//
you're reading...
Opinion, poem of a sort, semi-angry rant

The Ballad of What the Right-Wing Neocon Plutocrats Want – Really.

The Plutocrat

The Plutocrat (Photo credit: Limbic)

Best believe the far right majority

Ain’t concerned with women, gays, or minorities

Shit is all subterfuge

All they want is a stooge

To help loot us – their A1 priority

 

And part of the plan of these stoats

Is to keep us at each other’s throats

While weaseling more

Of what they’re living for

Money – huge piles of bank notes

 

Their sole concern is the amount

In each of their off-shore accounts

This land is their bank

If the ship of state sank

They’d save the money and let children drown

 

Their sole interest is interest earned

As far as the “issues” are concerned

They use them as wedge

To keep people on edge

While they keep a close eye on returns

 

“Issues” are just tools they use

To obfuscate and to confuse

And of course they’re just fine

With our lives on the line

‘Cause their wars bring in big revenues

 

To that end of course they don’t care

That healthcare and jobs aren’t there

That schools have to close

Better that money goes

To making one more billionaire

 

And the idea they “care” is so quaint

When pretending they do – it’s a feint

The goal of this “club”

Is privatizing what’s pub-

Lic, without any governmental restraint

 

If we keep being distracted we’re stuck

We must fight for a ban on big bucks

In elections or we

Will forever be

Controlled by these plutocrat fucks

 

 

 

 

 

© tony powers and Barking in the Dark, 2012. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to tony powers and Barking in the Dark with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

 

Advertisements

About barkinginthedark

Tony Powers is a writer/actor/musician. His full bio may be seen by clicking on the picture, and then clicking on either of the 2 boxes below it.

Discussion

36 thoughts on “The Ballad of What the Right-Wing Neocon Plutocrats Want – Really.

  1. These should be required reading in current political science classes.

    Like

    Posted by lorrelee1970 | February 29, 2012, 4:32 pm
  2. Tom, you write; “If some object, they can move to another area that has private schools, private healthcare, limited tort, etc …” there, in that one phrase is what i find reprehensible in this pastiche philosophy…yeah sure, people who can’t even afford to buy groceries are just gonna “move to some area that has private schools” no less…and “private healthcare” …not only do you assume they can afford to move, but i am sure they will also be able to afford those other things yes? and what if their own communities don’t want them to have either? does that make it right? your arguments are not well thought out. since you say you are a Christian may i remind you of Jesus’ mission statement re the poor and disadvantaged as laid out in Matthew 19:16-30, Luke 18:18-30, and Mark 10:17-31. and i repeat – what if their “own community” doesn’t care to afford them an education, or healthcare, what’s wrong then with the federal gov’t supplying same? please don’t give me the “slippery slope to socialism” argument. we already have socialism for the rich. Tom, i find i can no longer continue this pointless “debate”…just the very word and the notion “private” in this context disgusts me. enjoy Ron Paul…that’s it – i’m out. so long and thanks for all the fish.

    Like

    Posted by barkinginthedark | February 24, 2012, 10:45 pm
  3. We have a new topic of debate here in the UK. Cameron is talking about the need for “compassionate capitalism” . Look out…………coming to a debate near you soon.
    Great post, Tony.

    Like

    Posted by Single Malt Monkey | February 23, 2012, 10:32 pm
  4. This one points out some of the facts I just tried to make in the comment section of your post from yesterday. You did it better than I did. I’m glad you’re here, Tony, to keep driving home the points.

    Like

    Posted by Sparks In Shadow | February 23, 2012, 5:09 am
  5. Until we can get the Kochs and the other billionaires who are to run this country, like its their own factories, it will only get worse. Plus we do have to get the money out of politics, and put a noose around the lobbyists…

    Like

    Posted by Don in Massachusetts | February 22, 2012, 11:37 pm
  6. It’s the money. Until it’s dealt with, nothing really changes. It’s corrupting influence is being highlighted by the Citizens United decision and the resulting superpacs. I hope that our fellow Americans on both sides wake up to this fact and fight the money in the system. Giving up on the process serves no one.

    Like

    Posted by lisahgolden | February 22, 2012, 8:58 pm
  7. Excellent… love it! You do have a wonderful way with words, Tony!

