Who Wins?

With all of the media coverage of the 4th rate candidate Willard “Mitt” Romney as the favorite son of the Republican Party for 2012, it begs the question as to why that is so. After all, he finished behind eventual winner John McCain AND Mike Huckabee in 2008. So how can Americans support him now?

In a previous post titled, “Obama Issues Kill Order on Ron Paul” it would seem apparent that the Obama team is not concerned about Mitt Romney at all... in any way. Why not?

The answer may be as simple as this:  They are so much alike that people would rather keep what they have than take a chance on another with the same ideologies. Now most people who listen to him will disagree with that assessment, although their opinions generally are based on what they get from the privately-owned major media. Romney admits that he "just had to" bend to the left because while Governor, he felt pressured when dealing with a Democratic majority in the State Assembly. But now he wants all of us to trust that he will be a conservative President regardless of pressures, as if the president is under much less pressure than the Governor of the state of Massachusetts. While most of the media still supports and praises Barack Obama, Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News spins the “party backed conservatives” as somehow being conservative and so it has adopted Romney and Santorum as their favorite sons.

Rick Santorum has made some remarks recently that demonstrates he is unfit for service to this country. His lack of concern for the needed characteristics of a President is evident. He told a questioner that, “If you want a conservative President then vote for Ron Paul.” and then recently, he lashed out at a NY Times journalist saying, “That's bullsh!t!” which of course made the network news. What the privately-owned major media did not report on was Santorum's lack of concern over his decisions and actions that cost American Veterans, here at home, to loose their lives. Santorum also has admitted that he voted for bailouts and supported unprovoked undeclared unilateral warfare, military actions, even though it was not approved by Congress until after the fact. Santorum stated that he “is a team player” and that is why he voted with the party. He also voted in favor of the unions and again used the excuse that it was good for his Pennsylvania supporters. What he didn't say was which supporters he was referring to. It is evident that it was the unions and not the workers. Maybe what is really  needed in American politics is someone who is not a team player, after all it has been the team players that have caused most of the problems in America.

Newt Gingrich, the self professed socialist, is quick witted with words of the moment and has lots of his own ideas about how to fix America, but he lacks integrity as his past shows. Infidelity in marriage and questionable ethics while Speaker of the House. Not that either of the other two aforementioned candidates have shown much more integrity or honesty in public service.

 Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich all truly believe, just as the Bush's did and Obama does, that unprovoked undeclared unilateral warfare is smart and right, that casualties of war are to be expected and by implication there are no innocent bystanders. Tell that to the more than one million dead Iraqi children. Tell that to a people, a culture, a world heritage, a country that lays destroyed. And now they are pounding the war drums with intentions of doing the same thing to Iran. Is it any wonder that America is the most feared and hated country on the surface of the Earth?

Now we come to why Ron Paul is silenced by party backed conservatives. Simply put, because he can and will dismantle much of the unconstitutional bureaucracy in government and return many of the decisions to the States where they belong. The left has ignored Dr. Paul by either saying he is unelectable or by saying he is too radical. His 35 year record of being elected speaks differently in volumes and to the ever more socialist left, radical means anyone that is a conservative. The privately-owned major media is under executive order not to mention or to make negative mention of Dr. Paul.  Dr. Ron Paul can easily win the RNC nomination and presidency in November, if RNC will stop rigging the vote all across the country and if Citizens will listen to facts and not the hyperbole being spewed out by the privately-owned major media.

He has pledged to cut spending by $1 Trillion in his first year and have a balanced budget by his third year. He vows to eliminate 5 cabinet departments, abolish the TSA and corporate subsidies. He will stop foreign aid and foreign wars. As he has stated many times, as President, he will seek the approval of Congress before committing troops to combat and will consult with the military leadership to create a strategy to decisively win a war if we become involved in one. He will bring home the troops from the Middle East rather than have them moved from Iraq to occupy a nearby foreign country.

