The American Ruling Class

[aljhoa]

We've known all along that he didn't stand much of a chance at becoming the Republican nominee, and he admits that his strategy now is to use his delegate powers to make some arm twisting deals at the Convention.

It is not over until the fat lady sings - YouTube

With Romney less than 200 delegates shy of winning the nomination before the Convention, Ron's delegate power won't have much effect, especially if Santorum throws his delegates to Romney in return for a promise of high office, such as the VP role, or Secretary of State.

351 Mr / 151 Dr.RP
The Real 2012 Delegate Count for the Republican Primaries & Caucuses

All Republican Delegates Are "Free Agents" and Unbound? Reality Check - YouTube

Al

[dutchdivco]

RP 'endgame'

Rick; RP as Fed chairman; I LOVE the image, but can't recall how someone becomes fed chairman; is it by presidential appointment, and does it require Congressional approval? Oh, and such a deal would only mean anything if Romoney stuck to his promise, and if romoney won the election.

The only 'in depth' discussion I saw of Rp's announcement (of stop spending $ to campaign, while continueing to go after delegates) was on PBS newshour, where they spent 5-7 minutes.

The upshot seemd to be; There is a 'split' between RP and his supporters; many of his supporters STILL think he can garner enough delegates to win the nomination, even tho he doesn't think so. (This is what 'THEY' were saying). And, they talked about some actually fighting going on at some of the state conventions, and how RP doesn't want this, as it 'labels' his supporters as 'troublemakers'.

Their consensus was that RP's supporters divide into 2 types; the one (majority) are people who don't 'normally' vote in elections, and the concensus is they probably will go back to not voting, and so aren't important. The other group are those who have gotten very involved in Republican party, particularly at the state, delegate level. And these people (concensus again) DO have the Romney people 'scared'; they (Romoney and RNC) DON'T want to alienate these people, but they DON'T want them 'disrupting' the convention, as that is/has become a 'coronation', where the nominee is 'crowned', and the party shows unity. They then speculated on the dilemma for Romoney et al; don't really want to give RP a major speech opportunity, doubtful RP is going to give Romoney and endorsement, not sure what kind of platform planks RP would want, whether Romoney and RNC could 'live' with them, etc.
And, they pointed out that RP is NOT the Libertarian Party nominee, they already HAVE their nominee. Overall, not really cleat WHAT RP wants at this point, but ROMONEY and RNC ARE,....concerned (?) scared (?)

Its definetly going to make the convention interesting, and the end of 2012 and beginning of 2013 is going to be very interesting times; got both conventions and the election, got 2 major supreme court decisions, got the end of bush tax cuts, and 'enforcement' (?) of mandatory spending reductions, just all sorts of stuff hitting the fan at the same time. Oh, and then there's europe. Interesting times,....I'm not clear on exactly WHAT RP 'wants', myself.;-) Jim

[dutchdivco]

RP; What now?

I think there is something that happens someimes, and might be happening now, with RP. I'm almost positive (we can never truly know whats going on in someone elses mind) that this happened to Ross Perot. (Hmmmmm ALSO initials are RP; I never noticed that before!)
Anyway, SOME 'candidates' feel compelled to run, and have this strong conviction that they were BORN to be President.
Others run to make a point, or to 'keep the other guys honest' or to represent the views of their core constituency, etc. In other words, they aren't really running with the idea that they are going to win.
Most of this type 'flame out', somewhere in the primary process, sometimes they become the vice-presidential nominee, sometimes not. Every once in a while, one of these candidates actually gets to the point of realising they actually COULD win, and become president.
And, there is a big difference between 'fantasy' and 'reality'. Remember when Ross Perot had that little 'stumble'? I think that was when he experienced this, and just for a moment he had to ask himself "Hold it, do I really WANY to be POTUS?"
And, I wonder if Ron Paul has or is having a moment like this.

After all, I sure as heck WOULD'T want the job! Couldn't make me take it, if you held a gun to my head! RP ran to express his Libertarian views; these views have been out there for a long time,there IS a libertarian party after all, but many Americans were unfamiliar with them, and the ARE core 'conservative' values that 'should' be incorporated in Republican party.
So, he ran, (I think) to get 'exposure' for these ideals. He has also shown how the primary process is 'rigged' and 'worked' the system beautifully!

But, I wonder if he isn't somewhat conflicted as to 'What to do now?"

