HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » viguy007 » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: 1 2 Next »

viguy007

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Aug 15, 2012, 04:36 AM
Number of posts: 125

Journal Archives

Much too early for this question

As a Moderate Republican for Obama, I wonder who will be the candidates from your party in 2016 if Clinton does not run? I assume if she runs she will be the candidate.

Just Remind People

I worry that as part of his program, Mitt Romney has said he will offset any deficit caused by his income tax cut, by reductions in the budget. These reductions may include cuts in programs such as:
1- Food and Nutrition Services for children, such as the school lunch program.
2- Crop Insurance for farmers.
3- Conservation and recreation in national parks.
4- Maintenance and repair of the interstate highway system.
5- Providing natural disaster assistance after hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods.
6- Educational assistance such as Pell Grants.
7- Food inspection and the "Center for Disease Control" (CDC).
8- Retraining programs for the unemployed.
9- Counter-cyclical direct economic aid programs (food stamps, unemployment insurance).
10- Block grants and aid to local communities.
All these programs employ people, either directly or indirectly through the purchase of goods and services. They pump money into the economy and increase demand. To the extent these programs are reduced, overall demand in the society will be reduced. The reduction in demand will more then counter-act the stimulative effects of the tax cut.

(From My Website)

The Disaster is not limited to New York and New Jersey

I do not know why the President is only focusing on them. He should also be talking about WV, MD, VA, PA, OH, DE, NH. Three of which are swing states and have been affected by Sandy. I expect Mitt to attack Obama for not caring about them.

Sandy may determine our next president

I am an expatriate who lives in the Dominican Republic. I am not a weatherman, but Sandy is a big storm, it has effected us for 5 days even though it is 1000 miles away. We got no wind but we have gotten a ton of rain. It is forecasted to hit the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states. Floods will be a problem even if wind damage is not. These are all Obama states. This might hold down his vote in the areas Obama is the strongest. If the election is as tight as the polls say it is, this might very well cost Obama the popular vote victory. But what about the electoral college. This is where voter commitment and motivation comes into play. Most of these states are safe Obama, but PA and OH are not. If you live in OH, redouble your efforts to get people to vote early, tell them it is better to vote when the sun is shining, rather then at a time when you have a foot or more of water in the streets. In PA get your ground game ready, especially transport to the polls. With our commitment we can overcome anything the weather throws at us.

What If

We had a real nightmare? Romney won the popular vote. If the electoral college is tied, the House of Representatives would determinate the winner. Romney would be the winner. But Nebraska determines its Electors by district. In the last election, the state of Nebraska voted Republican, but one district voted for Obama. Obama got one electoral vote from Nebraska. What if that happened again? Obama would win the Electoral vote 270 to Romney's 268. Obama is the winner. How would the Republicans react. How much money would Romney offer the electors to change their vote. There is no law to require electors to vote for the the person they are pledged to.

Just a reminder of why we are here

The year was 1932, we were in the third year of the "Great Depression". It was a time of no hope for the future. Desperation ruled as the stock market had crashed, and banks closed never to reopen their doors. In the time it takes the eye to blink, or the heart to beat, a lifetime of savings was wiped out. Businesses failed, jobs were lost, homes and farms were foreclosed. Dreams were swept away. For many years the unemployment rate would be over 25%.

The old and disabled literally died in the street from starvation, too weak to wait for hours on breadlines at soup kitchens for a meal. World War One veterans, who had lost their homes, set up an encampment in Washington. They were calling for the bonus they had been promised after the war. But instead of being honored, they were brutally attacked and expelled by other soldiers. Hundreds of thousands homeless men, women, and children traveled from town to town, in open boxcars on the rails, and falling apart jalopies looking for work. Any job, at any wage, just to put a scrap of bread on the table and end the relentless hunger that consumed them. Fear and hopelessness lurked throughout the land.