Because of Dr. Paul's policy against the U.S. policing the world militarily, his detractors say he will destroy our military defenses by not being the lap dog for United Nations and NATO Globalist policies, and turn us into an isolationist nation. Obviously they either did not listen to him or they are just spinning it to suit their own agendas. Ron Paul will reinforce the national defenses and start by securing our borders. Standing armies are prohibited by the Constitution so there would be fewer troops required in times of peace.

The problem has been that we have not had times of peace at all since World War II. Besides Korea in the 1950's and Vietnam in the 1960's we were also in a 'cold war' with the Soviet Union until its demise in the 1980's, but by then we had established military bases around the globe, “protecting America” from foreign invasion. It seems to me this strategy is failing, just as is the case with the “war on drugs,” the “war on poverty,” and the “war on terrorism.” When there is no hostile enemy one is created in some false flag operation. Dr. Paul will stop that from happening again.

Opponents also claim that Ron Paul will allow the enemies of our ally Israel to develop nuclear weapons and destroy that nation. There is a problem with that logic because one of Islam's most holy sites sits right along side of the ruins of Solomon's Temple. I doubt that Iran will nuke it when that would draw the wrath of Muslims world-wide

The only weapons of mass destruction that the Bush Administration claimed that Saddam Hussein had were biological weapons given to him by Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush during their terms in office. Reagan and G.H.W. Bush also supplied the mujadeen (the Taliban) with Stinger missiles which they used against the Soviets during their occupation of Afghanistan.

It would seem on the surface that these groups hate us because of our liberties,  our Judeo-Christian ideologies, and our secular government. But they are angry because they have been exploited to no small degree. American corporations with State Department and CIA support, created dictatorships where there were valid democratic elected governments. Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in Iran, and Manuel Noriega in Panama to name just a few.

 Given the short time that he had to address the questions about Islamic extremists during the debates, Ron Paul could not fully articulate what he meant when stating that these people were attacking Americans because we interfered in their nations. All of the war-mongers jumped on that as did the media, denouncing Ron Paul's foreign policy as dangerous to America and especially toward Israel.

Ask Israelis what they think about Ron Paul. Ask Iraqis, Iranians, Pakistanis, Libyans, Egyptians, Palestinians, Somalis. Ask our allies, Australia,  Canada, and the Scandinavian nations about his foreign policy. See if they concur with all of the Ron Paul detractors here in America. You may be surprised to hear or read what they have to say.

 I have been making these inquiries myself and was quite amazed at how many nations are looking toward this November's election and praying for Americans to elect Ron Paul. They love him!
And I do too.

Obama Issues "Kill Order" Regarding Ron Paul and Russia Prepares for Nuclear World War III

I could say something vulgar regarding the privately-owned major media and the person occupying the presidency; however, instead I began to think along different paths.

Why would a Democrat, occupying the presidency, worry to such an extent about a supposedly minor candidate that the news has proclaimed unelectable? Although Ron Paul has been elected to office for 30 years and that is longer than the combined time in office of Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich taken together. I also wondered why just Ron Paul? Aren't Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich to be considered a threat... of any kind... and if that is true... why?

I wondered why... No U.S. News agencies or News groups had reported this chilling batch of information.

It seems as though the Russian threat of nuclear World War III might mean something to someone?

I wondered how many Americans remember Operation Mockingbird?

It should be quite clear to any American that American news reporting is only reporting certain kinds of news.

"The Federal Security Service (FSB) is reporting today (November, 2011) that the “secret letter” sent to Prime Minister Putin by Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda contains a warning that United States President Barack Obama has issued an executive-level “kill order” against US Congressman Ron Paul over fears this charismatic politician, who many believe could capture the Republican Presidential 2012 nomination, is about to expose to all Americans what can only be described as the largest mass theft in human history. The “kill order” is a metaphor for silencing down Congressman Ron Paul in the mass media as if he doesn’t exist.

According to this report, Prime Minister Noda first became aware of this “kill order” after a private meeting with Obama at last weeks ASEAN Summit meeting in Indonesia when the American President expressed his “unconstrained joy” over the toppling of the Greek and Italian governments in bloodless coups by EU banksters who installed to run these countries unelected former Goldman Sachs executives.

