The fix is in: The Great USA won’t hold free and fair elections, so why do we think we have the right to have an opinion, let alone judge, elections in other countries? We have no moral standing, so WTF??? Maybe we should have Russia, China, and Kenya supervise our next elections in 2012.
I suppose the only “proof” we need to know that the primary election for 2008 was rigged is to consider the following documented facts:
1. Ron Paul won half the Republican primary straw polls and placed well in nearly every other one. In most cases the support for Mr. Paul was overwhelming, often between 60-80%!!! The grassroots wanted Ron Paul: The signs, the banners, the blimp(!), the cash, the YouTube videos, the songs! He’s had more songs written about him than any other Presidential candidate who’s ever existed! Tens of thousands of people came to hear him speak. Have you ever in your life seen such enthusiasm for a politician?
2. Ron Paul did much better in those precincts where Diebold voting machines were NOT used. He even placed first in a few, earning at least 42 delegates along the way. On the Democratic side I notice Hillary Clinton did much better in precincts that used Diebold machines than the precincts that didn’t.
3. Exit polls showed Dr. Paul doing much better than Diebold said he did. A significant discrepancy in the exit polls is prima facie evidence of vote rigging.
4. The Ron Paul media blackout nearly says it all.
5. Isn’t it strange how 70% of the US thinks the war was a mistake and that our military troops should come home, yet somehow we supposedly” chose” the most warmongering candidates of the bunch? What’s up with that? I posit we didn’t vote for them at all. Looky:
New Hampshire election fraud January 11, 2008
New Hampshire Primary – Sham Chain of Custody Video Link – Sec. of State office claims boxes are secured, shows slit and open boxes arriving. [The boxes arrived by way of Langley AFB! Langley AFB is CIA headquarters!]
On the ground in NH: Recount Update PDF by Bev Harris January 18, 2008
Diebold Machine Rejects Ron Paul Votes In Michigan PDF Ron Paul War Room January 16, 2008
“We The People must hand count ALL paper ballots or lose democracy to the machine manipulators!” PDF by Ron Corvus January 14, 2008
European press: It wasn’t a miracle – Hillary won via a rigged vote PDF by Michael Carmichael Global Research, January 14, 2008
Thoughts on the Vote Fraud in New Hampshire PDF Brandon Dean January 11, 2008
The Winning Ticket: Hillary and Diebold in 2008 PDF By Mike Whitney 11/01/08
Scottsdale AZ Straw Poll 80% for Ron Paul!! Votes were almost stolen!! PDF January 11th, 2008 by jasoncin
Did Hillary Really Win New Hampshire? PDF By DAVE LINDORFF January 11, 2008
NH Race: The OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) consider an exit poll discrepancy to be prima facie evidence of tampering PDF January 10, 2008
Media Struggles To Whitewash Clinton Vote Fraud Suspicions – updated PDF By: Paul Joseph Watson on: 10.01.2008
Hand Count Shows 15% For Ron Paul PDF From Devvy Kidd By zooamerica 1-10-8
LHS Marketing and Sales Director Ken Hajjar’s Criminal Record PDF - He defends the swapping out of memory cards during the middle of elections.
New Hampshire Election Fraud PDF by Ron Corvus January 9, 2008 – Machine vs Hand Counted Votes(RonRox.com)
Fraud US Style – Fake Videos And Elections PDF By Stephen Lendman 1-10-8 – Zogby’s January 5 – 7 pre-election poll numbers showed Obama at 42% v. Clinton’s 29%
Clear Evidence Of Widespread Vote Fraud In New Hampshire PDF – Paul and Obama cheated out of 3rd and 1st by voting machines, hand count fraud
VOTER FRAUD confirmed by voter in Sutton, N.H. PDF Jan 8, 2008
Pretty sickening, isn’t it? It’s all a charade to pacify the peasants. This is how presidents are really elected:
1. Succession planning takes place at Bilderberg Group meetings. According to a leak from the 2006 meeting in Canada, the fix was in for Hillary Clinton a few years ago. During the 2007 meeting in Turkey it looked as though the Bilderbergers had either a) changed their minds, or b) at least came up with a backup plan should Hillary prove to be unelectable: Al Gore would be a last minute entry into the presidential race to “save the day.” As to Mr. Gore’s reaction to this decision I have no clue.