And, I'm not sure he really WANTS to be POTUS.Jim

[rickoff]

Rick; RP as Fed chairman; I LOVE the image, but can't recall how someone becomes fed chairman; is it by presidential appointment, and does it require Congressional approval?

Yes, it is a Presidential appointment, and to my knowledge no Congress has ever stated disapproval of such an appointment. That's probably because the Fed always makes sure that their chosen man is the one who is appointed. They sure as heck wouldn't want Ron Paul appointed, so I'm betting it will never happen.

I'm not clear on exactly WHAT RP 'wants', myself.;-) Jim

That's really simple to understand, especially if one has seen Ron's approved ads. First and foremost, audit and end the Fed, cancel all "debt" claimed "owed" to the Fed, reinstate a sound monetary policy controlled by the Congress, do away with the income tax, make huge cuts in Federal spending and disempower all unconstitutional governmental offices, such as Department of Energy, Department of Education, etc., close most of our more than 900 foreign military bases and bring our troops home, and restore the foreign policy objectives that the Founding Fathers deemed proper.

[rickoff]

Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett asked Hawaii officials several weeks ago to verify that Hawaii does have a valid birth certificate for Obama on file, but Hawaii has so far refused to confirm any such thing. Here's what Ken Bennett has to say on the matter:


“Because of the importance and profile of the president’s case, and at the request of many constituents, I have gone the extra step of asking the state of Hawaii to verify the facts contained in his birth certificate,” Bennett wrote in response to concerns last month. “Hawaii is bound by their own statutes to provide such verifications to other state officials in their official duties. “With all due respect, the [Arpaio] investigation has not proven anything other than raised probable cause that the birth certificate posted on the White House website ‘may be’ a forgery. The next lawful step would be for the sheriff’s office to turn their findings over to the county attorney for prosecution,” he continued. “Evidence would be brought on both sides and a judge should issue a decision.
“Whether or not that happens, if Hawaii can’t or won’t provide verification of the president’s birth certificate, I will not put his name on the ballot,” he wrote.

[wayne.ct]

Who wants to be POTUS?

I was in a group of about 15 people and the speaker did an impressive job of explaining the ups and downs of the stock market. At least I was impressed. I forget at what point he said it, but he also said this. "Whoever is the next president, I would not want to be him because the stock market and the economy is going to react badly no matter who is in the White House." That, at least, was the gist of what he said. The words may be imprecise. Perhaps, Ron Paul is not very excited to be the next president because he knows, somehow, it is not going to be a fun experience. You might want to think about this. The population may be moving in the right direction but there is some ways to go.

[aljhoa]

Mind manipulation and control. Believe in my methods. Believe in me. Comply with my rules, my methods, pay me, and anyone that doesn't believe me or follow me, is an enemy. Sound like politics?

That's the definition of a cult. So under that premise, our governments and politicians and how their positions are revered, can be seen as a cult. I already mentioned that religion is a cult. The only difference between cult and religion is how many people accept it. Under the definition of cult, our entire society is one.

Politicians are nothing more than cult leaders wanting you to join their cult. We just don't want to view it as a cult, because we don't want to believe that we're so mind controlled and brainwashed. We want to think we have free choice and free will. But, we also want to be accepted. So we accept what the majority thinks, in order to feel part of society. Part of the 'order', the religion, the 'group'. In order not to be considered the 'enemy'.

As soon as we have leaders and a following, basically, we have cults. We have cults in every single aspect of our lives. We don't want to admit that we've been sold 'snake oil' so we call them 'marketers'. We don't want to view this mind control and brainwashing as being the tactics of a cult.
Our Cult Called Government AKA Snake Oil

Al

[dutchdivco]

Sorry, Rick

"That's really simple to understand, especially if one has seen Ron's approved ads. First and foremost, audit and end the Fed, cancel all "debt" claimed "owed" to the Fed, reinstate a sound monetary policy controlled by the Congress, do away with the income tax, make huge cuts in Federal spending and disempower all unconstitutional governmental offices, such as Department of Energy, Department of Education, etc., close most of our more than 900 foreign military bases and bring our troops home, and restore the foreign policy objectives that the Founding Fathers deemed proper."