Not known to many Americans is that the giant global investment firm Goldman Sachs put Obama into office by being its top donor and after winning the Presidency put so many of its former executives into the US government it is known as the “Wall Street Cabinet.”

The reason for Goldman Sachs, and other top American and European banksters, putting Obama into office, this report continues, was to loot the American taxpayers of an estimated $100 Trillion…nearly $30 Trillion of which went directly into the pockets of international banksters around the world and another $70 Trillion in lost home values, stock portfolios and pensions funds.

The main conduit of this massive theft was the US Federal Reserve System which during the 2008 Financial Crisis secretly doled out, without the American peoples knowledge, over $16 Trillion to European banks and companies and another nearly $8 Trillion in “secret loans” to the largest banks in the United States.

Causing Obama and his bankster allies to fear Ron Paul, this report continues, is the Congressman’s ability to hold US Congressional hearings on the $8 Trillion in secret loans to the largest banks in America without the public’s knowledge exposing this largest theft in human history and laying bare for all to see the total criminality of their entire elite political, financial and corporate class.

Though the US mainstream media has virtually ignored Ron Paul’s candidacy the American people themselves appear to have broken through this deliberate government ordered blackout of his Presidential run as evidenced by his rise in the polls in the first campaign States of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, which should he win them all would assure him the Republican nomination.

The fears Ron Paul is causing among Americas elite classes appear to be justified as he recently likened the US Federal Reserve System to “drug addiction” warning that the deception it has foisted upon the public will lead to the destruction of the United States.

Ron Paul further warned the American people this year that their nation was becoming a “police state,” called for the impeachment of Obama for ordering the assassination of an American citizen without charges or trial, and stated that Obama had violated the War Powers Act over his actions against Libya.

Ron Paul’s fears of a police state America being ruled by a dictatorial tyrant were confirmed yesterday when the US Senate, in a 61-37 vote gave, for the first time in history, the power to the US Military to hold citizens without charges or trial indefinitely by passing a bill that was written in secret and never openly debated.

So frightening is this new law that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in the days prior to its passing warned: “The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.”

Most ominous in this FSB report is its stating that the “assassination regime” ordered against Ron Paul by Obama may already be underway as one of the US foreclosure fraud whistleblowers subpoenaed by Ron Paul to testify before the US Congress named Tracey Lawrence was found “suicided” yesterday in Las Vegas.

The destruction of anyone found opposing the Obama regime and its bankster backers was, also, brought into sharp relief this week by the smearing by mental illness allegations of one of America’s top heroes US Marine Sergeant Dakota Meyer, who in September received the Congressional Medal of Honor from Obama (who called him one of the most “down-to-earth guys that you will ever meet”) for saving the lives of 36 of his comrades, but after he alerted the press that his employer defense contractor BAE Systems was selling high-tech sniper rifles to Pakistan that are being used to kill America Soldiers was labeled as a “drunk and mentally ill.”

So concerned has the Kremlin become about the growing American fascist police state it caused General Nikolai Makarov, Russia’s top military commander, to issue a warning to the West last week that the Motherland was fully prepared for a nuclear World War III and which prompted the Obama regime to state that it would immediately cease observing their arms treaty with Russia.

To if the American people will be able to rally around Ron Paul before he is assassinated by the Obama regime it is not in our knowing, other than to note that in a country where every public demonstration – however peaceful and orderly it might be – is ordered by their authorities to be treated as the equivalent of a prison riot, where the former police chief of Seattle blamed the militarization of local US police forces on Obama’s Homeland Security Department, and where the media is described as being nothing more than a “lapdog” for Obama and his bankster allies, the likelihood of these people escaping the worst horrors to come do, indeed, seem inescapable."


Source: www.eutimes.net
href="http://www.eutimes.net/2011/11/obama-issues-ron-paul-kill-order-as-russia-prepares-for-war/ 

What If?

