The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

Iowa GOP vote fraud? (That is a question mark) GOP moving vote tabulation to UNDISCLOSED LOCATION! I smell a rat - the only way they can prevent Ron Paul from winning is to rig the vote for Romney or Santorum.

Joseph Stalin said "He who votes decides nothing; he who counts the votes decides everything."

I not only smell a rat - I smell a big, dirty, hairy, stinking rat. There's no doubt whatever that the Iowa game was rigged. Shortly before the Iowa caucus, several polls had Ron Paul in the lead with as much as 60% of the votes that would be cast. And where was Santorum? Well, he was 15% at best, and lower in other polls. Are we supposed to believe that Santorum suddenly moved so far ahead as to surpass Ron Paul and tie Mitt Romney, for no apparent reason, and gained all his votes from flip-flopping Ron Paul supporters? That's idiotic. Furthermore, let's stop for a moment to reflect upon and compare the results of the August 2011 Ames Iowa Straw Poll. Ron captured 28% of the votes, while Mitt Romney garnered only 3%, Newt received only 2%, and Rick Santorum was at 10%. The people of Iowa had already formed strong opinions at that time which were not likely change a great deal in just 4 months time. In reality, the votes that went to Michelle Bachmann, who narrowly edged out Ron Paul in the Ames Iowa straw poll, but who did poorly in the Iowa caucuses, should logically have gone mostly to Ron Paul, who has been closer to Bachmann's professed stances of constitutionality, financial responsibility, and limited government, than the other candidates. Shortly before the Iowa caucuses, in fact, we saw two members from Bachmann's campaign headquarters leaving Bachmann and joining the Ron Paul campaign. Obviously they joined with Ron because they saw Bachmann's support fading and felt that Ron Paul was the only candidate who had expressed many of the same concerns as Bachmann, and yet remained strong in recent polls.

It's plain to see that the Republican party has no intention of allowing Ron Paul to win any of the primaries, and that he won't be the Republican nominee, so I don't see any point in Ron competing in the primaries. Far better to declare himself an independent candidate at this time, and to keep his support group strong and growing. Of course the general election will be rigged just as the Iowa caucus was, and as all of the primaries will be, so even though Ron would likely have the votes to win, the public would never know it.

[Aaron]

Ron Paul 2012

Completely rigged against him.

No matter what happens, and not to play the "glad game" lol, but because of Ron Paul, there is a LOT more awareness in the general population about the federal reserve scam and amongst countless other things like personal liberty issues, etc...

I believe he said he does not plan to run as an Independent.

[rickoff]

Completely rigged against him.


I believe [Ron Paul] said he does not plan to run as an Independent.

Yes, he did say, a couple of days ago, that he has no plans to run as an independent candidate, but also that he won't flatly rule that out. To my thinking, supporters will demand that he run on the ballot, and his promise to supporters was that he was in it to win it and wouldn't back down. He may go through another primary or two to see what happens, but after that he will need to make a decision.

[aljhoa]

RP MD 2012 - Glenn Back's Makeup
Glenn Beck tells his listeners WE MUST support Ron Paul - YouTube

Al

[fan1701]

GBTV: Glenn analyzes Ron Paul's record - YouTube

[rickoff]

RP MD 2012 - Glenn Back's Makeup
Glenn Beck tells his listeners WE MUST support Ron Paul - YouTube

Al

I heard this segment of the Glen Beck Show while driving in my truck a couple of weeks ago. Glen, like nearly all other hosts speaking on political issues, says that he is in complete agreement with Ron Paul's economic and constitutional policies, and that he only disagrees with Ron on foreign policy.

For me, much of America's past and current foreign policy makes no sense whatsoever, so why do people get nervous when someone like Ron Paul comes along and advocates that we change our foreign policy to bring it in line with the intentions of our Founding Fathers, and in strict obedience to the Constitution? Consider the following:

• The Founding Fathers never advocated that we should have a standing army other than during a declared war, and made no provision in the Constitution that we should police the world and set up more than 900 permanent military bases in foreign nations. Is this policy in accord with George Washington's admonition that, "Over grown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty."
• Why is Ron Paul's stance against the President, or Congress using preemptive military force against nations in undeclared wars considered wacky by the media and Ron's political opponents? Have they forgotten the words of George Washington, who said, "The Constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure."
• Those who voluntarily serve in our armed forces must largely agree with Ron Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy, as he has received more financial support from US military personnel than all other candidates combined. It is those who serve in our armed forces who are most likely to understand the consequences involved in John Kennedy's very sober warning, "Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind." Why is it that establishment politicians in Washington, D.C. have continually failed to heed this warning, and instead embrace a foreign policy of continuous involvement in aggressive and provocative military pursuits?
  
