The Democrat-Republican Divide : Whose Friends Get the Money

Some of my fellow citizens reacted with shock when they learned that Republicans in Congress recently voted to spend $20 billion more dollars than even Resident Barack Obama wanted to spend on the Farm Bill.   This was after separating the agriculture components of the farm bill from the food stamp components which had come to dominate the total program's budget.     They also made sneaky changes to the bill which made payments permanent rather than subject to five year reviews.

Some of my friends are puzzled by actions like these - because they have not yet achieved enlightenment on the true nature of our two party system.    Attaining such enlightenment is not easy, and once obtained it is also hard to retain.  The latter is not so easy in a false corporate media environment which constantly tries to talk you out of believing that what you just saw (over and over again) really happened.    For some, they may get a glimmer of light, the truth may start to shine through, but it is lost in an avalanche of loud media propaganda which sucks their minds back into the red-blue matrix.  But these "glitches", these things that don't seem to make sense under the conventional framework, are not "glitches" at all.   They are glimpses of reality breaking through the concealing wall of propaganda.

The enlightenment I have had is this: The real dispute between the Red Team and the Blue Team is whose friends get the money.   The rest is mere window dressing which neither side is serious about.  They merely throw it up there in order to dupe more people into voting for their faction, so that their friends can get more of the money.   Neither side has any interest in reducing government at all, they only have an interest in getting their "friends" (i.e. people who give politicians money in order to get politicians to give them your money) a bigger share of an expanding pie.

In this case, when the "Farm Bill" was a combination of welfare for the poor (food stamps) and welfare for corporations (farm subsidies) both sides were getting something.  But now that America's credit card is about to be maxed out, the various parasites on the productive working people of our nation have to fight harder over the scraps of our wealth which are left.   So the Republicans separated the Food Stamp welfare from the Farm Subsidy welfare.   The Democrats were all about cutting the Farm Subsidy (the Republican's friends) in order for there to be more money for the Food Stamp program (the Democrat's friends).   The Republicans are all about the opposite.  Neither of them have any interest whatsoever in cutting government overall.  Handing out your money to their friends and supporters is where their interests lie.

Here in Arkansas, the reverse happened.   Republicans took over the state legislature for the first time in over a hundred years running on a platform of opposing the implementation of Obamacare- which was correctly seen as an expansion of welfare primarily to the Democrat's supporters.   Once the Republican state legislators got in there, Democrat Gov. Mike Beebe proposed to cut some private interests which favored Republicans in on the loot.  With some help via bribery of legislators to change their vote, a majority of Republicans tossed their campaign promises into the nearest trash bin and signed onto Obamacare under the so-called "Private Option."

No expansion of government is too big if both side's friends can participate.   That is the lesson here.  It also explains the trillion dollar bailouts of the biggest banks. The big banks are "friends" of both red and blue.  Most voters red or blue opposed the measure, but they happened anyway and are still ongoing under QE to Infinity which is of course still underway.  One of the measures, QE II, almost all went to foreign banks.  That is how unrepresented the American people are in this two-party hoax.

What puts the two-party scam in an awkward position is that a huge segment of the American voters believe that government is too large, particularly on the federal level, and ought to significantly reduce both their scope and their spending.  Because of that, one side has to pretend to be the side which wants to reduce government spending. in order to deceive voters into supporting them.  That is why things like what happened on this farm bill are such glitches in the matrix.   Voters see that and say "wait that does not make any sense!"  Well, it does not make sense if you believe the matrix programming that one party wants more government and the other wants less.  It makes perfect sense if you believe the truth: both parties want to expand government relentlessly and their only real dispute is over whose friends get how much loot.

Oh, there are a few on the Republican side who are serious about reducing government that slipped through the screening process designed to weed out true believers and replace them with "company men."   These few are irritants to "The Big Show" which is more phony than WWE.   Since the Republican team has been assigned the role of pretending to be the side which wishes to reduce government, they have more of these trouble-makers than the other side.   The blue side is reprobate and basically admits it.  The red side pretends to be upright but is a part of the same scam.  Virtually all activism will be a waste of effort unless it is done within a mental framework which accepts and accounts for this.

Which of the two is the most offensive to heaven?   I have been blessed, after a lifetime of seeking, with the privilege of knowing God, of understanding who He is, just a little bit.   It would be very consistent with His nature if judgement of this dishonest and corrupt system began not with the side which is most openly wicked, but with that which is most hypocritical.   In the weeks and months to come, some of my friends and I intend to explore the idea of local alternatives to this system.  Stay tuned.

*********

Mark Moore is a writer for Arkansas Watch and an advocate of the Philosophy of Government known as Localism (Amazon Kindle) (Nook).