    Like

    Posted by Rose | February 22, 2012, 6:02 pm
  8. With all due respect, these stereotypes are just as common as the stereotypes on the other side. The gov’t is filled with bad people and nodody gets to the white house without “skeletons”. I know lots of Republicans and very few of them are like this. I don’t respect them either but the majority of conservatives are not like this. There are thoughtful, just like me, but might not be as passionate.

    Of Americans, 20% are extreme Republican, 20% are extreme Democrat. This extreme group will never open their mind to the other side. Most of the things you write about concern 20% – probably even less.

    Of Americans, 40% are conservative, 40% are liberal, 20% are in the middle. Those 20% decide most elections. My mother-in-law is a registered independent living in a swing state. She has considered affiliating just to stop the solicitations in election years. She gets absolutely hammered but she decides elections and both parties know it.

    Gov’t, on both sides, attracts the worst of the worst. The rhetoric of Obama, Bush 43, Clinton, Bush 41, etc migh be very different but the results are similar. Since WW2, we have had more time under Democrat rule than Republican rule (legislatively) and we have had periods where each party has had majority control of the executive and legislative branch at the same time, yet we have a mess and our problems have gotten worse. Why? Those that “serve” are concerned with gaining power and their legacy much more than anyone they mention in any speech. They don’t even write what they say. Obama and Romney are both frauds. They will literally say anything they think will help them get elected. They will change any view on any issue to appease their voters.

    Gov’t has failed us, plain and simple. There are plenty of lesbian, black women who have figured that out and don’t cast votes in favor of more expirements by the government. That does not make them dumb. Nobody likes to be judged and looked down upon but many are willing to judge others for dissenting from big governement.

    Like

    Posted by Tom | February 22, 2012, 3:44 pm
    • Tom, with respect – my piece is specific to the “far right” “plutocrats”, and “neo-conservatives.” if that’s you well… and, the republican administrations since ww2 are the ones who have historically transferred the wealth from middle class to upper class i.e. themselves.) if you cannot recognize the fact that the republican party has been highjacked by a far-right lunatic fringe bankrolled by the ultra-conservative Koch Bros., Harold Simmons, et al, and a whole list of neo-conservative billionaires, then nothing you can vent here holds water. again, you do not make the CRITICAL distinction between Government and the ADMINISTRATION of same…but rather, you choose to throw the baby out with the bathwater. it seems, to your way of thinking, that the administration of our government by Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush and Dick Cheney was the same as the administration of government by FDR, DDE, JFK, LBJ, and Bill Clinton. i’m afraid the facts do not bear that out. i will repeat, in the absence of a third or even fourth party there is no question as to which of the extremists of the two parties has ,and will continue, to loot the middle class as they privatize all they can – and all for profit at our expense. i leave it to you to figure out which extremists of which party that is. believe me – i do know it’s not you. as usual, i appreciate your comment, as it always speaks for itself. continue…

      Like

      Posted by barkinginthedark | February 23, 2012, 12:53 am
      • Tony, I’m glad you made the point about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I was just struck by that thought, too. It’s such a sad thing to do.

        Like

        Posted by Sparks In Shadow | February 23, 2012, 5:17 am
      • other than JFK, they were all bad, but I was referring to congress post ww2. Congress does the spending including the social security trust fund. what i said about the executives was that the results are mostly similar and influenced by things out of their control. I don’t mean they are exact, but more similar than different. They will all say what you want to hear on your side and the opposite on the other side.

        Ronald Reagan would have been ok had it not been for his 180 after the attempt on his life. He was good and bad like Clinton. Nixon closed the gold window, LBJ ruined our national net worth. The Bushes are evil. Obama is like LBJ. those 5 are probably the worst.

        The far left have just as extreme a vision. I am a fiscal conservative and social liberal when it comes to my view of what gov’t should be. I am NOT a modern republican if that is what the GOP is. I am libertarian. A lib does not have a problem if you go to church, a seance or an orgy. A conservative will go his way and not care which way you go as long as you don’t tell him his way is wrong. That is what the founding fathers had in mind. Jefferson especially. I think you are ok with that. our difference is really on money and how it should be spent. I am fine if you want to smoke pot, and i might even buy it for you but i don’t want the gov’t telling me i must buy it for you. you can substitute a lot for pot and you can substitute just about anyone for you.