2. The mainstream media, whose top executives and anchors are usually at the Bilderberg meetings anyway, is then told who to hype, who to ignore, who to smear, and who to blackball. Money changes hands and survey results are pulled out of some journalist’s ass. “Front runners” are announced before the first straw poll vote is even cast. Straw poll and primary votes are ignored in favor of conclusions that the race is “too close to call.” Meanwhile the CIA and Mossad are programming the machines that count the votes.
3. Some semblance of a fair election takes place. There may be physical obstacles that emerge at the polling places like insufficient number of voting machines in certain precincts, misdirection, ballot stuffing, “lost” bundles of ballots, fictitious mail-in ballots.
4. The party in power counts the votes. After the ‘close election’ with the unexplained ‘last minute swing’ to the pre-selected candidate, that candidate is declared the winner. The loser, also a Bilderberg shill, concedes with no fuss. Remember how Al Gore barely even questioned the results of the 2000 election? How he told the country that we needed to “move on?” How about Bush’s fraternity brother and business partner, John Kerry? You see what I mean.
So! Now that you understand how the election process works you need to decide whether or not you’ll even bother to vote. I say by all means do vote . . . with a write-in candidate! Mickey Mouse always places well among the also-rans, but this year I think a little solidarity is in order. I think the universal write-in candidate should be:
FUCK YOU AND YOUR NEW WORLD ORDER
Wouldn’t it be funny if Fuck You won?
19 responses so far ↓
lostspartan77 // February 20, 2008 at 12:17 am |
I take it you are a bit of a liberal… all this talk of the economy crashing, voter fraud, and a Republican candidate that has no chance of winning anything tend to cause the undecided and often easily confused to run from the incumbent political party.
Personally I am a conservative however I have actually considered voting for Obama. I would however not vote for Hillary and if she were to make it I would vote for any Republican candidate that is running against her.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // February 20, 2008 at 2:03 am |
Liberal?
In the Jeffersonian sense, almost libertarian; I suppose I’ve turned out like my folks after all in that we’re all live-and-let-live conservatives. I used to think I was liberal in the almost-socialist sense, having grown up in the state that invented the HMO (Minnesota), but I’ve come to realize how dangerous authoritarian governments are, even the “come to Momma” types that promise cradle to grave service.
The meanings of “liberal” and “conservative” are so corrupted I don’t even use them anymore; I think they cause political divides where they oughtn’t. We all want pretty much the same things, after all, and I think most of all, Americans like to be left the hell alone. At least I do. These days I think there are only two kinds of government: Grass Roots and Authoritarian.
Ron Paul is the only man in the race who isn’t a corporatist stooge. Dr. Paul is a principled man even if I don’t agree with him on most things, but I’ll take it. As for Obama I’D GO BACK IF I WERE YOU. He’s the Manchurian candidate. Notice he talks a lot about his black father but not his white mother? Ever wonder why? It’s HER pedigree, not his father’s, that’s remarkable.
Ever wonder about his meteoric rise to political power positions, bypassing other notable Chicago politicians who had been “waiting in line” for much longer? It’s positively Clintonesque,the calling card of a CFR corporatist stooge.
Obama is also a Mason (no big secret, but it’s Chicago so hey) and a blood relative of a few of our Power Elites (reportedly not just Cheney, but I don’t have the details). Also, his speechwriter is the brother of a Fox News VP. In other words he’s being propped up and groomed by some very powerful people, and he’ll owe them big time if he succeeds.
