Starving the Monkeys™, Hologram of Liberty… ” Any thinking person who reads this book should walk away angry at the hoax that has been perpetrated on the people of this country. So why hasn’t this happened in droves? Two reasons……”
This book is a well-researched, scholarly dissection of the frauds surrounding the convention, the framing and the ratification of the Constitution for the United States of America. Any thinking person who reads this book should walk away angry at the hoax that has been perpetrated on the people of this country. So why hasn’t this happened in droves? Two reasons.
First, this books strikes at the core of all contemporary political debate. Don’t let the publication date of 1997 fool you; the material here is timeless. With a complete grasp of these ideas, it is easy to see that the left-right debate is merely a pointless sham. Powerful interests derive their power from your participation in a heated struggle, and don’t want you to realize that the struggle itself is based on a lie.
Second, people want to believe in the nobility of the framers. Popular conservative talk show hosts are currently putting on such ridiculous eulogizings as “Founders Fridays” to prop up this myth. Yet, those people were fallible, like everyone else, and equally susceptible to the corruption of power, and gullible to fraud. Boston provides many examples in this book of how many of our nobility were complicit in speculative equity and land deals in ways that would make modern schemers blush.
With this year’s crucial election less than a week away, it has become painfully clear that the winners and losers will be decided by the least qualified voters. Misdirection, lies and deceit are nothing new in politics, but have recently been elevated to an art form.
The electorate is divided into three main groups and subdivided into a few minor ones. About one third of the voters are hard core Republicans and one third hard core Democrats. It does not matter who their party nominates, they will vote for him or her. If the Republicans ran Hitler and the Democrats ran Stalin, each would be guaranteed one third of the vote simply by their party affiliation. The remaining one third is who decides those elections that are legitimately run. This third breaks down into left and right leaning people, those who choose based on the candidate, not the party, the one issue voter (abortion, gun control, etc.) and the totally clueless. The clueless are the real targets of all of the campaigning, political ads, and the so called debates. Winning over the “low information voter” is the key to victory.
In response to widespread blackout from both the mainstream media and political establishment alike, VT is honored to present a real Presidential debate giving us choice and not that fake stuff the MSM tries to pass off to us as democracy.
Held in Chicago and presented online by RT, a Russian based media organization, VT joins with RT in presenting a platform for the major third-party candidates also vying for the White Housethis election year to debate.
All three presidential debates are now behind us. Mitt Romney’s convincing win in the first clash was a game changer, turning a possible Obama landslide into an even race. The debates provided the big boost Romney needed, but for advocates of limited government, the three debates suggested a troublesome four years ahead, no matter who wins. Just a few of the red flags:
Then, Crowley enabled Obama’s lie about the topic and cut Romney off. The next set of questions that must be asked must deal with the supervisors who knew that the collusion took place prior to the debate.
Obama Bows Before Romney’s Stellar Debate Performance
October 18, 2012 By Kris Zane 10 Comments
Highlights of Romney’s stellar debate performance in the second presidential debate.
Bypass the Mass Media: Get Articles Just Like This Straight To Your Inbox!
Journalism: If the mainstream press had any self-respect, presidential debate moderator Candy Crowley would be out of work today. Even by the media-bias standards we’ve come to expect, she set a new, unforgivable low.
In a pre-debate interview with the Baltimore Sun‘s David Zurawik, Crowley talked about how she saw her role as moderator.
The presidential and vice presidential debates are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonprofit corporation that mandates that a candidate have at least 15 percent support in national polls to participate.
Since the CPD took over running the debates in 1988, only once has a third party candidate been allowed to participate: In 1992, when Ross Perot joined Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush on the debate stage.
The dominance of the two major parties at the debates has critics charging that the system is effectively rigged to shut out other voices. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party nominee for president and former New Mexico governor, has sued on anti-trust grounds to be included this year. The CPD, he said in an interview, is designed “to protect the interests of Republicans and Democrats.”
This year, Americans will be subjected to another presidential election season of unfair and unbalanced debates.
After two debates, the American public has seen liberal Jim Lehrer of PBS exercising no control over the proceedings and liberal Martha Raddatz of ABC allowing Vice President Joe Biden to interrupt Congressman Paul Ryan 82
At other times she was the seasoned ABC News war correspondent who kept the two guys in suits taking snarky swipes at each other in line.
