Read that a president of a Super PAC, being concerned with the direction of
the Country, was going to attack Obama. Isn't that an oxymoron? How can
a "Super" PAC be concerned with the direction of the Country? Wouldn't a
Super PAC just be a plain PAC, if it was concerned with the Country, i.e. not
concerned with preserving its own status as "Super"? Oh well, thats language.
Language can be a powerful tool in a political campaign. But, so can money.
The words "millions" and "billions" are being tossed around as if it was money
that was running for office. Corporations that make billions are now expressing
their choices for political office. Kinda oxymoronish. I guess we are creating a
value system where to have the highest regard or patriotism for your Country is
expressed in the money spent to get to public office. If money equates to
patriotism, or political office maybe the moneyed should be the first ones to
fight in wars, not the poor. This kind of linguistic manuevering can be 'balanced'
out by a triadic form of government. The Top can execute the laws, the bottom
can legislate new laws and the Judicial can modulate the Constitutional relation
between the abstract Top and the concrete bottom to create a well balanced
Country. Of course, this presupposses that each part of the triad does its part. If
not, the only solution is revolution.