Here’s the game:
Hillary Clinton is David Rockefeller’s political representative. Rockefeller is the West Coast architect of the present “New World Order” plan: One world government rule by elites, one world religion, one world currency and a 70-80% reduction of the world’s population by any means necessary.
Barack Obama is Zbigniew Brzezinski’s political representative. Obama’s sponsor Brzezinski IS THE ARCHITECT OF THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR and the “let’s kill the mooslems and steal their oil and rule the global thermonuclear wasteland” Master Plan.
John McCain is Henry Kissinger’s political representative. Kissinger is a war criminal who can’t even leave the country for fear of arrest and a trial at the Hague.
By “political representative” I really mean “corporatist stooge.”
WE don’t get a political representative. Neither you nor I rate our very own action arm in the White House. We are serfs living on THEIR land and bringing THEM profit with our wage slave labor. We pay them tribute once a year on April 14, and afterwards they’ll let us live another year to make them richer. Unless you’re an antiwar protester, in which case you’re on a Homeland Security domestic terrorist watch list and all bets are off.
Elections are staged in such a way that no matter who you “elect,” you LOSE, and it will continue like this on our way to Global Corporatism (read “Fascism”) until or unless we kick every one of them to the curb.
It’s high time we started kicking. In the mean time to save several million dollars on this staged election (Diebold 08!), why not just hand each corporatist elite a ruler and tell him to unzip his fly. Whoever has the biggest, wins. Isn’t this what the power game is all about anyway?
lostspartan77 // February 20, 2008 at 4:10 am |
I am impressed by your extensive and well defined characterization of the candidates. For what it is worth I am not easy to impress.
This is why Obama, he is black. The straight white male has been cornered by organizations like the NAACP and ACLU castrated by the feminist movement and striped of his manhood by Hollywood.
I agree that it is a fallacy to believe anything a politician says however there are things Obama has said that give me a sign of some hope. I do not have the direct quotes and given the amount of crap on the internet right now I doubt I can find them again. I will paraphrase. The first was in regards to cleaning up the inner city “You want to clean up the inner city, stop throwing trash out of your car window”, “You want jobs in the inner city, stop robbing the liquor stores.”
The reality of American culture is that only white people can be racist. This does not hold true for the rest of the world by any means; however it is the reality of the country we live in. Being black means that Obama can say and do things that no white president could dream of.
My second reason for why Obama feeds off of the point I just made. I am tired of hearing about the inequalities that are some how poured upon the black people in America. So he can be our token black president. How much more can the civil rights movement ask for after that?
I do agree with the essence of what you have stated as well as the overall futility of participating in our broken representation democracy. It is a sham, we fell into an Oligarchy a long time ago. The reality that the government does not want us to reach is that we can not vote our way out of an Oligarchy. The only way forward is by the sword not the little hole punch in the voters box.
Assuming there is a choice to be made I am going with Obama, for no other reason then I am a white male and due to that inherently racist.
As for why not Hillary, everything else aside being the first woman president she will have no choice but to go the route of Queen Elizabeth. She will have to become a rage bitch in order to prove that she can govern as well as a man. The last thing we need right now is a president trying to prove to the world that she is as good as a man. I believe she is, the Middle East will not. She will make the wrong move in trying to prove it.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // February 22, 2008 at 12:06 am |
Ah, but would you change your mind if you discovered Obama really isn’t Black?
His father (Sr.)was ETHNICLY ARAB, all his Sr.’s relatives Arabs with only 1 relative African Negro. father’s great grandparent.
True Obamas Sr. was born in WEST OF KENYA were the negro tribes were CHRISTIANS, Obama Sr. GOT AN ARAB name to disinguish himself from the CHRISTIAN african negro tribes. Obama’s Sr. PARENTS WERE ARABS.
ALL Barack’s relatives have arabian names. Barack Obama is a 50% caucasian(white mother), 43.75% ARAB and 6.25% AFRICAN from his ‘great great grandfather’s side.