By Andrew Paolo Napolitano

"What if Democrats and Republicans were two wings of the same bird of prey?

What if elections were actually useful tools of social control?

What if they just provided the populace with meaningless participation in a process that validates an establishment that never meaningfully changes?

"What if that establishment doesn’t want and doesn’t have the consent of the governed?

What if the two-party system was actually a mechanism used to limit so-called public opinion?

What if there were more than two sides to every issue, but the two parties wanted to box you into a corner, one of their corners?

What if there’s no such thing as public opinion, because every thinking person has opinions that are uniquely his own?

What if what we call public opinion was just a manufactured narrative that makes it easier to convince people that if their views are different, then there’s something wrong with that – or there’s something wrong with them?

What if the whole purpose of the Democratic and Republican parties was not to expand voters’ choices, but to limit them?

What if the widely perceived differences between the two parties was just an illusion?

What if the heart of the government policy remains the same, no matter who’s in the White House?

What if the heart of government policy remains the same, no matter what the people want?

What if those vaunted differences between Democrat and Republican were actually just minor disagreements?

What if both parties just want power and are willing to have young people fight meaningless wars in order to enhance that power?

What if both parties continue to fight the war on drugs just to give bureaucrats and cops bigger budgets and more jobs?

What if government policies didn’t change when government leaders did?

What if no matter who won an election, government stayed the same?

What if government was really a revolving door for political hacks, bent on exploiting the people once they’re in charge?

What if both parties supported welfare, war, debt, bailouts and big government?

What if the rhetoric that candidates displayed on the campaign trail was dumped after electoral victory?

What if Barack Obama campaigned as an antiwar, pro-civil liberties candidate, and then waged senseless wars while assaulting your rights; that the Constitution is supposed to protect?

What if George W. Bush campaigned on a platform of nonintervention and small government, and then waged a foreign policy of muscular military intervention and a domestic policy of vast government borrowing and growth?

What if Bill Clinton declared that the era of big government was over, but actually just convinced Republicans like Newt Gingrich that they can get what they want out of big government, too?

What if the Republicans went along with it?

What if Ronald Reagan spent six years running for president, promising to shrink the government, but then the government grew while he was in the White office?

What if, notwithstanding Reagan’s ideas and cheerfulness and libertarian rhetoric, there really was no Reagan Revolution at all?

What if all this is happening again?

What if Rick Santorum is being embraced by voters who want small government even though Senator Santorum voted for the Patriot Act, for an expansion of Medicare and for raising the debt ceiling by trillions of dollars?

What if Mitt Romney is being embraced by voters who want anyone but Barack Obama, but they don’t realize that Mitt Romney might as well be Barack Obama on everything from warfare to welfare?

What if Ron Paul is being ignored by the media not because as it claims he’s unappealing or unelectable, but because he doesn’t fit into the pre-manufactured public-opinion mold used by the establishment to pigeonhole the electorate and create the so-called narrative that drives media coverage of elections?

What if the biggest difference between most candidates was not substance but style?

What if those stylistic differences were packaged as substantive ones to reinforce the illusion of a difference between Democrats and Republicans?

What if Mitt Romney wins and ends up continuing most of the same policies the Barack Obama promoted?

What if Barack Obama’s policies, too, are merely extensions of those from George W. Bush?

What if a government that manipulated us could be fired?

What if a government that lacked the true and knowing consent of the governed could be dismissed?

What if it were possible to have a real game-changer?

What if we need a Ron Paul to preserve and protect our freedoms from the government?

What if we can make elections matter again?

What if we could do something about this?

From New York defending freedom every night of the week."

Andrew Paolo Napolitano, Freedom Watch,

(Source: LYBIO.net, http://www.lybio.net)

Your Choice Should Be America

Whenever some well-meaning person questions my convictions, I usually make time to explain why I believe as I do.

When the English Monarchy and the Church were both exercising control over empires, nations, and individuals' thoughts, there came to be an increasing number of people that felt they had lost what little control over their own lives they had managed to gain. These people decided, in one way or another, it was time to take control of their own lives and they came from many parts of the old world to settle in the new world. However, because the old world continued to exercise, what the new world settlers felt unfair and confining, control in various forms, they decided to begin a Great Experiment to be free.

