a broadcast licensee was made to hold their license in the first term for a minimum of five years and then for every renewal afterwards, a duration of three years, whether the license holder was making a profit or losing their shirt entirely. It was for the "public good."

What we have now is what I like to refer to as "Century-21 broadcasting," for you can now buy a media outlet and immediately turn around the next minute and hang a for sale sign on that license, with the sole interest of profit, with no longer any regard for the public good. That is what has allowed our broadcast media to now be boiled down to a mere six corporations. FOX news owner Rupert Murdoch of News Corp has said that in the very near future, we will be down to just three media owners and he is adamant that he will be one of them. That is a scary thought for many, considering the fact that Murdoch claims he can print or broadcast whatever he likes, whether it is the truth or not. There was a day when a foreign national was not allowed to buy into our media, due to the inherent danger of our way of government being influenced by contrarian concepts to the ideals that our forefathers fought so hard for and left to us as caretakers of. We have failed miserably in that regard as it is now legal for foreigners to buy into our media, as the Australian Murdoch has, thus circumventing and usurping our republic and its democracy.

7) Education reform. We need a separation of school and state. A great many who have children that are in school, or have gone through today's educational system, are appalled by the poor standards set by our government. The "no child left behind" program is arguably fraught with problems which ironically are contrary to the bills very name. Many teachers will testify to this in droves. Children do not learn at the same rate. They do not all have the same inherent understanding or cognitive learning curve. To mandate principles to all that can apply to only a few is not the best idea for our educational system. More importantly, it is not the best approach for our children. Furthermore, the suppression of educational standards is an absolute crime against humanity which should not be allowed at all. The most common offense is in the teaching of our history, in which very much is left out, thus giving future generations a poor framing of how and why we arrived at the point we are at today. As the old saying goes, "the victor always writes the history." This revision of our history books clearly needs to change.

8) Healthcare reform. We desperately need non-profit healthcare for all. Many cannot grasp this altruistic and benevolent concept as they forget the long ago day of such a noble idea. Hospitals were allowed to cover their costs, but were not originally in the business of making a profit. The HMO was born under the Nixon administration under the lobbying efforts of Henry Kaiser (Kaiser-Permante). If you listen to the Nixon tapes you can find a conversation between Nixon and Kaiser describing this awful plan for healthcare. In the call, just as chilling as the Watergate tapes, Mr. Kaiser can be heard detailing such a system that would garner great wealth to its owners and shareholders through denied services and coverage. Nixon loved the idea and soon the HMO was born. In capitalism you make money on the services and goods delivered, however the healthcare and insurance industry are two of the few that make their profit from the denial and limitation of services. Bill HR 676, co-written by Dennis Kucinich and John Conyers, would bring Americans the health care reform that we so desperately need in this country.

9) Right to property. Many do not understand this concept. All Americans should have this right, without the fear of losing it, however, there is one aspect that is most unfair. Many do not know firsthand that those with large amounts of property are discriminated against because they have generous land holdings. This law is good for one thing only, limiting the amount of land that can be owned by the common man. Under our current system, no one truly owns land. They merely lease or rent it from their local government in exchange for an unfair property tax. If you do not pay the exorbitant tax, you lose your land. This is clear discrimination towards the middle and lower class. The tax is unfair to those who produce nothing of capital value from their land and have it merely as a means of homestead to live upon and hopefully pass on to their children.

Case in point, those with land can pay tens of thousands per year in taxes, with no city services made available to them whatsoever, other than schools, which they may or may not take part in. Those living in small town neighborhoods pay only a fraction of the amount of rural landholders, hundreds as opposed to tens of thousands per year, while reaping municipal benefits that rural landholders have no access to, such as sewer and water utilities, not to mention police and fire department protection. The only proper means of taxing homestead landowners should be upon the capital gains achieved through the sale of such homestead land. The current property tax system is clearly discriminatory and grossly unjust in its design.

