Obama/Biden or Romney/Ryan, Does it Really matter?

Become a Fan (12 fans) -- Page 1 of 1 page(s)

opednews.com

AP photo

Does it really matter that Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan to run as his #2 in November?

Traditionally, we Americans have been made to believe the choice for a
vice presidential candidate was a big deal i.e. somebody to compliment
the presidential nominee and garner additional votes, hopefully capture
his state and others in the election and be a credible president if
something dire happens to the president.

Back when the two main party's national conventions meant something
and the eventual presidential nominee wasn't pre-ordained by the
primaries, the nominee for vice president was often a rival in those
primaries and chosen as a concession for his committed delegates to
coalesce around and agree to support his opponent. Lyndon Johnson comes
to mind in the Democrat's convention in 1960 when Kennedy chose Johnson
as his running mate. Now the national conventions are nothing more than
balloon dropping extravagances, meaningless afterthoughts of political
puffery. The presidential candidate has long been decided in the party's
primaries to vie against a sitting president, the other major party's
unchallenged opponent.

Though the Republican Vice Presidential choice of Sarah Palin in 2008
caused a stir with questions about her competence to be president
should a mid 70's John McCain become incapacitated, the harsh reality
is, the presidential candidates and their running mates from either of
the two main parties doesn't really matter who sits in the Oval Office.
That's because the ultimate policy choices of endless war, unnecessary
defense spending, the dominance of the big corporate and special
interests influence over the electoral process and the political agenda
in favor of those interests does NOT change regardless of which major
party's candidates is elected.

Though Barack Obama was and is brighter and more eloquent than cowboy
George W. Bush, the ultimate policy decisions of the two men differ
slightly and in some cases have become worse.

Cases in point:

Drone warfare and missile strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia have
grown substantially under Obama and what Bush initiated, getting secret
Justice Department memos written giving "legal" cover for anything the
president does but kept secret for reasons of national security (and
therefore unchallenged), has become more pronounced since Obama came to
power.

Tax cuts for the rich remain in place. Unemployment, foreclosures,
student loan debt remain unacceptably high, while the big banks that
needed to be broken up remain too big to fail. Meanwhile the financial
industry skullduggery that became so pronounced during the Bush years
has not been reined in with tough regulations under Obama which can only
mean a new financial meltdown and severe economic dislocation will
surely be in the offing in the not too distant future.

So the "illusion" is we "choose" candidates from the other major
party when we believe the current office holders of the other major
party fails. But it's a ruse, a con job as so clearly evident by Mr.
"change you can believe in" Obama pretty much a facsimile in policy
execution as that of his predecessor.

That's the harsh reality; Obama/Biden or Romney/Ryan. It doesn't really matter.