“What does that mean, ‘a bunch of stuff?’” Raddatz asked Biden.
Moderator on the hot seat The role of the debate moderator Perspective from a moderator The 2012 debate moderators Raddatz also pressed for specifics such as when she demanded of Ryan: “I want to know how you do the math and have this increase in defense spending?”
There has been plenty of discussion of the presidential debates: moderators, topics, format and so on. While I was lurking on one such thread here on FR tonight, it occurred to me to look for information about how they are setting up the upcoming town hall debate on October 16 by going to the website of the Commission on Presidential Debates.
While there, I came across a section regarding eligibility to participate in the debates and lo and behold, they require the participants to be Natural Born Citizens and the rest of the constitutional qualifications to run for President. See here:
Mitt won hands down and gave us the first positive sign that victory could be in sight. But getting there from here is going to be along a long, booby-trapped trail.
Truth is that anyone with something substantial to say could have done the same thing Romney did to President Teleprompter, who for four long years has been a moving target out on the campaign trail, if only because without the teleprompter there’s only ever been an empty suit.
“Where was Obama tonight?” asked an ostensibly nonplussed Chris Matthews after the debate.
I had halfway noticed this situation during the debate but didn’t really consider the implications until she commented.I went back and fast forwarded through the debate. Romney would look at Obama for significant periods, but Obama only occasionally glanced at Romney before looking away or looking down.An obvious explanation for Obama not looking at Romney is that Obama felt intimidated by Romney.
The debates cannot resolve differences on issues because the responses are too short. Romney apparently recognizes that the debates allow a candidate to show who has the strongest personality and would be best able to stand up to the leaders of other countries, the leaders of special interest groups and congressional opponents.Watching one’s opponent is important in verbal combat as well as in physical combat. A boxer watcheshis opponent to look for an opening for a punch or an indication of what type of punch the opponent may throw.
Lie-detector test of presidential debate proves inconclusive… (“If Barack Obama or Mitt Romney weren’t telling the truth at any point in last night’s debate, it appears they believed their own lies.”)
The group that got buzz on Wednesday by paying a security firm to use new truth detecting technology to give both candidates a lie-detector test during the debate said the preliminary results do not indicate any major lies from Obama or Romney.
Blog: Broken Barack… (“Obama made a lot of great points tonight. Unfortunately, most of them were for Romney,”)
William L. Gensert
During last night’s debate, Barack Obama, the greatest man to have ever walked the face of the earth, went down in flames. Mitt Romney destroyed him in the first debate. As a political junkie, I have seen my share of debates; my favorite was Reagan/Carter in 1980, which Reagan won handily.
This delightful thought lead me to then wonder how many times Obama will give Romney “the finger” in some ridiculous way (scratching his head, wiping his mouth, etc.)tomorrow at the debate just like he did to Hillary Clinton and McCainduring the debates of 2008.
Let’s take bets here! We can gloat if we are right in how predictable Obama is.
The former New Mexico governor this week took his case for inclusion in the presidential debates to U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. Johnson’s presidential campaign filed an antitrust lawsuit alleging that the Commission on Presidential Debates is colluding with the Republican and Democratic parties to prevent third-party candidates from participating.
“It’s antitrust. We’re being excluded by a private organization, and it is fundamentally unfair,” Johnson told the Journal on Friday.
America is a place where neighbors rarely speak openly about politics, and when they do, it is usually only to repeat media sound bites. An Obama / Paul race will change that. Two differing ideologies will Clash.
One for greater individual freedom. The other for more government. This competition of ideas will not occur with other Republican candidates, since they are ideologically aligned with President Obama when it comes to the power of the individual over the power of the state.
Inevitably, debates will take place between the two candidates. Discussions in the new media will take place on the candidates. And most importantly, neighbors will discuss these two ideologies with each other.
Because the differences between them are so significant these two candidates will compel us to move beyond the media sound bites and really examine our beliefs about the idea of America and the direction we should take as a nation. We can make that debate happen.