10) Federalize the Federal Reserve. To this point, many respond with, "say what?" Few actually understand that the Federal Reserve System was one of the worst things to happen to our republic and its democracy. Established in 1914, the Federal Reserve is not owned by our government, nor "we the people." It is a private corporation with private owners that earn obscene amounts of profit at the expense of our government and its people. The Federal Reserve basically prints paper money with no inherent value whatsoever, aside from the manufactured value that we apply to it. There is no gold or silver backing. It is a Federal Reserve Note, a promissory note merely called "legal tender." It is essentially, worthless paper. Woodrow Wilson was hoodwinked into this crooked system and deeply regretted it for the rest of his life. By allowing a private company to print our country's currency, we effectively lost our ability to be a true sovereign nation. The Federal Reserve System is very much behind the failure of our banks and the current financial crisis, yet few understand this undeniable fact of life in the U.S.

Marketing Political Ideology

The suggestions above are but only ten points for now, but there are others that can be added to this list in the hopes for a more fair and equitable society for all. If some truly don't understand the concepts outlined above, or wish to label this ideology as some form of socialism (another marketed term) then perhaps they have forgotten the true root meaning of that term, "social," or better yet, "society." That is what a true benevolent civilization is all about, taking care of its people, taking responsibility for your society.

Government regulation is another "marketed evil," yet it is obviously a very necessary overseer due to the system of unchecked capitalism in which we live. Until greed is removed from the equation, our long dreamt about  "government of the people, by the people and for the people" has no chance for success. Do not forget that "we the people" created this government for our own mutual benefit, to guard us all from the tyranny of oppression that our forefathers fought so hard to escape from.

The allegation of a "tax and spend" liberal is a clear ruse that few fail to reason through. The concept of "tax and spend" is the root of capitalism, whether some like it or not. It's the exact same precept of "work to earn a living and then spend your income," rather than the concept of spend first and then work to pay off your already purchased credit card debt. We have simply been marketed to in a grand effort to place a subliminal trigger in our heads to believe that "tax and spend" is wrong, but if you truly follow the reasoning through, you will not find the logic in the argument. We earn first and then we spend.

Another example of twisted and marketed dogma is the "death tax." There is no death tax. That is nothing more than a calculated marketing of the "estate tax," which only the wealthiest worry about. That law was placed for good reason and intent. It was a way of keeping the wealthy from becoming ultra-wealthy and thus gaining more power and influence than our own government. Like it or not, it has valid reasoning behind it, but we are being duped into thinking that we will all be taxed upon our death. Nothing could be farther from the truth or more patently absurd.

Forefathers Rolling In Their Graves

Our forefathers were indeed very bright persons with a grand idea for a better way of life, for all of us. They were not so prescient of the future to come as they were acutely aware of the history of the past. Our constitution is a highly revered document for the people and not "just a goddamn piece of paper" as attributed to George W. Bush.

That any American president could make such a mindless remark regarding our US Constitution is reprehensible and irresponsible, but sadly Bush was not the first. Other presidents have been known to make such bold remarks in times of duress, Teddy Roosevelt being one that immediately comes to mind. It is not the purpose of our elected representatives to tell us that our Constitution and our Bill of Rights is an invalid "piece of paper." Much blood was spilled by a great many for our precious rights, so to cavalierly discount this country's founding blueprint for democracy is very much akin to treason.

Change Comes About When Social Inequalities Are Recognized

We the people have the chance to change the course of this misdirection in our country. While the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) was the single biggest blow to our democracy, (with the Patriot Act a close second) we still have a chance to succeed, but only by overwhelming the machines. When that is done, no matter how many rigged machines there are, there is always a disparity in the exit polling to point out any signs of wrongdoing.

By overwhelming the machines and voting en masse, we create too great of an exit poll discrepancy for actual election fraud to go unnoticed. Historically, election polling is normally within a 1% margin, yet the last election was 3% or greater. In states with electronic voting, the exit polling was off considerably, but in states with paper ballots, the exit polling was right on the money, as it has always been prior to HAVA.