Soooooooo . . . unless you follow the “one drop” rule he’s more white than anything!
http://kennethelamb.blogspot.com/2008/02/barak-obama-questions-about-ethnic.html
lostspartan77 // February 22, 2008 at 12:42 am |
Then considering your new information that brings out the eternal question, how black is black enough or perhaps you could spin it around the other way and say “I guess he is white enough to be president”
The reality is as said before; I do not believe for a second that my vote counts for anything.
It is fun and irreverent to discuss.
moodymommy // February 22, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
Dear HPS, I know this is not at all scientific, but I talk politics with all of my friends and relatives, and not one of them mentioned Ron Paul. My guy was Edwards, but he didn’t wait to “hear” my vote. The silver lining in all of this, for me at least, is that whoever comes next will be better.
Duane // February 22, 2008 at 6:59 pm |
What a great blog I’ve stumbled upon. I’m already thinking of a martini tonight to ward of the blizzard raging outside.
Ron Paul wasn’t my guy either. I like his ideas, but frankly I can’t stomach the Republicans enjoying even one more day of power. I’m still for Hillary. I don’t think Obama would be bad, but I’m afraid he’ll follow Carter’s missteps in thinking all it takes to affect change is to lead the way. It’s never that simple. Hillary seems more rooted in the reality of Washington for better or worse.
lostspartan77 // February 22, 2008 at 11:08 pm |
Duane, I keep hearing about Hillary’s deep experience and understanding. It seems as though she is trying to twist her time as the wife of the President into something that would make her at the level of an incumbent. Would you trust a Brain surgeon’s wife to operate on you simply because she has seen and heard about her husbands work for so many years?
Duane // February 23, 2008 at 6:20 am |
I would certainly trust a brain surgeon’s wife to operate on me if she were also a brain surgeon and that’s how I see Hillary.
I would hardly limit her credentials to being Bill’s wife. She has her own impressive resume. The fact that she had access to the White House for eight years doesn’t hurt and in fact she used the experience to essentially redefine “First Lady.” I’m not saying she’s perfect. I have yet to meet the politician who is perfect, not even those I admire most (Adams and Truman.)
Given that Obama and Hillary are essentially for the same things as far as an agenda, in my opinion Hillary has the edge in experience even without Bill. And to be perfectly honest I would love to have Bill back in the White House. The country did pretty well for eight years. It’s a win-win situation.
I’m not against Obama, per se, I’m just not jumping on the band-wagon. There’s a part of me that thinks the same mindless souls (read: evangelicals) who gave Perot the time of day and who put Bush in office are the ones so inspired by Obama’s rhetoric of change.
lostspartan77 // February 23, 2008 at 6:12 pm |
You have made it clear that you have been on the Clinton bandwagon since probably the early 1990s. What possible reason could I have for wanting to attempt to change your mind? Forget about Obama’s message of change and stick with Hillary’s promise that she is as good as her husband and will bring more of the same.
By the way you never did mention how Hillary has more experience then Obama outside her term as the Presidents Wife, simply that she has more as everyone keeps doing.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // March 7, 2008 at 12:31 am |
snipped from another site, Posted By: GoldenEagle
Date: Thursday, 6 March 2008, 1:26 p.m.
The media has repeatedly reported that John McCain won the Texas GOP Primary in a landslide.
On SuperTuesday2, Ron Paul received 70% (37,220) of the vote in his district (14) for Congress. In that same district, it’s also being reported that he received only 6,697 votes for President. If true, that implies that that less than 1 in 5 persons who voted for him for Congress were willing to support him for President. Does that seem realistic to you? If this were Hillary’s or Obama’s home turf, can you envision that either of those candidates would fail to persuade over 80% of their local constituency to also vote for them for President?
