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)

The Big Fix

There is a concerted effort to defraud the public by rigging the elections. The group Black Box Voting touts itself as America's Election Watchdog and with good reason. They have uncovered the fraud and how it is done.

I have a first-hand account of a fraud perpetrated on the voters in Nevada by a representative of the Republican National Committee, and the Nevada Republicans who worked the polls that day. All of the Ron Paul delegates were essentially "locked out" of the tallying so they do not know what the actual count is. What they do know is there are a lot more people who voted for Ron Paul and signed on as delegates in their district only to find that they cannot seem to be represented by the RNC or its local affiliates. On their site Black Box Voting has the following spin and truth being displayed through the media:

TALKING POINT: The voting systems have been tested by independent test laboratories and when installed, cannot be changed. 

THE TRUTH: 
a) Testing labs are paid by the vendors. They keep their reports secret from the public. 

b) These labs test only what the vendor tells them to test. They have also been caught omitting key tests. 

c) Saying "the installations cannot be changed" does not mean "the votes cannot be altered." 

d) Votes and vote totals can be altered whether or not electronic vote counting software is an approved version. A computer can only do what it is told to do. 

e) The mitigation for vote tampering is not pretesting a software specimen. The mitigation is public ability to see the actual vote counting.





The only true method of counting and verifying the votes is manually within the public's view (See Protecting the Vote). Anything less is an obvious open door for those that will perpetuate a fraud. Paper ballots that are clearly printed, with those same rectangular boxes that need to be completely filled for the electronic devices to read the vote is the same visual method used by a human. The media does not require an estimate within minutes of the polls closing. The importance of an accurate and valid election is paramount to anything the media wants or needs. The American People's rights come before the "entertainment" offered by the privately-owned major media.


This video may help you see things a bit differently about who is influencing what, and how they are lying to all of us.  It is not just about vote fraud! It's about liberty!

A Challenge to Voters

Tuesday March 6 is being called Super Tuesday. Big deal. Most Americans just follow the analysis they get from the privately-owned major media, who obviously are controlled by people that have a major stake in the outcome of the election. And yet, as if by cue after all is said and done, the voters prove by the tally that they vote the party favorite most of the the time. Which is to say, they vote what they are told is best regardless of what is true.

According to others, when it comes to military defense and foreign aid, something must be wrong with Dr. Paul's thinking; but, has anyone seen how much of the military actually supports him? The graph is real and says it all. Only Ron Paul stands alone in not supporting undeclared unilateral preemptive warfare, but instead, favors diplomacy and commerce.

It would appear that when you actually see who the troops support, it is none other than Ron Paul! Now aren't you just a little surprised? I'm not. And that is because I have been listening to and following his spoken thoughts and his actions throughout the decades in Congress and while he worked around his medical practice. His dedication to the US Citizens is further demonstrated by keeping his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. His voting record in the House of Representatives proves that he truly practices what he preaches as a true conservative. He is a Statesman, the likes of which we have not seen in our lifetimes.

What is remarkable about Dr. Ron Paul is his ability to smile and laugh-off quite a bit of what his detractors say, while still maintaining his stand on the principles upon which our nation was formed. It is important to keep in mind that the reason the Constitution itself was written, was to allow the federal government a limited set of powers and those powers were to be divided into the three branches of government and keep them separated by a system of checks and balances. There were also very specific rules to establish the candidates and eventual choices for the Executive Branch.

If the security of the nation is at risk, as Dr. Paul says, there will have to be defenses in place to protect the American people which is a mandatory part of the national security requirement of government. But having military bases scattered all around the world, even in nations that are allies, is as Dr. Paul states, "Just plain wrong!"

All the other candidates from the GOP make Ron Paul out to be the one that is weak on defense. I lived through the war protests of the sixties; although, today's sentiments are similar, no one truly is willing to place the nation in harms way. The current furor has been whipped up and channeled through media spin and paid protesters. The Occupy Wall Street protesters and all the other occupy sit-ins that have been spawned from the media blitz are funded by the backers of continuous wars to gain profit.

So, lets summarize some of the solutions he stands by and then on to my challenge: Ron Paul is the only candidate who will cut the budget by $1 Trillion dollars in his first year in the White House. He will cut spending in areas that will have little or no impact on those that are on Social Security and Medicare and will return control of other welfare programs back to the states. He will defend America including its borders, but most of all, he will repair the economy starting with sound money that is based on asset values such as precious metals but not limited to just those.

There is no other candidate who understands that it is paramount to restore liberty to the States and to the Individual. There is no other candidate that can protect our sovereign rights as a nation and restore the U.S. Constitution.

So here is my challenge: To all the voters that will be choosing a candidate on Super Tuesday. I challenge you to make it a real Super Day by making Ron Paul the winner in all states, and really blow the media pundits out of the water. This proposed win for Dr. Ron Paul would be the best thing for all Americans that love life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Send a message to the rest of the country this Tuesday and make a revolutionary stand for freedom.