The radio was filled with talk of revolution. The Nazis were held in high esteem. Many respected businessmen said they were the model for government efficiency and solving our problems. Politicians were talking endlessly about the need for fiscal responsibility. They said the solution to our economic crisis was to cut the budget. People wondered if the “American Dream” was dead, never to return. And in the middle of this time of crisis, this great test of democracy, three years after the "Crash of 29", there was an election. This was a time to renew the dream with a vote. Perhaps a last chance for that dream that is America.

His campaign theme song was “Happy Days Are Here Again”. On his first day in office, after he had just been sworn in, he said "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself". This was a man who could not walk without help from others, yet he chose to carry a whole nation on his back, to a new day of hope. Perhaps the secret of his greatness was he knew what it was like to depend on others, and how interconnected we all are. His name was Franklin D. Roosevelt, but in the hearts of this fellow Americans he was just FDR, and to many, savior of the “American Dream.

Some of the wealthy elite called him a Communist. Others said he was a Socialist. He called himself a Democrat, but he really was a Pragmatist. His ideology and program was to try something, if it does not work, try something else. He greatly increased the role of government in the economy. He had programs to provide jobs, and create a social safety net. His public works program built roads, schools, bridges, Dams and docks. He pushed for and got laws which would regulate the financial industry and banks. Laws were passed that helped workers to form Unions, thus ending the downward spiral of wages.

The economy did not zoom ahead, but people had more money in their pockets. They had a greater sense of security, and renewed hope about the future. Slowly but surely, the American Dream was once again revived. It took eight long years from the time FDR was elected, and finally the “Great Depression” was ended after a total of eleven years.

If you belong to a union, read this, make copies, and share it with your co-workers

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

The United States is in the middle of an election, but one thing that has not been talked about, is the fact that Mitt Romney is extremely anti-union. My father use to say that everything he and his family had was because of the union, and that is true for each one of us. We might be skilled individuals in our trade, but without our Union, the employers would pay us only what they wanted to. If there is any single issue that determines our vote in this election, it should be the candidates attitude towards organized labor.

Mitt Romney would be a disaster for Unions, if he were elected President. Below this letter, is a quote directly taken from Mitt Romney's website (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/labor) concertinaing his beliefs about Unions. If you or any member of your family has the slightest inclination to vote for Mitt Romney read that quote and think about what he is saying. Every worker has an enormous stake in this election whether they know it or not. Unlike a month ago, it looks very much like Romney may possibly win, especially if we sit on our hands and do nothing.

We must not forget the president appoints members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Supreme Court. Their decisions effect all unions, and indirectly each one of us. Your vote will help determine what kind of environment your Union faces when it tries to organize a new work place, or needs to take a job action to protect our working conditions.

Private sector unions went into a severe decline after President Reagan broke the PATCO strike, by the hiring of permanent replacement workers. The courts allowed this tactic to be used in the private sector, thereby greatly increasing the risk of going on strike. This effectively removed the strike from the employee's collection of weapons in the fight for decent wages and working conditions.

As unions declined, employers no longer worried about the employees joining a union, so they offered less in exchange for a workers labor. This is true for both unionized workers and even more so for non-unionized workers. That is the reason why wages have been stagnant for the last 35 years, while executives have seen their compensation rise by over 300%, and corporations are making record profits.

I have developed a web site which explains why I am voting for Obama. It is aimed primarily at Republicans and Republican leaning independents. But it can be used as a tool to reach a general audience of anyone who is undecided and not committed to President Obama. It is broken down into pages grouped around common subjects and issues.

Each page has social networking buttons (Facebook, Twitter, et cetera) including buttons for generating emails. These will do most of the work for you. They will automatically post the link to the page, the title of the page and a short description of the page. You can add your own introduction if you wish, and I would recommend you do so, since it adds the personal touch. Send your favorite page to at least five of your friends and acquaintances and ask them after they view the site, to use it to send it to five or more other people.

The Web Site is: http://CommonSenseFor.US

There is less then two weeks to the election. We must act now.
Thank You,

===================================================================
Quote below is from Mitt Romney's website (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/labor)
===================================================================
Today, the effects of unionization have changed in ways that need to be recognized. Too often, unions drive up costs and introduce rigidities that harm competitiveness and frustrate innovation.