Many proponents of the statist ideology will work hard to see to it that the champions of freedom are denied a candidate in the general election who expresses those viewpoints. As usual, America’s political class will try to limit debate so that only statist viewpoints are widely expressed and only candidates with statist viewpoints are included on the ballot in November. This year is very different.
me ^ | 1-07-12 | ak267
Posted on Saturday, January 07, 2012 5:56:29 PM by ak267
ABC has decided to shorten tonight’s debate format to a series of one-on-ones with the hopes of narrowing the field to a single winner.
Trump drops debate and possible Indy run. What happened to Newt’s Presser?
Fox News announcement | 12/13/2011 | self
Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2011 2:36:36 PM by sodpoodle
What happened to Newt’s noon announcement? Nothing being reported.
RUSH: Reports are circulating out there that Donald Trump is looking into canceling the debate that is set for December 27th. Michele Bachmann has pulled out. There’s really only two people that are gonna show up, Newt and Santorum are the only two that plan on showing up. Everybody else said no. And we’ve got a sound bite coming up. Trump is really disturbed about Bachmann. Apparently Bachmann’s called him often, called him a lot of times, talked to him about becoming her vice president if she won the nomination. Apparently she was calling Trump seeking his advice. Here, let me find the bite. I may as well just play it here rather than tell you it’s coming up on the program. Grab number 17. This was on Imus this morning on Fox Business Channel. The question: “Now, so only Gingrich, only Gingrich, you like him, by the way?”
RUSH: Folks, I have to tell you something. We got another Republican debate tonight. It’s sponsored by the Heritage Foundation. It’s gonna be moderated by Wolf Blitzer, CNN. It’s gonna be broadcast by CNN. It’s a Heritage Foundation debate on foreign policy. And from what I’m told, old Wolf is out there preparing a response to Newt Gingrich if Newt chides him for the way he’s conducting things as the moderator.
Enough, Already, With The Debates
The Silent Majority ^ | 11-21-11 | J.D. Longstreet
Posted on Monday, November 21, 2011 9:27:30 AM by Lexluthor69
I am not a debater… never have been. Although I have been speaking publicly since the age of nine, I hate debates.
You may have noticed that I DO tend to favor commentaries. In a commentary I am allowed to express my views completely, without interruption, and then sit back and wait for the fur to fly.
I have no interest in arguing my positions or opinions. Once stated — that’s it! I don’t argue. Its not worth the time and effort necessary to sway someone else’s opinion my way. I simply don’t care if you disagree with me. Once my personal deliberations are complete and I make my opinions known, I am finished. (I know the shrinks would have a field day with this!)
All this leads me to the so-called debates between the GOP candidates seeking the Republican Party nomination for President of the United States. Only a child would confuse the debates with a press conference … for that is all they are … press conferences. They are “gotcha” sessions. Little is learned from them though they make for grand spectacle.
Politico ^ | November 17, 2011 | ALEXANDER BURNS |
Posted on Thursday, November 17, 2011 11:55:09 AM by Cincinatus’ Wife
Nancy Pelosi rebuffed Rick Perry’s debate challenge this morning, POLITICO’s Jake Sherman reports, giving three reasons for her decision:
“He did ask if I could debate here in Washington on Monday. It is my understanding that such a letter has come in,” Pelosi said in the Capitol Thursday. “Monday I’m going to be in Portland in the morning, I’m going to be visiting some of our labs. I’m in California in the afternoon, that’s two. I can’t remember what the third is.”
WND Exclusive ELECTION 2012
Leaked CBS memo backs Bachmann ‘snub’ charge
Campaign says network debate manipulated to shut her up
Posted on Sunday, November 13, 2011 3:55:00 AM by South40
The first broadcast network presidential debate this year, which ended its national telecast and switched to a choppy livestream feed two-thirds of the way through the event, produced a storm of complaints from viewers across the country and two of the candidates on the no-frills debate stage in Spartanburg, S.C.
CBS’s foreign policy debate, co-sponsored by National Journal, offered unusually detailed discussion of policy and a format that was free of many of the literal bells and whistles of more slickly-produced face-offs. But the confusing format — the televised portion for most of the nation ended after an hour and viewers were expected to go to the Internet to see the final 30 minutes — led to widespread frustration among those following the debate.
A network spokeswoman, Sonya McNair, said its livestream had been overwhelmed by an unexpectedly large audience, and brushed off complaints. The final half-hour had been added, she said, for the benefit of South Carolina viewers.