I THOUGHT it was clear, from the CONTEXT of my post; I meant I'm not sure what RP wants to do with his 'candidacy', or 'campaign', going forward;
He's NOT going to 'endorce' Romoney, (I don't think), and even if he did, his 'followers' wouldn't 'buy' it. He's NOT going to be nominated or approved as Fed chair, although that IS a great mental image. Not going to be on the ticket as VP, Romonoey wouldn't offer, and I doubt RP would accept. He's NOT going to run as a Candidate on the Libertarian party 'ticket', (they already HAVE a nominee), and while he's continueing to 'work' the system to accrue delegates, he's NOT (I don't THINK) going to get enough to win the nomination. Platform planks are of little real value or relevence; parties regularly put in planks to assuage constituencies, and then ignore them.

So, what is it he intends now, or HAS HE ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED WHAT HE SET OUT TO DO ???

He's definetly communicated the "Libertarian" views, in such a way to 'garner' a following; something the Libertarian party HASN'T done. And he's shown how these 'views' have 'resonance' with a certain percentage of the populace.

He's 'shown' how the primary process is corrupt; how BOTH parties manipulate the results, and the delegate selection process, in order to assure that the candidate the PARTY wants ends up with the nomination. (I say both parties, because I can't believe the Dems don't do the SAME kind of thing!)

So, what else IS there, except to run as an Independent, and be accused of handing Obama the election. (i.e. the old 'third party as 'spoiler' accusation).

One thing it occurs to me; Goldwater campaign was a campaign for 'Libertarian' views, WITHIN the Republican party; won the nomination, lost the general. But, sowed the seeds, and layed the groundwork, for (20 years later) the 'Reagan Revolution'. Perhaps he is laying the groundwork, for Rand or some other candidate to pick up where he left off? Jim

[rickoff]

The Breitbart news team ran an article on Thursday that exposed a very interesting tidbit of information about Barry. They had found a short bio on Barry that was used as a promotional tool by Barry's literary agency, Acton & Dystel. In 1991, to promote a book titled Journeys in Black and White, the agency had stated, "Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago's South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White." Note that the bold text was made so by me to make these words stand out from the rest.

That book was never published, and probably for good reason. The title lends some credence to the idea that the writings may well have reflected the kind of white bashing, America hating rhetoric as heard from the pulpit of Jeremiah Wright. Barry had his eye on a political future, and a book like that would have sunk his chances early on.

As the Breitbart article hit the mainstream, nearly all the major news networks remained totally silent about this revelation, but a few that commented on it were quick to pass it off as having been an obvious error. In fact, they were able to get someone at the literary agency to say that the mention of Kenya as Barry's birthplace was just a mistake. I suppose that's possible, but when a literary agents writes up a bio on an author, don't you think that they gather the bio information from the author himself? And after writing the bio, it would be standard operating procedure to submit the bio to the author (Barry) for approval before publishing it. So why didn't Barry correct them on that "error?" I'd say it is because he wasn't running for a political office back in 1991.

The 1991 bio wasn't the only time the literary agency had stated that Barry was Kenyan born. In fact, a promotion for his book, Dreams From My Father, had stated in April 2007, two months after Obama had launched his presidential bid, that the then Democrat senator from Illinois was "born in Kenya." The 2007 bio said, "Barack Obama is the junior Democratic senator from Illinois and was the dynamic keynote speaker at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. He was also the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review. He was born in Kenya to an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister and was raised in Indonesia, Hawaii, and Chicago. His first book, DREAMS FROM MY FATHER: A STORY OF RACE AND INHERITANCE, has been a long time New York Times bestseller." The Wayback Machine Internet Archive reveals that only a few weeks later, the agency had changed the wording to state that Barry was "born in Hawaii." Rather obviously, someone in Barry's campaign had noticed the bio and told the literary agency to "correct" it, for if it had been left unchallenged then Barry's presidential bid would have gone down in flames. Looks like they didn't contemplate that anyone would find these bios on the Wayback Machine, and just thought that changing the wording would take care of the matter. Barry's way of handling this will be to crack jokes about it, just as he has so many times about his "birth certificate," and Democrats and the media will laugh it up as usual. But don't you wish that someone in the spotlight, such as Romney or Dr Paul, would hammer it home? Barry's campaign has already started running character assassination ads against Romney, and touting lies as fact, so why not stand up and tell the true facts concerning Barry? The Democrats and the media would all claim that to be racially motivated, of course, but I think most intelligent people would see through that ploy. I don't like political smear campaigns, but telling the truth about someone who is ineligible to be President is not a smear tactic. It is simply telling the truth and letting the chips lay where they fall.