The statistics tell an unkind story. Studies conducted by non-partisan scholars have shown that labor unions reduce investment and slow job growth. Right-to-Work states have added millions of jobs over the past decade while states with pro-union policies have shed nearly a million jobs. In a recent Gallup poll, a majority of Americans said that labor unions “mostly hurt” the American economy.

Yet as unionization becomes less and less popular—union membership in the private sector has declined from 36 percent in the 1950s to less than 7 percent today—Big Labor is fighting harder and harder to maintain its power. The question is: whose interests should come first, those of workers and businesses or those of organized labor?

OBAMA'S FAILURE
In the midst of an economic crisis, policies that strengthen the hand of labor unions at the expense of both businesses and workers are probably the last thing the country has needed. But President Obama, in political debt to labor leaders who have funneled union funds to the coffers of the Democratic Party and who are vital to his reelection bid, is willing and eager to press forward with Big Labor’s agenda.

He pursued “Card Check” legislation that would have stripped workers of the right to vote by secret ballot on whether to unionize. He issued an order requiring workers on stimulus projects to become union members. He appointed Big Labor cronies to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) where they have wreaked havoc on the law. Perhaps the best known example is the agency’s decision to bring charges against Boeing—the nation’s largest exporter—for opening a billion-dollar manufacturing facility and hiring over 1,000 new workers in a Right-to-Work state.

Far from contributing to economic recovery, the Obama administration’s highly politicized labor policies have instead dampened business investment and made the employment climate worse. Overall, it is a familiar story from the annals of American politics: favors were given and favors were repaid, and the American people lost out in the transaction.

MITT'S PLAN
As president, Mitt Romney’s first step in improving labor policy will be to ensure that our labor laws create a stable and level playing field on which businesses can operate. As they hire, businesses should not have to worry that a politicized federal agency will rewrite the rules of the employment game without warning and without regard for the law.

Appoint to the NLRB experienced individuals with respect for the rule of law.

Amend NLRA to explicitly protect the right of business owners to allocate their capital as they see fit.

Reverse executive orders issued by President Obama that tilt the playing field toward organized labor.

Support states in pursuing Right-to-Work laws.

As matters currently stand, unions can take money directly from the paychecks of American workers and spend it on politicking—each election cycle, unions spend hundreds of millions of dollars. In non-Right-to-Work states, employees have little choice but to watch their money go toward such expenditures, even if they do not support the union and its political agenda. The result is the creation of an enormously powerful interest group whose influence is disproportionate to its actual support and whose priorities are fundamentally misaligned with those of businesses and workers—and thus with the needs of the economy.

Prohibit the use for political purposes of funds automatically deducted from worker paychecks

The real bombshell

So Mitt Romney lied under oath in a divorce case, is not a bombshell. But hopefully it will refocus the MSM attention on the bombshell that was revealed months ago.

Mitt Romney would brag that he was a great businessman and should vote for him because of this; he could turn around the economy. Yet, it was shown his company (Bain) outsourced jobs to other countries, fired employees and drove companies into bankruptcy. Mitt Romney responded that he was not responsible for these things because they happened after he left the company in 1999. However, official SEC documents, which Mitt signed under penalty of perjury, indicate he was CEO of Bain until 2002.

If Mitt Romney left Bain in 1999 then why is Bain important? We must not forget a major contributing cause of the Financial Crisis of 2008 was the filing of false or misleading documents with the SEC. This is no small or trivial matter. Since 2009 the SEC has collected fines of over 3 Billion dollars for this violation from financial institutions such as, among others: “Goldman Sachs”, “Citigroup”, “Credit Suisse”, “J.P. Morgan”, and “UBS”. Mitt Romney said actually left all operational control of Bain Capital in 1999. This means he sanctioned and acquiesced to the filing of false and misleading documents with the SEC until 2002. This indicates a certain attitude towards these filings: The complete and truthful disclosure of all facts to the SEC is not important. This was an attitude all too prevalent in the financial community prior to 2009, and all of us paid the price.