        Like

        Posted by Tom | February 23, 2012, 5:05 pm
    • ok. thanks for the comment. continue…

      Like

      Posted by barkinginthedark | February 23, 2012, 11:58 pm
    • Tom, i’m just gonna cut to the chase here. i think libertarianism is a shortsighted, dangerous philosophy, bordering on fascism, and i agree with the following in-depth thesis on libertarianism: http://www.zompist.com/libertos.html
      sorry.

      Like

      Posted by barkinginthedark | February 24, 2012, 12:41 am
      • No need to be sorry. What we have now is a battle between corporate oligarchy and socialism. I am a fan of neither. We are never going to eliminate gov’t. A vote for Ron Paul or the Libertarian party will go a long way to weakening the present system which is taking us straight to the cliff.

        For what it’s worth, I agree with a lot of what I read in the link. What I consider Libertarian is limited gov’t not anarchy. As you know, I have always been inspired by Thomas Jefferson. I think he would have a major problem with both parties today. His problem with Republicans is the same as mine. Although I am Catholic, I don’t believe the religious right should have a place in the Republican party. I am against most war (if not all). I don’t like the corporate environment. I hate the Federal Reserve banking system. Ron Paul is there as well.

        I believe gov’t should be flipped upside down. If I am going to be forced to give 1/3 of my earning to tax, I would prefer the largest to go local, followed by state and the smallest going to the Federal gov’t. That would force power to be decentralized. Communites that were mislead we suffer while properly managed communnuites would thrive. People could move and force other communities to get it right. Competition is healthy but you can’t really move to England or Canada (most will not) if you are unhappy with our present gov’t.

        The federal gov’t would be in a postion to defend its boarders, provide infrastructure, have international relations, etc. They could not spread huge social programs across the country or spread our military all over the world. Why do guys in Washington think they have the best solutions for communities in Kansas and Souther Ca? Those are very different places with very different people and different issues. The best people to solve those problems are in that community. If you want social programs and healthcare for everyone in your community, you got it. If some object, they can move to another area that has private schools, private healthcare, limited tort, etc and visa versa and in between. That is freedom. Smaller gov’t is less likely to be corrupted especially if its funding has the ability to opt out by moving.

        Banks should have to observe state lines. Federal and state gov’t could limit growth of corporations force competion, etc. It would be easy to break up some of the giants. It would take more balls than brains.

        Like

        Posted by Tom | February 24, 2012, 4:35 pm
  9. Bravo, Tony! Once again, the maestro of political satire and poetic grace tells us like it is. And your closing refrain sums this up so perfectly:

    “If we keep being distracted we’re stuck
    We must fight for a ban on big bucks
    In elections or we
    Will forever be
    Controlled by these plutocrat fucks”

    Thank you once again, Tony, for another very powerful writing overflowing with genius.

    Internet high five! (slap hand here. But not too hard… don’t want to damage your monitor)

    Like

    Posted by She speaks.... | February 22, 2012, 2:43 pm
  10. Amen! This is the crux of the matter. There will always be fat cats trying to buy influence, but without real campaign finance reform with real teeth in it, we (the people) have no chance to get anything else we want and need. It personally really hit home with me in the late 80s and early 90s, as I saw all manufacturing go overseas and the stores filled up with goods Made in China (or Singapore or Sri Lanka or you-get-the-idea). A particular woman’s clothing store on Fifth Avenue in NYC flew American flags in their show windows during the first Iraq war. When I commented that their windows made them look more like a military barracks than a woman’s clothing store, I was told that the owner was pro-American and patriotic–to which I replied, Then why can’t I find one article of clothing hanging on your racks that says it was MADE IN AMERICA? To which the manager actually conceded, You have a point there.

    Like

    Posted by Carole Monferdini | February 22, 2012, 1:38 pm
  11. Anything with ‘obfuscate’ is brilliant.

    Like

    Posted by Frugalistablog | February 22, 2012, 5:56 am

Thank you for reading, I appreciate your time. Kindly Leave a Comment...I Place a High Value on All the Comments of My Readers. Thank you.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: