Franklin Roosevelt and Evo Morales


communistcrossMORALES LOSES ELECTION! spin the headlines, but where’s his replacement? What other candidate did the people prefer? The answer is… nobody.

Evo Morales is as safe in Bolivia as Mayor Cermak was in Chicago when Corn Products Refining provided glucose for all the beer and moonshine for hundreds of miles in every direction. Already the CIA, FATF, AML, TF, CFT, DNFBP, IRS-CID, INL, ICRG, GIABA, GAFISUD, FSRB, FIU, FinCEN, EAG and other altruistic concerns have been sent by “our” government to dislodge Evo, just as it went after Mayor Big Bill Thompson of Chicago. But the Bolivians have a sovereign government of their own, which expelled the US envoy for espionage.

Don’t be shocked. The looter octopus that has gained complete control over all three branches of what is now Amerika packs its diplomatic service with agents of coercion and espionage. That same woman, with the help of the above Acronyms-With-Guns, got the president of Paraguay impeached and increased homicide rates in the Caribbean by 800% before moving on to Brazil. There, the politician twice preferred by voters as the lesser of two looters was promptly faced with loose talk of impeachment. Morales, thrice-chosen by his countrymen over prohibitionist hypocrites, has reason to worry for the future of his country. President-elect Roosevelt was himself worried about his country as Mayor Cermak of Chicago was fatally shot by an assassin while riding next to him in a parade–less than a month before inauguration day. THAT scared the jejeezes out of Congress!

What Morales did was ask Congress for a constitutional amendment to allow him to run for a fourth term, just as Franklin Roosevelt would have done, and gotten, had his health not intervened. Why was Morales refused a possible fourth term?

Part of the reason is doubtless ideological. Under the Monroe Doctrine, South America is more independent than Puerto Rico, but completely unaware that there of any alternative to Soviet-style communism or American-style nationalsocialism. Morales rejected the alien régime of christian fascist prohibitionism, which is precisely why Bolivia’s voters elected him three times in a row. Franklin Roosevelt did precisely the same thing. Roosevelt promised to legalize beer, excuse me, “beeah,” a month before the 1932 election. The entire USA had been a religious police state since the night of January sixteenth, 1920. Politicians, police, judges and gangsters were everywhere murdering, bribing, betraying and conspiring with one another–exactly as in These States today–and for the exact same reason. The Political State, at the urging of religious fanatics, then sought and now seeks to dictate to men and women what they must and mustn’t eat, drink and smoke exactly the way it is done in Mohammedan countries. By saying no to such fanatical totalitarianism, Morales and FDR both earned the grateful thanks of the population they were elected to protect from threats both foreign and domestic.

The difference was that in Roosevelt’s time, the Liberal Party of America in its 1930 platform demanded the overthrow of Methodist White Terror and Ku-Klux Sharia law and pledged itself to the protection of individual rights against teetotalitarian prohibitionism. Roosevelt’s Democratic Party had no choice but to add its own prohibition plank lest its own politicians’ hands be slapped away from the till. In Bolivia there is nothing resembling a Libertarian Party. Voters there have been taught there are two systems: Christian National Socialism and Soviet Communism, and have decided that communism is less obnoxious than nationalsocialist prohibitionism–exactly the same choice made by American voters  before and after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.  Bolivia is the same as it was in 1910, when William Jennings Bryan ordered them to send men with guns to force them to eat, drink and smoke what His jealous god intended–and nobody understood a word that he said. The US Government, on the other hand, listened, understood, and pointed loaded guns at its own countrymen, and at the rest of the world for good measure.

So why did 51.3% of Bolivia’s Congress turn down Morales’ request for a constitutional Amendment to allow a fourth term? Probably because they do not want him assassinated by a disturbed lone gunman working alone with no support from a fanatical nationalsocialist foreign government.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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