Is full disclosure to the SEC one of the regulations Mitt Romney would do away with? What about other regulations overseeing the financial community; Wall Street and the banks too big to fail? If you put a fox in charge of the chicken coop, you have a problem for the chickens. Will Mitt Romney's election be the equivalent of that for the small investor? As a small investor, and businessman, is this a chance I want to take? I have been burnt once by a government that did not believe in regulation, and was asleep at the wheel.

"Bain" was first brought up by a candidate, who Mitt Romney mocked as wanting to colonize the moon, and the false filing received no mention in the media. Perjury is perjury. It was ethically and morally equal to saying "I never had sex with that woman", for which Bill Clinton was impeached. However this was much worse. This was related to an institution designed to protect investors, not sex. There can be no equivocation since the two official documents Mitt signed exactly contradict each other 100%. He can not flip-flop between these two documents. Either Mitt lied to the SEC, which is perjury, or he is bald-faced lying to us, we the people he wants to vote for him.

I just sent this to the membership of a very conservative union (a very successful old craft union)

The United States is in the middle of an election, but one thing that has not been talked about, is the fact that Mitt Romney is extremely anti-union. My father use to say that everything he and his family had was because of the union, and that is true for each one of us. We might be skilled individuals in our trade, but without our Union, the employers would pay us only what they wanted to. If there is any single issue that determines our vote in this election, it should be the candidates attitude towards organized labor.

Mitt Romney would be a disaster for Unions, if he were elected President. Below this letter, is a quote directly taken from Mitt Romney's website (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/labor) concertinaing his beliefs about Unions. If you or any member of your family has the slightest inclination to vote for Mitt Romney read that quote and think about what he is saying. Every worker has an enormous stake in this election whether they know it or not. Unlike a month ago, it looks very much like Romney may possibly win, especially if we sit on our hands and do nothing.

We must not forget the president appoints members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Supreme Court. Their decisions effect all unions, and indirectly each one of us. Your vote will help determine what kind of environment your Union faces when it tries to organize a new work place, or needs to take a job action to protect our working conditions.

Private sector unions went into a severe decline after President Reagan broke the PATCO strike, by the hiring of permanent replacement workers. The courts allowed this tactic to be used in the private sector, thereby greatly increasing the risk of going on strike. This effectively removed the strike from the employee's collection of weapons in the fight for decent wages and working conditions.

As unions declined, employers no longer worried about the employees joining a union, so they offered less in exchange for a workers labor. This is true for both unionized workers and even more so for non-unionized workers. That is the reason why wages have been stagnant for the last 35 years, while executives have seen their compensation rise by over 300%, and corporations are making record profits.

I have developed a web site which explains why I am voting for Obama. It is aimed primarily at Republicans and Republican leaning independents. But it can be used as a tool to reach a general audience of anyone who is undecided and not committed to President Obama. It is broken down into pages grouped around common subjects and issues.

Each page has social networking buttons (Facebook, Twitter, et cetera) including buttons for generating emails. These will do most of the work for you. They will automatically post the link to the page, the title of the page and a short description of the page. You can add your own introduction if you wish, and I would recommend you do so, since it adds the personal touch. Send your favorite page to at least five of your friends and acquaintances and ask them after they view the site, to use it to send it to five or more other people.

The Web Site is: http://CommonSenseFor.US

There is less then a month to the election. We must act now.

===================================================================
Quote below is from Mitt Romney's website (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/labor)
===================================================================
Today, the effects of unionization have changed in ways that need to be recognized. Too often, unions drive up costs and introduce rigidities that harm competitiveness and frustrate innovation.

The statistics tell an unkind story. Studies conducted by non-partisan scholars have shown that labor unions reduce investment and slow job growth. Right-to-Work states have added millions of jobs over the past decade while states with pro-union policies have shed nearly a million jobs. In a recent Gallup poll, a majority of Americans said that labor unions “mostly hurt” the American economy.

