From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: U.S. | Government & Elections
Providing the Illusion that Something's Changed
by Sudhama Ranganathan (uconnharassment [at]
Saturday Oct 6th, 2012 11:02 AM
Elections in our country are at the point where they would seem too easy were it not for the drama and theatrics. Every year it's another nail biter, yet we are only really allowed one more party than those nations under communist rule. Depending on what the folks pumping the real money into the campaigns want to see as an outcome, in terms of the candidate that makes for the best symbol of what wealthy corporate donors want (and that's marketability in foreign countries), elections can go any number of ways. As things stand currently, we are at the mercy of their whims and their dollars. When we catch on, instead of patriotism or guilt because they have betrayed the trust of their fellow man, they switch gears and give us a little distraction, maybe a little smoke, could be a little mirrors. Whatever the case, they apparently have a need inside to see they get their way no matter what, and they will use whatever excuses necessary to tell themselves they are doing right using phrases have been uttered before in history, such as, “sometimes you have to do bad things so you can do good,” “the ends justify the means,” etc.

Smiley face

This year is no different. First money was pumped left and right into the primaries straight into the veins of the same party that just two years ago was gaa-gaa for the Tea Party movement, to the point of storming Capitol Hill and filling the halls of Congress to the rafters. They shouted at the tops of their lungs at almost every congressmen and senator as they walked past on their way to make the votes that gave those protesters so much consternation. They stood up and shouted at town hall meetings, drowning out all other opinions, and broke every unspoken rule in the unwritten book of conduct. To hear them tell it, there was just no way they could stand by and allow what they saw, which they believed to be, in their words, the path towards ruin for America. Not them, never.

Only, this time the money and the endorsements for the same party went elsewhere in terms of philosophical direction. That's right, strangely enough, the anti-healthcare crowd was nowhere to be found. The “never again will we see a big government bailout again” political party came up reading “error – files unable to be located.” It was like they just evaporated, right into thin air. But they had to be there somewhere, right? I mean, we are talking enough people to change the course of the 2010 elections and apparently change so many people's minds nationwide, that most people across the boards agreed with at least something the Tea Party stood for. This was millions of people. I mean, that's what the news channels told us, and it isn't likely they would ever lie to us. Right?

So these millions of people were still there charged up as ever, as it's not as if the issues they were so upset about changed, and the same people that poured so much money into them the last time around would be sure to pump money into them again as they helped them win. And obviously, since they were touted as the true supporters of the free market, those real capitalists that vouched for themselves via their checkbooks would just further this and reinforce it this time around, right? So, which candidate did the party of no free healthcare on our dime and no government funded bailouts or stimulus packages pick? They only managed to elect fourteen actual legislators from this so called true blue movement in 2010 (on the national level) … surely they would want to shoot for the gold with a Tea Party prez., right?

Well actually, they voted for the person that supported a huge government funded bailout in the form of TARP. ( Oh, there was drama, to be sure. There were fireworks, there were gaffes, ups and downs, neck and neck moments and then not so neck and neck moments, there were defeats and comebacks, there were moments of clarity and there was periodic out of left field battiness in supposedly the most conservative arena in decades and of course – combativeness.

But they didn't stop with a guy that supported a huge bailout and stimulus effort only. No, that wouldn't be dramatic, confusing nor distracting enough. They added an extra kick. The guy all the people in the party, that less than two years ago was marching on the capitol with guns strapped to their legs and signs that basically said this time the guns weren't loaded … (this time), the folks that had politicians swearing they would stick to this new philosophy no matter what until things were changed and would never waiver in their commitment including going so far as to turn back all federal funding for federally mandated healthcare, picked was the one person that not only flip flopped on his commitment to repealing the federal healthcare legislation, but actually previously passed the one healthcare bill that the president's and California's were modeled on. (

They picked a guy so close to the president in action, except the noises made when he moves his mouth, the pair may as well have been separated at birth. Maybe that's what happened to the president on the first debate – he just got really confused due to looking at his other self. He was scared by the site of his political doppelganger. Maybe the nutty professor stumbles were just the president thinking to himself, “geez I was gonna say that” and “wow, we really agree on a lot” followed by “I'm, I'm … I'm surprised, I'm … i'm flummoxed. How … how do I argue with myself? Maybe next time or the time after that, maybe I'll find a way to be, Buddy Love.” Maybe that's just what happens when one extremely pliant centrist comes up against another for the first time. It's like plastic man seeing himself in the mirror for the first time. “Wow, so that's what my face really looks like?”

Since the primaries people have begun looking at the race as if it seemed too scripted. As a result, there have been no shortages of back and forths. Just like previous elections, the numbers stay close, or one person keeps catching up close, then falling behind. Before the debates, they were closing in the polls, then a Harvard educated successful businessman and former governor said something just made for the current state of cable news. Wow. It was almost as if he didn't know the cameras are always rolling in 2012. His numbers dropped, “oh gasp, oh how could he!”

Then the first debates roll around, and on the president and the first lady's anniversary at that. “What must she be thinking, oh the tension.” What happens? “Nnnnnnoooooooooo!!!!!!” The worst showing in a presidential debate in decades. First we had Barack Obusha, then it was Barack Obomney now we have Barack Onixon. “Lloooorrrrddd, can it be true???!!!!” Then as the ride just went down, up we go again for what many predicted would happen (including myself) as we close in on the actual election. Yup, the unemployment figures drop to numbers we haven't seen in years. “IIITTTTT CCCCaaaannnn'ttttt bbbbeeeeee!!!!!” It couldn't have been written better.

Such tension, such drama and theatrics. Jerry Bruckheimer couldn't have done a better job at producing this thing. But of course, it's still a little stiffly thin, don't you think? Wonder what will come next on our way to another electoral win for President Barack Obama? Popcorn anyone?

To read about my inspiration for this article go to