The aftermath of the conflict between the old and new world was the establishment of The Perpetual Union (which is no longer in effect) and the later United States Of America. The important ideas, ideals, and concepts were composed and written down as two founding documents the Declaration of Independence and The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union (A.C.P.U. which is no longer in effect) and the later Constitution of the United States of America. These two sole sources of intents and purposes define America and American Citizens. If, by letter or spirit, either one or both are under attack, by inaction in defense of, or by action to corrupt letter or spirit of, the very way of life in America becomes threatened.

Why do Americans pick between Democrats and Republicans? Why do we patronize the privately-owned major media who regards Americans as having so little intellect that they have to tell us what the candidates stand for and which ones are important? Are we so engrossed in that kind of authoritarian nonsense that we have to rely on others to make choices for us? The "fair and balanced" claim by one network is betrayed by their bias for party favorites to the detriment of any others that may challenge typical Washington politics. All of the major media ignores candidates from any other party, and have even ridiculed one of the most outstanding statesman of our time.

Why do we tolerate public employees who were elected to serve the nation by presenting the best American ideals and addressing the most important issues facing our country and providing solutions to attain those goals, but instead did otherwise? The interests of American Citizens; home and hearth, financial soundness, and personal rights and freedoms are the concerns of all. These important ideas and issues are held as important concepts, as well as many others, within the Constitution. That document and our country largely have been ignored, by the party favorites and only recently have they even mentioned the very real problems we face. It is only obvious that Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich have changed the tune they hum. Instead of their usual stance, pompously prancing about proclaiming themselves our leaders while taking advantage of anything they can, they are now on uncertain ground and are now parroting the only candidate that has said the same things for thirty years. Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich have never been our "leaders" at best they were our representative employees!

It doesn't require a genius intellect to know that neither party has provided a difference in identifying problems nor finding approaches to solutions that have beneficial results, except to grow government in ways that were never intended. What they have provided over the past three or four decades, regardless of their supposed liberal or conservative policies, is an expansion of government in every direction; controlling through legislation, mandates, regulations, taxation, and executive orders has been the result. So far the solutions offered by big government thinking is more jobs in government (most of which are temporary) and borrowing money to fund what they cannot do by increasing taxation. The economic stimulus has been to guarantee enormous loans to companies with poor management and business models that have failed at the taxpayer's expense. Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, M F Global - J P Morgan are all examples.

The generalized root beliefs of today's current American Democratic philosophy are those dangerously close to, if not, socialism. Any of the various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, or a system of society or group living in which there is no private property and in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state, which is a stage of society in Marxist theory that is transitional between capitalism and communism and is distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done are not American in concept or ideals.

The generalized root beliefs of today's current American Republican philosophy are those dangerously close to, if not, Fascism. The political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and which stands for a centralized autocratic government or dictatorial control which is effected by policies or practices of, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition are not American in concept or ideals.

And still the voters select from these same two diseased pools of philosophically political sociopaths.

The generalized root method of enacting today's current American Business philosophy are those of Corporatism. The organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction. This concept was borrowed from the business practices of the English Crown and is not American in either concept or ideal.

The generalized root beliefs of today's current American Business philosophy are those of Capitalism. The economic system characterized by private or partner ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market is the mainstay in America.

It seems clear that "conservative" Republicans want to save us from the "liberal" Democrats and the "liberal" Democrats want to save us from the "conservative" Republicans. In the end, both parties seek to dismantle freedom and constitutional government in order to accomplish their own agendas. They only differ in style; in substance they are twins. While fiercely opposing each other, both parties seek but one thing: unbridled power and control.

As things stand now, we do not need to fear al Qaeda, Iran, or North Korea as urgently as we need to fear the abuse of power from within our own government. There is no question that we have the military power and strength to fight off any foreign enemy. The bigger question is, do we have the moral strength and ethical power to fight off those within our own country who would strip us of our freedoms? How we answer that question will determine our destiny.