Yet as unionization becomes less and less popular—union membership in the private sector has declined from 36 percent in the 1950s to less than 7 percent today—Big Labor is fighting harder and harder to maintain its power. The question is: whose interests should come first, those of workers and businesses or those of organized labor?

OBAMA'S FAILURE
In the midst of an economic crisis, policies that strengthen the hand of labor unions at the expense of both businesses and workers are probably the last thing the country has needed. But President Obama, in political debt to labor leaders who have funneled union funds to the coffers of the Democratic Party and who are vital to his reelection bid, is willing and eager to press forward with Big Labor’s agenda.

He pursued “Card Check” legislation that would have stripped workers of the right to vote by secret ballot on whether to unionize. He issued an order requiring workers on stimulus projects to become union members. He appointed Big Labor cronies to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) where they have wreaked havoc on the law. Perhaps the best known example is the agency’s decision to bring charges against Boeing—the nation’s largest exporter—for opening a billion-dollar manufacturing facility and hiring over 1,000 new workers in a Right-to-Work state.

Far from contributing to economic recovery, the Obama administration’s highly politicized labor policies have instead dampened business investment and made the employment climate worse. Overall, it is a familiar story from the annals of American politics: favors were given and favors were repaid, and the American people lost out in the transaction.

MITT'S PLAN
As president, Mitt Romney’s first step in improving labor policy will be to ensure that our labor laws create a stable and level playing field on which businesses can operate. As they hire, businesses should not have to worry that a politicized federal agency will rewrite the rules of the employment game without warning and without regard for the law.

Appoint to the NLRB experienced individuals with respect for the rule of law.

Amend NLRA to explicitly protect the right of business owners to allocate their capital as they see fit.

Reverse executive orders issued by President Obama that tilt the playing field toward organized labor.

Support states in pursuing Right-to-Work laws.

As matters currently stand, unions can take money directly from the paychecks of American workers and spend it on politicking—each election cycle, unions spend hundreds of millions of dollars. In non-Right-to-Work states, employees have little choice but to watch their money go toward such expenditures, even if they do not support the union and its political agenda. The result is the creation of an enormously powerful interest group whose influence is disproportionate to its actual support and whose priorities are fundamentally misaligned with those of businesses and workers—and thus with the needs of the economy.

Prohibit the use for political purposes of funds automatically deducted from worker paychecks

Please send this to any fundamentalist Christians you may know

Please don't think I'm crazy but I have a serious question to ask you. You are more schooled in fundamentalist Christian doctrine than I am. I have never devoted much time studying the Book of Revelation. I believe you have. Recently, someone told me Mitt Romney is the Antichrist. The situation in the Middle East between Israel and Iran with the bomb has always been worrisome, and I just became aware of something called the "White Horse Prophecy" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Horse_Prophecy ) so that possibility now seems less crazy. If I am not mistaken, the Antichrist will be a great deceiver who has a pleasant facade, bur really does not care about people. Please look at the following videos and you will see what I mean.

Mitt Romney Is Assessed By His Fellow Republicans


Mitt Romney - Protector Of The American Middle Class Worker ?


Mitt Romney - In His Own Words


So Which Mitt Romney Would You Be Voting For?


Even before I became aware of the "White Horse Prophecy" I had read something on the website http://www.CommonSenseFor.US called an American Nightmare, and it follows:

I am a life-long Republican, but I fear a nightmare scenario if Mitt Romney is elected President. I believe it is a realistic scenario so I will not be voting for him.

First, a truism: Capitalism is driven by the simple supply and demand equation. If there is no demand, any supply of widgets will just sit and rot on store shelves. To the extent that widgets are rotting on store shelves, no more widgets will be ordered or produced. The Demand for things must always be there first. However, people can have a want or demand for widgets, but if people do not have money or credit to buy these widgets, in economic terms, there is no demand. Moreover, to the extent people are not able to afford and satisfy their wants or needs for these widgets because they have no money, they will be frustrated and perhaps even angry.