WND Exclusive ELECTION 2012
Leaked CBS memo backs Bachmann ‘snub’ charge
Campaign says network debate manipulated to shut her up
Posted: November 12, 2011
7:34 pm Eastern
© 2011 WND
Several times throughout the course of the 90-minute presentation, Rep. Bachmann, R-Minn., attempted to follow-up questions and answers by other candidates – just as the moderators of the debate suggested they would be allowed to do at their discretion.
Purdue prof: Perry gaffe could happen to anyone; says word-finding gets tougher as we age
The Republic ^ | Nov. 12, 2011 | AP
Posted on Saturday, November 12, 2011 10:59:58 AM by Innovative
Christine Weber-Fox says Perry’s inability to remember all three of the federal agencies he wants to eliminate during an appearance in Wednesday’s Republican presidential debate isn’t a sign of any mental impairment.
The Purdue professor of speech, language and hearing sciences says Perry’s brain-freeze appears to be a “case of normal word-finding difficulty that can happen to anyone.”
Novemeber 10, 2011 | Me
Posted on Thursday, November 10, 2011 3:29:35 PM by JNRoberts
Today, Dennis Prager, who does NOT support Rick Perry for President, spent about half hour talking about how foolish, petty, etc. it is for people and the media to make such a big deal about a guy who forgot something during a debate.
Despite being consistently ranked in the top three in GOP presidential candidate preference polls, Ron Paul has been given the least time to speak OUT OF ALL THE CANDIDATES at the debates that have taken place thus far.
Confirmation of this fact comes in the form of a study from the University of Minnesota, published to the Smart Politics blog.
The study has tallied the total face time that candidates were afforded during the last three debates. The results speak for themselves.
It’s hard to log on and read the threads on the FR and not wonder what is going on, have the Freepers went off thier rockers? Has Obama driven them insane? I know I’m going to take some heat for this but it needs saying. Oh, and this was posted in the CHIT/CHAT forum where things like this can be posted.
Let’s categorize the crazies:
1) First, theirs the Sarah Palin is running but she’s so brilliant she’s skipping all the debates crowd. She’s not running folks, she all but made that clear while signing autograph’s at the fair today.
2) Second, there’s the thread titled “Perry was the winner of the Iowa debate!”. Is somebody smoking crack? And now he’s even the favorite canidate of the tea party? really? Al Gores ol’ campaign manager and open borders guy?
3) Next we have the “Ron Paul won the debate guys” (you all probably got the email like I did). Please, come on, folks, wake up. Even if he wins the poll it will mean nothing, he will fade away as usual and you know it. You guys remind me of Linus waiting year after year for the great pumpkin.
I’m going to stop here, but could go on, I’m no expert, I’m just seeing a ton of irrational, emotionally based, wishful thinking and some moon bat-ness that suprises me frankly.
Okay, you may now commence to ripping me to shreds.
Posted on August 12, 2011 by Admin| 15 Comments
*Taken from Wake Up 1776.
The Fox News commentator tells everyone who just got done watching the Republican Presidential debate in Iowa to go on FoxNews.com and vote. So then Hannity comes on and brings his hired propagandist Frank Luntz and then interviews several candidates except Ron Paul. I don’t even remember Hannity showing a video clip of Ron Paul during the entire show.
The announcement of the poll results was supposed to be done during the hour long Hannity post-debate show. The entire show was a propaganda piece saying nice things about everyone but Ron Paul.
Well, it turns out Ron Paul won the FoxNews.com poll handily. He won it by several thousand votes. Here is a screenshot and a breakdown of the poll results shortly after 12 am ET (after Hannity’s show concluded).
A campaign aide to Florida gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink has been removed after the Democratic nominee was sent a text message during a televised debate — in violation of the rules that the candidates agreed to.Sink’s campaign did not name the advisor.
But a campaign spokesman confirmed it was Brian May, who signed the rules agreement before the Monday evening debate.The incident took place at the CNN/St. Petersburg Times Florida gubernatorial debate when Sink’s make-up artist delivered a two-sentence message on a cell phone during a break.
Republican nominee Rick Scott, who was sitting next to Sink in the nationally televised debate, noticed the violation and notified a CNN official. The CNN official approached the make-up artist and Sink, and confiscated the cell phone.