We have had two presidential elections now (2000 and 2004) where the people's vote was without a doubt not counted. Both elections were very close, with mere hundreds of ballots tipping the scale, yet both elections undeniably did not count many of the votes, which could very well have had a direct effect on the eventual outcome.

In both of those elections, the key battleground states had a Secretary of State who coincidentally just happened to be that states official campaign co-chair for the winner of each election, George W. Bush.

In 2000 the U.S. Supreme Court illegally stepped in and stopped the recount in Florida. Hanging chads or not, the intent of the voter is the letter of the law and that was clearly ascertainable in Florida by counting the votes. The Supreme Court undeniably stopped that count. George W. Bush's own campaign co-chair in the state, Katherine Harris, was the overseer of the election process. A clear conflict of interest. She employed a company known as Choicepoint Database Technologies to disenfranchise 57-thousand voters. It was Harris who then eventually declared Bush the winner after the Supreme Court's ruling.

In 2004, John Kerry acquiesced early to a very narrow Bush win, with thousands of votes still uncounted. The election overseer for Ohio, Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, was also coincidentally the state's campaign co-chair for Bush's re-election. He was also a shareholder in Diebold Electronics (178 shares), the company that made the electronic voting machines in question during that election. Again, this is all clearly a huge conflict of interest. How can we expect an investigation of a company where the CEO, Wally O' Dell, said he would deliver an election win for Bush, when the overseer of the election process himself has a biased financial interest as a shareholder in that company?

For those that may disagree, they more than likely have not researched those elections on their own, or they have been spoon-fed from our corporate media. Both elections also had tens of thousands of disenfranchised voters, skewing the final results, in essence giving us a two-term president never once truly elected by the people.

Being Great Once Again

In closing, while I have always supported standing up for the common man, I have always voted for "the best person" for the job. There are good people on both sides of this divided political spectrum, however, there are also sadly too many with blatant avarice that benefits but only a few, with little regard for the many.

This piece is not to condemn our country, nor any particular political party, but rather stands in support of a once great democracy that many would like to see restored to its glory, as well as improved upon. If history has shown us anything, both major political parties have been infiltrated with people of shallow character. We need to do a better job of selecting those we place in office for our representation.

A good patriot does not blindly accept egregious behavior from its government, rather, they stand in defense of our country, to help correct its shortcomings and to keep our elected representatives in line.

When asked about our country's Constitution and what form of government we were to have, Benjamin Franklin declared, "A republic, if you can keep it."

While we are certainly being challenged in that regard, it is time for the people to stand up for their rights and challenge our government back.

To quote one other great American, "dissent is the greatest form of patriotism" - Thomas Jefferson.

To bring about change will require accountability, as well as responsibility from our elected representatives, but actual true change will only come to America when the people finally wake up and start asking questions and demanding answers.

Getting rid of the Bush-Cheney regime was a good start for 78% of America. Now, if the other 22% would start thinking beyond their political party, we might have a shot at turning this country around and making it great again in the eyes of not just Americans, but the entire world community.

Other Timely Op/Eds from NewsFocus:

America Stolen: The Take Over of Our Media

American Capitalism: Economic Dysfunction

Socialism Is Not A Dirty Word

What Most Don’t Know About Our System of Currency

Conspiracy Happens

A 21st Century Flat Earth

The Great Divide

More on the Op/Ed page


Bill Maher On America: Not Everything Has To Be For Profit

Maher Is In Line With Congressman Kucinich On This One

America Needs To Quit Claiming It's #1 And Strive To Be #1

Maher makes some excellent points about false bravado in America.



About The Author:
Tim Watts is a veteran San Francisco broadcaster with 25 years experience in the industry as an on-air talent, Program Director, and consultant. He is the creator and sole author of the websites NewsFocus.org, and TheAmericanTruthNetwork.com. He has been writing about U.S. corruption over the last decade, while also investigating 9/11 from the moment that the first tower fell. He has documented his 9/11 research on a website called A September Coup