I assume Mitt Romney will implement the Ryan budget plan, as he said he would. It will cut taxes mostly for the "investor class" (aka the rich). At the same time it will shrink government spending by cutting programs that mostly benefit the poor, working and middle class families. Since money knows no nationality, and owes no loyalty but to itself, most of the tax cut the rich receive will be invested in emerging market countries, where it will get the greatest return. It might also be deposited in secret bank accounts in "offshore tax havens", or hidden away in gold. This is especially true in difficult economic times. This money will not move through the American economy, and by creating demand, help it grow. Unless there is demand first, no business will expand to produce items (widgets) that will just rot on store shelves.

Since Mitt Romney promised not to increase the deficit, to pay for the tax cut, the budgets would be slashed for programs across the board. These would include: crop insurance, disaster relief, road and bridge repair, unemployment insurance, “Pell Grants”, food stamps, job training, "Head Start", and so forth. Cuts in federal grants to state and local governments would mean the layoff of policemen, firemen, teachers, and all types of government workers. This means that requests to the local government, for the permits that any business needs, would now take longer to process.

In economic terms, all these things and people consume "goods and services," and produce a demand which will employ other people to meet this demand. Those people in turn create their own demand. In this way the whole economy is intertwined. With the Romney budget cutbacks, to the extent demand is now lessened, employers will also cut back. This will cause factories to close, and jobs will be lost, so the unemployment rate will rise. Instead of the slow but steady economic growth we presently have, the economy will once again begin to shrink. We will be in a "double dip" recession.

As the economy shrinks and people lose jobs, their ability to make their mortgage payments will decrease. Once again bank foreclosures on homes will increase. Families will lose their homes. They will be looking for help, but they will get none from Mitt Romney, since he believes "don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom." Perhaps in economic theory this would a solution to a financier, practical, like strapping a pet dog to the roof of a car during a 12 hour family road trip.

But we must always keep in mind that, the statistics we read about unemployment and foreclosures are not just numbers. They represent real men, women, and children who, maybe for the first time in their lives question: Will I eat tonight and where will I sleep? They are more afraid than they have ever been before in their lives. Without any help from the government, what will those families be forced to do in order to survive? Prostitute themselves, steal, become criminals in order to put a roof over their head and food on the table, for themselves and their children. Is this what Mitt Romney wants, because in some cases, this is what he will get.

But the nightmare continues. Mitt Romney has said, "I have indicated, day one, I will issue an executive order identifying China as a currency manipulator. We'll bring an action against them in front of the WTO (World Trade Organization) for manipulating their currency, and we will go after them." Sounds good until you read the warning that same WTO gives on their Website. "The short-sighted protectionist view is that defending particular sectors against imports is beneficial. But that view ignores how other countries are going to respond. The longer term reality is that one protectionist step by one country can easily lead to retaliation from other countries. (For example), the trade war of the 1930s when countries competed to raise trade barriers in order to protect domestic producers and retaliate against each others’ barriers. This worsened the Great Depression."

Will Mitt Romney's actions towards China ignite a fire he may not be able to control? Europe is already economically frail, since many countries are in a recession because they adopted budget cutbacks which are the equivalent of the Romney-Ryan budget. Austerity in those countries has only caused the financial condition of the people to worsen. It has caused political instability and rioting in the streets. At this point, the possible starting a trade war between the world's two largest economies would be an unwarranted risk. This would create the perfect economic storm. A trade war, when combined with Europe's fragile economy, and the downturn in the economy caused by the Romney budget, would result in another depression, not just a severe recession.

I will now assume those reading this are not aware of President Nixon's "ENEMIES LIST". This was a list which was used to harass ordinary American citizens who Nixon felt were his enemy. This was one of the reasons he was impeached in what is now known as the "Watergate" scandal. The official purpose was described by Nixon's White House Counsel, John Dean. It was "how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration; stated a bit more bluntly—how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies". I fear Richard Nixon and Mitt Romney are cut from the same cloth.

