Bush verses Kerry

 October 18, 2004

 

In the course of human existence it is significant to note that some attributes of humankind have not changed since the beginning of recorded history.  One particular aspect to note is the affinity to take the path of least resistance.  In fact it is as if we have cognitively emulated the fundamental pathways of nature without knowing it.

 

Ask any present day Europeans their opinion of the presidential elections in the United States and you will hear much the same from one to another.  However, should you ask them the root of their opinions they falter.  They cannot identify the source.  In fact the source is elusive to them because they have adopted the sense of others who in turn did the same.  Where did it start?

 

The answer is simple.  People hear the facts of a given issue but remember only what they want to interpret from the facts.  They then tell others who in turn simply repeat what they hear, if it sounds good, as if it were their own words.  Another issue at play is the source of the facts.  Are they facts or was bias and fabrication introduced?  Is it possible to separate the facts from the lies and then think logically and correctly about an issue?

 

The many feel comfortable repeating the sense of others.  If it sounds good it must be good.  If it feels good it must be good and if everyone around is accepting of it, most assuredly it has to be good, especially if you want to fit in.

 

For the not so average persons who dare to not take the path of least resistance the path can be perilous.  These people are generally not well received by the many.  They are usually ridiculed and accused of being malcontent.  Some truth exists in malcontent for how could an enlightened mind be content surrounded by and inundated with mediocrity.

 

And so humanity has gone for several thousand years.  If only we had bettered our minds as we have our technology we would not have the growing disparities seen today.  The most significant disparity of which I speak is that of intellect and knowledge.

 

It is a shame that the many cannot see how the clever few are really controlling their thoughts and existence.  They think that, for example, they live in a free society and are free to choose their own destiny based on their own choices.  They believe that they have free speech which they can use to persuade those around for a perceived good.  However they see so little for how is it that their own little ways do not change a thing.  They should look to the clever few to understand how to make change.  An ocean cannot be steered as you would a horse.

 

At one time, to some, an accurate perception of such unethical control was perceived and they endeavored to use the techniques of the clever few.  In a noble act of rebellion they persuaded the many to clean house.  In one case the house was cleaned and then designed to have a self cleaning mechanism and in another the cleaning mutated into “The Terror”.  The many savaged the few and even went on to savage themselves and in the end what was left was a country of savages. 

 

Today it is no wonder that in France we have a government made up of a majority of corrupt individuals.  A poor foundation always gives rise to a defective house.  And in the United States the self clean mechanism is failing not because of a poor foundation but because of the constant onslaught of the elements, the most significant element being evilness.

 

Some questions may be asked.  Is it evilness that leads people to take a path of least resistance or are we simply acting as a product of our biological selves?  Is evilness an entity of itself or is our biological self inherently evil?  In any case the easy path is responsible for the impediment of intellectual, moral, ethical, and social progress.

 

In an effort to countermand repetitious rhetoric I shall endeavor to speak about the presidential election in the United States.

 

It is not difficult to understand that a person of the nature of John Kerry, a liar, traitor and heathen, would be detrimental to the economic and moral health of the United States.  It is only a matter of connecting facts and applying correct thinking.  However it takes a little more understanding to see that the overall health of the United States is important to Europe and thus to France.  If your partner and mentor is of high moral integrity and financially sound you cannot help but be positively affected.

 

On the other hand, and not to be contrite, it is a little more difficult to understand how George Bush also is not right for the United States.  He publicly stated he did not care what the majority of his countryman wanted and he would do what he decided was best for them.  Indeed George Bush is motivated for what is best for him and his cronies but doing a bad job of fooling his countryman that this is not the case. 

 

For many Europeans this issue is obscure and insignificant, dwarfed by the media steering us in other directions.  However to the American people it is a very significant issue.  Many Americans cherish the words of their constitution, “by the people, of the people, and for the people” and many Americans sacrificed their lives to keep America for the people.  When an American president shows so little regard for the desires of the people of his nation he is no president.

 

The issue of which candidate would be best for the interests of Europe has been distorted by European media and politicians.  They have twisted the nature of the Iraq war by feeding their countrymen with lies and exaggerations for their own benefits without consideration for the well being of their people.  Indeed the more their own corruption came to light the more they accused others and pointed their fingers west, a typical mode of operating for such criminals.

 

So, who is the best candidate for president of the United States?  Perhaps one should ask which one will soonest bring the need for the people of the United States to purge themselves of their corrupt politicians.  It is relatively obvious that Kerry would be a worthless president.  His lies and deceit automatically disqualify him.  Bush on the other hand engages in the same but has proven to go a step further by putting his wishes above those of his people.  To really understand which one would bring the time of change the soonest one needs to look more deeply.  Who would be best at helping further destroy what made America good and great?  America was good and great because they had a foundation built on Christian morals and integrity therefore Kerry would be the best choice to speed up the time for change.  He represents a political party who basic tenets are anti-Christian and therefore anti-American.

 

The Editor

La Chronique d’Angers