• Beck and other talk show hosts who claim that Ron Paul's foreign policy would likely prove disastrous to Israel have no foundation in reality. Israel is perfectly capable of defending itself against hostile elements in the middle east. Remember the Seven Day War? Those nations which fought against Israel and lost that battle should do well to remember it, and to also remember that Israel now has over 300 nuclear weapons. Israel does not need our military backing, and isn't asking for it. As a matter of fact, Benjamin Netanyahu made that very clear to the US Congress in a speech given on the US House floor.
• While the US foreign policy has focused, and continues to focus, on forming and maintaining alliances with favored nations, why is that considered correct? And why is Ron Paul's policy of maintaining friendly relations with all nations, and not elevating certain nations above others, seen as "nutty" by mainstream media and establishment politicians? After all, it was George Washington who said, "Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all." Another Founding Father and President, Thomas Jefferson, said in his first innaugural address of 1801, "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none, I deem the essential principles of our government, and consequently those which ought to shape its administration."
• Ron Paul is probably the only legislator who can truthfully proclaim that he has never voted to approve any legislation which fails a test of constitutionality. Isn't that how the President, and all members of Congress, should view any proposed legislation? Again, it was George Washington who said, "The Constitution is the guide which I never will abandon."

We would all do well to remember George Washington's most wise and prophetic statement of all, "The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves." This is something that Glen Beck does appear to understand, and is the reason why he would support Ron Paul in spite of his disagreement with Ron over foreign policy.

[rickoff]

Judge Napolitano Endorses Ron Paul and slams Romney and Santorum.

I have always liked Judge Napolitano, who is a firm constitutionalist, and would love to see him running as Vice President under Ron Paul.

[rickoff]

The latest on Government Motors (GM)

After the bailout and takeover of General Motors by Corporation U.S., are things really running along more smoothly? It wouldn't appear so, if recent news releases are any indication.

In one example, the Chevrolet division of Government Motors is recalling 4,296 Chevy Sonic autos that were shipped to dealerships and sold to customers with no brake pads installed on the front calipers!

In another example, it is reported that Government Motors is hammering out a deal whereby the Chevy Volt will be built in China! The Chinese government offers Chinese buyers a $19,000 per car subsidy for purchasing electric cars, but only if they are built in China. So, seeking to expand their market for the Volt, which cannot be expected to sell very well here in the US because of the high price tag and the Volt's failure to live up to GM's promises, GM is eager to give away the Volt technology and cut a deal with the Chinese government. Of course what this means is that the Chinese will use the same technology (or a modified version of it) to build a non-Volt low cost electric car that they will export to the United States, and which American consumers will opt to buy instead of a Chevy Volt, Toyota, or Honda electric car. When that happens, Government Motors may as well shut down its entire manufacturing facilities, or turn them over to the Chinese, and begin selling the Chinese made autos. GM would become a sort of WalMart like importer of Chinese automotive goods.

[rickoff]

The Ron Paul campaign has been doing a good job of exposing the counterfeit conservatives running against him for the Republican nomination. Most recently, it was Newt Gingrich who was exposed, shortly before the Iowa caucuses. Newt had been doing quite well in polls, until the Ron Paul campaign began running this TV ad, and then his popularity plummeted. The focus now is on Rick Santorum, in an effort to take him out of the equation, which would then leave Mitt Romney and Ron Paul as the surviving contenders, whereupon the focus would then be shifted upon Romney. Here is the new TV ad exposing Santorum, titled "Betrayal." The ad points out how Santorum has worked in Washington as a corporate lobbyist, and how he promised a Balanced Budget Amendment, but then voted 5 times to raise the National Debt ceiling limit. The ad also points out that Santorum voted to approve construction of the "Bridge To Nowhere," that Santorum admitted he is no longer a deficit hawk, that Santorum sided with big-money union bosses and voted against the Right To Work Act, that Santorum has received huge sums of cash from special interest groups after promising to fight the special interests, and that he has been named one of the most corrupt members of Congress.