The only negative things we knew about Nixon before he was elected president were: he worked as an aide to Senator Joe McCarthy and he gave a hokey speech about his dog "Checkers". My fear about Mitt Romney may be baseless, for no man can see into another's man heart. But Mitt Romney's has many red flags about his character. His ruthless actions in the primaries. His offshore bank accounts and other indicators he is a tax avoider. His secrecy and attitude when questioned about his finances. The lack of compassion and empathy indicated by his teen-age bullying and tying his dog to the roof of his car for 12 hours. And his seeming lack of core values in an endless chase for political power. These all add up in a very troubling way.
While the preceding facets of my nightmare are based on facts, what follows is INFORMED SPECULATION. You will not understand the political part this nightmare unless you fully take into account the changes the Romney budget and his program will produce. Mitt says he wants to do away with "burdensome regulation" of the financial industry and slash "welfare" type programs. Most of these programs and regulations which Mitt wants to change date back to the "Great Depression" so it might be useful to first look at why they were put into place.
The "Great Depression" truly was a time of no hope for the future. Desperation ruled as the stock market crashed, and banks closed never to reopen their doors. In the time it takes the eye to blink, or the heart to beat, a lifetime of savings was wiped out. Businesses failed, jobs were lost, homes and farms were foreclosed, and dreams were swept away. For many years the unemployment rate was over 25%.

The old and disabled literally died in the street from starvation, too weak to wait for hours on breadlines at soup kitchens for a meal. World War One veterans, who had lost their homes, set up an encampment in Washington. They were calling for the bonus they had been promised after the war. But instead of being honored, they were brutally attacked and expelled by other soldiers. Hundreds of thousands homeless men, women, and children traveled from town to town, in open boxcars on the rails, and falling apart jalopies looking for work. Any job, at any wage, just to put a scrap of bread on the table and end the relentless hunger that consumed them. Fear and hopelessness lurked throughout the land.
The radio was filled with talk of revolution, and esteem for the Nazis who seemed to be solving their problems. Other politicians were talking endlessly about the need for fiscal responsibility, and a need to cut the budget. And in the middle of this time of crisis, this great test of the “American Dream” and democracy, three years after the "Crash of 29", there was an election. This was a time to renew the dream with a vote. Perhaps a last chance for that dream that is America.

His campaign theme song was “Happy Days Are Here Again”. On his first day in office, after he had just been sworn in, he said "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself". This was a man who could not walk without help from others, yet he chose to carry a whole nation on his back, to a new day of hope. Perhaps the secret of his greatness was he knew what it was like to depend on others, and how interconnected we all are. His name was Franklin D. Roosevelt, but in the hearts of this fellow Americans he was just FDR, and to many, savior of the “American Dream.
Some of the wealthy elite called him a Communist. Others said he was a Socialist. He called himself a Democrat, but he really was a Pragmatist. His ideology and program was to try something, if it does not work, try something else. He greatly increased the role of government in the economy. He had programs to provide jobs, and create a social safety net. His public works program built roads, schools, bridges, Dams and docks. He pushed for and got laws which would regulate the financial industry and banks. Laws were passed that helped workers to form Unions, thus ending the downward spiral of wages. The economy did not zoom ahead, but people had more money in their pockets. They had a greater sense of security, and renewed hope about the future. Slowly but surely, the American Dream was once again revived. It took eight long years from the time FDR was elected, and finally the “Great Depression” was ended after a total of eleven years.

The Romney budget and program take the exact opposite approach from FDR to addressing the economic downturn. It will have increased economic inequality, in that, it gave significant tax cuts to the rich while cutting benefits such as unemployment insurance, student financial aid, food stamps, "Head Start", school nutrition programs, "aid to dependent children" etc, mostly used by the poor. It will tear the heart out of the "social safety net" FDR constructed. The common perception will be the government adopted programs that made the rich, richer; and the poor, poorer. This will revive and reinvigorate the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, perhaps to the extent where the frequency and size of its demonstrations will match those against the war in Vietnam.