[aljhoa]

Депутаты - Deputies Like War

SL-Project "Депутаты" - YouTube


Al

[john_g]

I wondered what other people think of the scenario that Rommey gets charged with voter fraud allegedly committed during 2010, then it would leave RP as the only candidate. I have read, cannot find link, that allegations of financial corporation fraud have also been made. If these are both true then it would change the game somewhat.

Did Mitt Romney Commit Voter Fraud In Massachusetts in 2010? - Business Insider

[dutchdivco]

History repeating itself??

Barry Goldwater, while registered as a Republican, was 'really' a 'Libertarian'. Ran for pres., GOT the nomination but lost in the general. Had a core of VERY dedicated supporters, and seems to have 'won' the nomination by using similar tactics to what RP is doing; concentrating on delegates.
While he lost the election, he DID 'pave the way' for Ronald reagan, who gave the nominating (keynote) speeech, at the convention. Famously reffered to simply as "The Speech", actually titled "A Time For choosing" (I think it is).
Anyway, perhaps RP is similarly paving the way, for one who will follow; kind of a 'John the Baptist' for a Jesus to come? I know, bad metaphor, but anyway, 'we'll see'.
By the way, anyone who hasn't READ "The Speech" ought to, its amasing how relevent it is today, considering it was written 44 years ago!! You can Google Ronald Reagan the speech and find it.Jim

[Mad Scientist]

Ken Bennett's "Birther" Request Shows the Insanity of Arizona's GOP - Page 1 - News - Phoenix - Phoenix New Times
]

Interesting article in which the author shows his bias quite nicely by following the old adage if can't refute the evidence then attack the character of those who carry the message.

[rickoff]

Perhaps he [Ron Paul] is laying the groundwork, for Rand or some other candidate to pick up where he left off? Jim

That sounds about right, as I doubt Ron will run again as he becomes another 4 to 8 years older. Thing is, this country will be too far gone by then to be turned around. And that is why it is crucial that we assure, this year, that we restore our original jurisdiction (OJ) government by voting in each of our states' OJ elections come November. It's the only vote that will actually count, as it must be done by content notarized certified return receipt mail. In case you aren't familiar with content notarized mail, it is actually done by taking your voting document to a notary public who certifies the actual contents that he or she witnesses being sealed in the envelope. You then take the envelope to the post office and pay for postage and certified return receipt signature service. That proves that the person or agency the envelope is addressed to actually signed the certification card upon receiving the mail. The card is returned to you as proof of receipt. You also keep the notary public's certification of the envelope contents, which must state the name of the person you voted for as OJ state governor. That's very important. Also, you send a photo copy of both the notary's content certification and the certified mail receipt directly to the candidate. After election day, the candidate contacts the office where such records are kept and determines whether or not anyone else is claiming victory. If so, it comes down to who can prove they have the most votes, and that is why this method is so important, since it assures that each of our votes really counts and that fraud is ruled out. The services of a notary public are normally offered free at your bank, and the certified return receipt will cost a couple of bucks or so, but is well worth the peace of mind and sense of accomplishment you will get from it.

Rick

When we get a little closer to November, I'll post a content notarization certification form that anyone can use by simply editing in their name, the date, and the name of the candidate they are voting for.

[aljhoa]

From Washington, D.C. on Wednesday, Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) attacked the contents of an act currently up for discussion that, if passed, would reestablish America’s major role in Israeli affairs. Rep Paul fears, however, that it would do more harm than good for all nations involved.

To House Speak John Boehner, Paul said that H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, “is another piece of one-sided and counter-productive foreign policy legislation.”

“This bill’s real intent seems to be more saber-rattling against Iran and Syria,” insisted Paul, “and it undermines US diplomatic efforts by making clear that the US is not an honest broker seeking peace for the Middle East.”

“The bill calls for the United States to significantly increase our provision of sophisticated weaponry to Israel, and states that it is to be US policy to ‘help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge’ in the region,” added the congressman.

The bill itself was created to reaffirm America’s “commitment to Israel’s security as a Jewish state,” “provide Israel with the military capabilities to defend itself,” “expand military and civil cooperation” and “encourage Israel’s neighbors to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state,” among other matters according to the official synapsis included in the legislation.

“This bill will not help the United States, it will not help Israel, and it will not help the Middle East,” concluded Paul. “It will implicitly authorize much more US interventionism in the region at a time when we cannot afford the foreign commitments we already have. It more likely will lead to war against Syria, Iran, or both. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.”
Prison Planet.com » ‘It will lead to war’ – Ron Paul fights to end military aid for Israel

Al