It's our choice: we can continue to vote for candidates that are members of the two major party philosophies, or we can vote for candidates, regardless of party affiliation, who will represent the best interests of America and its Citizens. That does not automatically disqualify a candidate from a major party, it does mean that it is the responsibility of the voter to vet the candidates to determine the ones who have demonstrated their honesty, integrity, and eligibility that have honored their oaths of office to uphold and defend the Constitution (if they have been in office), and who have a record of performance that demonstrates they have made those hard decisions.

It should be obvious I will never vote for Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich to be my employee to hold any public office. I carefully looked at their morals, ethics, qualifications, and their voting records. Instead, and because of a thirty year length record of voting for American ideals and concepts, I am voting for Dr. Ron Paul.

Beliefs and Actions

So... Palin says, "they are getting more grounded in their beliefs and are articulating them better."

Palin thinks Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum are becoming more grounded in their beliefs. These politicians and businessman are fully grown men with past actions and public statements which should have cemented their convictions and character development by the age of 21.

By the time U.S. males turn 30, patterns of belief and behavior are developed and become set and the actions and words derived from them define and reinforce those convictions. These male characteristics remain in and with their holders until overtaken by death.

The prime ability and skill politicians must posses is to speak well and convey their ideas to listeners convincingly, nothing else is more important. Even if mistakes are made in their actions or words the skill to talk around, under, over or through opposition, disaster or debacle is paramount:   nothing is more important to a successful career politician. If nothing else, Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum should have developed the skill to speak well and convincingly, by now.

You might think Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum truly would have made up their minds ten years later by their 40th year of thought over what they believe in and their actions should have revealed exactly what they believed, or 20 years later by their 50th year of thinking over the same things they believe in and whatever they have done.

Most, if not the majority, of the male population of the U.S. Are considered old codgers that are completely set in their ways by the time they reach their 55th year. Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum have the experience of their actions and the publics' reaction and response to whatever they have done or said in the past with which to work. Regardless of reaction and response, when considering the true worth and measure of any man, his record of actions can be the only quality of merit or accomplishment.

Romney, a corporate raider with a record of business cannibalism and destruction, believes money and the power to get more is the most important thing in his life, since he has spent his entire professional life doing just that. Great hair, pretty teeth and a real live shark.

Gingrich, a politician with a long ugly record of ethics violations and more, continues to do and say whatever he thinks people will believe. His personal life, a failure at any point except to take advantage of self-made disasters, and use them for financial or political gain reflects his professional life and vise-versa. Great hair, rotund presence and words that are only backed by current listeners.

Santorum, another career politician with severe blemishes, pandering to lobbyists, developing rapidly into a sleazy politician (no moral or ethical compass of any bearing) and representing foreign institutions by adding an amendment which drove the suicide rate at one home for Veterans from 59 in 2000 to 131 in 2003. Earmarking, big government spending, and bringing religious matters and concerns to whip-up the voting public. It should be remembered that the U.S. Constitution prohibits laws regarding religion. Santorum does not think it important and does what he can to circumvent the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution, even at the high price of U.S. Veterans lives. Suave, self righteousness at any price oozing from every pore.

However, there is a completely unexplainable exception to this cavalcade of professional Politicians and wanna-bes.

An apparent statesman, who relies on and applies judiciously and unerringly what was written and trusted more than two centuries ago. His entire carrier has in purpose and action been applied to the benefit and well being of his countrymen. These actions of record were gained by a thorough understanding of what was written and what it represented. Few politicians and even fewer citizens take the time to truly become familiar with the document that defines our nation and by extension its people. While others argue, accuse and insult one another, this statesman explains truthfully and simply what has gone wrong and what must be done to correct these problems. His beliefs are secondary when compared to his record. He lives an ordinary life with his family in Texas with one huge glaring difference:  he well knows his beliefs and convictions and has had the character and courage to stand alone in upholding the U.S. Constitution against all enemies.