Romney's policies will be seen as causing the economic downturn. This will be unlike Obama who was seen as inheriting the bad economy from the Bush administration. Therefore the demonstrators will be angrier then they were in the first wave of the "Occupy Wall Street" movement. Some of the demonstrations may deteriorate into riots and civil disorder, as they have done in London, Greece, and Spain. These will only be splinter groups but media reports will focus on them. America has not seen mass violent demonstrations and riots in many years. Yet, they have occurred, for example, the riots and burning of cities like Detroit and Watts.

President Obama was "hands off" regarding the first wave of "Occupy Wall Street" movement. He also appeased them by using a more populist tone in his speeches. But Mitt Romney will not do that. He will be pressured by his "hard right" supporters, into declaring the "Occupy Wall Street" demonstrators are terrorist because of the riots. He can then evoke the "Patriot Act." We must bear in mind, many of the illegal actions in regards to the anti-war movement for which Nixon was impeached, would today be perfectly legal under the "Patriot Act."
The "Occupy Wall Street" encampments would then be swept clear and destroyed by soldiers, like what happened under President Hoover, to the encampment of the "Bonus Marchers" in 1932. At that time, soldiers with fixed bayonets and hurling tear gas destroyed an encampment of 10,000 people. In this raid, two babies died and nearby hospitals were flooded with casualties.

America would be bitterly divided, this would reach an extreme degree if any demonstrators were killed by soldiers, as they were at "Kent State" during an anti-Vietnam War protest. Some violent radical groups may form, similar to the "Weathermen" during the Vietnam War, with their slogan "The Elections Don't Mean Sh^t—Vote Where the Power Is—Our Power Is In The Street." It should be remembered that although the vast majority of anti-war protests were peaceful, some radical groups were bombing buildings, burning down ROTC armories, and robbing banks.

At this time, we would have as president, a man who is closely tied to Wall Street. A man who was ruthless in the way he handled his business (Bain) and political campaigns. A man who has no problem being deceptive, to either us or the SEC as to when he left Bain. A man who for many years did not disclose a Swiss bank account on government financial disclosure forms. A man who is completely opaque and secretive in whatever he does. In sum, a man whose attitudes and aloofness more closely resembles that of an aristocrat, a king, rather than those of a "man of the people". With this combination no one could know what would happen next. How will Mitt Romney, a man whose authority has never been challenged, react to this challenge?

The election of Mitt Romney, and the enactment of his budget, may very well lead to civil unrest and rioting in the streets. People will revolt against the hardships imposed by perceived unfairness of the budget and rising inequality. This will lead to cries for "law and order" and a completely polarized society. We may very well end up having the every day activity of ordinary Americans subject to surveillance. Now, either the genius of our democracy kicks in, cuts in the budget are rolled back and compromises are reached, or we travel down a much darker road. A road I hesitate even to think about, but one that I must admit possibly exists, no matter how unlikely I hope it is.

Martin Luther King, Jr. said "We must never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal." Hitler in a time of political unrest and economic distress, was elected to office in a democratic process. He then claimed he needed additional power, in order to achieve “law and order”, and so he became a dictator. We say it could never happen here, but as the little known "plot against FDR" shows, it is not unthinkable.

The plot against FDR was an alleged political conspiracy in 1933. Retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler claimed that wealthy businessmen were plotting to create a fascist veterans' organization. They would use it in a coup d'état to overthrow President Roosevelt. Butler was to be the leader of that organization. In 1934, Butler testified to the “Special Congressional Committee on Un-American Activities” on these claims. In the opinion of the committee, these allegations were credible. When the committee's final report was released, it said the committee's "two-month investigation had convinced it that General Butler's story of a fascist march on Washington was alarmingly true."

Thus my nightmare ends.

You may think I'm paranoid, and I can only hope you're right. However, many economist believe that if Romney does what he says he wants to, in regards to the budget and China, the economic portion of my nightmare will become a reality. As far as the political portion of my nightmare, the very fact that I can make a coherent, cogent and credible scenario, is scary enough to keep me up at night. It should do the same to you.
I read this before I found out about the "White Horse Prophecy" and now this nightmare has become much, much darker.

Go to Page: 1 2 Next »