Congressional District 14 Results -
http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race4.htm
Presidential Race District 14 Results -
http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race64.htm
lostspartan77 // March 7, 2008 at 2:19 am |
Your video from the Onion basically sums it up. It is all a sham.
lostspartan77 // March 8, 2008 at 4:54 pm |
A fun bit of history for you, I recently read the book “History of the Peloponnesian War” by Thucydides and now I am reading “A War like No Other” by Victor Davis Hanson.
Athens (which was the first real Democracy the world has even known) at one point during the Peloponnesian War actually converted to an Oligarchy in order to appease the Persians in an effort to gain their support.
The Persians felt that an Oligarchy rather then a Democracy would be far easier to negotiate with and since the Athenians’ needed assistance they actually converted their government and abolished their Democracy. Athens was a true participatory Democracy and the people had a say in the decisions the government made. The Persians where not about to make deals with a government that could not guarantee long term adherence to their policies.
As Plato says “Those who tell the stories rule society”, it is easy to see why they do not teach this one to kids in school.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // March 9, 2008 at 6:06 pm |
Hm! Interesting, because despite protestations to the contrary the US is NOT in favor of democracies in third world countries. Democratically elected officials are routinely taken out in favor of puppet dictators, who turn into so-called “terrorists” if they begin to defend their economies, their natural resources, and their people.
lostspartan77 // March 11, 2008 at 2:32 am |
That is an excellent point and one I had not considered when I wrote about Athens. You are completely correct in what you are saying.
If for arguments sake you will accept that America is in fact now ruled by an Oligarchy as opposed to a proper Democracy as it was initially established. Then it would be completely understandable using the example of Athens and the Persians that we would want our “Allies” and subjects to also follow the same form of Government.
Consider the following definitions (I know you already know what the words mean) it is difficult to develop and maintain long term policies especially ones that provide no benefit to the people of a nation with a true democratically based society whereas an Oligarchy or Dictatorship can enforce such policies.
Democracy a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them
Oligarchy is a form of government where political power effectively rests with a small, elite segment of society (whether distinguished by wealth, family or military prowess). …
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // March 11, 2008 at 11:13 am |
Very close, LostSpartan77! Replace the word “Democracy” with “Republic” and you’ve just about nailed it. “Democracy” is a dirty word here, as our Founding Fathers did NOT want one. A voluntary association of sovereign states was their origional vision, but said vision was smooshed to bits after the Civil War.
Today “Democracy” is taught in our schools in a (largely successful) attempt to confuse children into thinking democracies represent the best of what civil society has to offer. NAH. “Majority Rules” is just another form of tyranny. Liberty, meaning personal sovereignty, represents the pinnacle of civil society.
lostspartan77 // March 12, 2008 at 1:52 am |
You got me on that one; I have been corrected several times over the years for refereeing to the US has being run by a Democracy, for some reason that fact is lost on me… Perhaps this is because it does not really matter what we call it. That does not change what it has become.
HeathensOnline.com » Ruminations Zombie » Stupid Laws, or Zombie Conspiracy? // March 28, 2008 at 3:57 am |
[...] Now I love conspiracy theories as much as the next schizophrenic, 9/11 , the moon landing, even Ron Paul media bias, I even had a few of my own, especially when a few years back all the probes sent to Mars crashed [...]
gilgemesh // March 30, 2008 at 3:24 pm |
So, I took a few days to really go over all the great stuff compiled in this post, and the associated comments. I wholeheartedly agree that the founding fathers wanted the US to be a republic. They were all wealthy landowners who wanted to keep the power in the hands of other wealthy land owners. They did not believe that the ‘regular’ people of the land had the knowledge or good sense to be able to run a country. This is why our electoral system is so screwed up. Ballot fraud not withstanding, I don’t really feel like my vote in a general election counts anyway. And, since the US is basically just a 2 party system, you need to align yourself to a parties political agenda before you can even choose between their offerings. It just stinks all around.