Of course Ron has some other excellent ads running which should have a lot of appeal to anyone opposed to overbloated government, and the Washington mindset that allows Congress to continue their endless borrowing and spending. One such ad is Big Dog. Another, which is a remake of the Chinese university lecture video, looks to be very effective as well at getting the message across to the many who are now either undecided or flip flopping from one candidate to another.

We can be sure that there will be plenty of negative TV ads and media smears against Ron Paul, and I'm glad to see his campaign is taking an offensive position in exposing the hypocrites, rather than spending time and campaign donations to run defense.

[blackchisel97]

Rainbow Six -Patriots

Not sure if this is the right thread to post but I couldn't find more appropriate.

New Clancy 'Rainbow 6' vid game labels OWS protesters as the new domestic terror threat


Rainbow Six: Patriots Gets Disturbing Terrorist Trailer - Softpedia

V

[rickoff]

Not sure if this is the right thread to post but I couldn't find more appropriate.

New Clancy 'Rainbow 6' vid game labels OWS protesters as the new domestic terror threat


Rainbow Six: Patriots Gets Disturbing Terrorist Trailer - Softpedia

V

Yes, blackchisel97, this is the right place. The storyline and the promotional trailer for this "game" are both very disturbing. This is not a game. It is an indoctrination tool, and is being used by the Ruling Class elite to promote divisiveness and hatred amongst the people, and especially hatred against all groups which refer to themselves as patriots. Promoters of this "game" are using it to portray patriots as violent thugs who will commit any atrocity, no matter how despicable or inhumane, in order to achieve their objective of dethroning the Wall Street elite, the banksters, and a corrupt government. Their hope is that hordes of people already hooked on playing violent shoot and kill games will become totally desensitized to the idea of taking up real weapons and using them against patriot groups. After watching the trailer, I read some of the viewer comments posted there, and am reposting here the one which most closely reflected my own opinion, along with my own post in answer to it.

"Great, one more entertainment genre gets sucked into the void of turning the american people against "patriots". When you portray them like this in a game, it's hard to expect the ignorant masses not to hate them. This game is nothing but propaganda, and Tom Clancy is a sellout. Welcome to the new America, Welcome to the New World Order. - shrapnel333"

@shrapnel333: Quite right, and the DHS has already identified potential "terrorists" as being anyone who drives a pickup truck, is a member of a 2nd Amendment rights group, is a veteran, is a member of the TEA Party or other group which voices strong dissatisfaction with our current government, or anyone who refers to the Constitution when explaining their stance or complaining about government representatives or institutions. In other words, true patriots. - TheRickoff

[rickoff]

This is what Ron Paul has to say concerning the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA):

"The founders wanted to set a high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty. To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured. The Patriot Act, as bad as its violations against the Fourth Amendment are, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act continues that slip into tyranny, and in fact, accelerates it significantly."

[aljhoa]

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

This is what Ron Paul has to say concerning the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA):

"The founders wanted to set a high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty...."

by this tribe of black gentry, who work more effectually against us than the enemys Arms; and are a hundd. times more dangerous to our liberties and the great cause we are engaged in.
Washington to Edmund Pendleton, November 1, 1779 - For Teachers (Library of Congress)

Al

[Aaron]

boycott Tom Clancy

The Tom Clancy game...

Start one of those change.org petitions to demand they withdraw that game and boycott Tom Clancy and the video game producer.

[aljhoa]

Ron Paul's Newsletters
I'm racist you are racist Obama is racist, McCain racist, Romney racist, Santorum racist, Herman Cain racist, Rick Perry racist, Sarah Palin racist, Snoop Dogg definitely racist...yo mamma racist....
Anyone who calls anyone else a racist...is a silly ignorant being that should be ignored and ridiculed...our government OWNS us!
We are slaves and they CALL US ANIMALS in the US CODE...anyone who buys into this stuff needs question the health of their mental state
gladiator1010
Breaking News! Ron Paul NOT the author of "racist" newsletters Proof in video - YouTube

Al