Election Reform!

Author Topic: Election Reform!  (Read 91538 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Why Americans Elect Awful Presidents
« Reply #80 on: June 21, 2012, 02:57:13 PM »
Why do Americans elect such awful Presidents? For the same reason they elect so many awful Congressmen, Senators and Governors: because they refuse to ask the right questions. Allow me to explain.

I think most of those reading this would agree that there's a world of difference between "being your own leader" and being a cheerleader for someone else. And most people, unfortunately, are always looking for excuses to be the latter, that way they can go on treating politics as just another spectator sport. But in doing so, they ignore

(a) the fact that feel-good platitudes designed to elicit cheers and applause from the already-converted are no substitute for specific ideas on how key governmental policies can actually be made conducive to securing a truly just, prosperous and free society;

(b) the fact that, although ideas themselves are indeed bullet proof, the political leaders who espouse them are not; and

(c) the consequential fact that, the more a nonviolent revolution is driven by the force of a particular person's popularity instead of by the force of ideas, the easier it is for the banker-owned political establishment to neutralize that revolution through either character assassination or -- if the political leader in question becomes too popular and/or advocates policy reforms too threatening to the institutionalized privileges of the parasitic ruling class -- literal assassination (as the anti-war followers of RFK and MLK all found out the hard way).

Now, that's not to say that an idea-driven nonviolent revolution is incompatible with supporting and promoting a particular candidate, just that the latter must be a mere supplement of, rather than substitute for, the former.

It seems that no matter how many times I say this, it continues to fall on deaf ears.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=198869.0
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
2012 US Elections: Obamney vs. Rombama
« Reply #81 on: August 25, 2012, 03:44:28 PM »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/2012-us-elections-obamney-vs-rombama/32488

2012 US Elections: Obamney vs. Rombama
War, economic collapse and poverty await Americans no matter who they vote for

by Tony Cartalucci



Global Research, August 25, 2012
landdestroyer.blogspot.com

War, economic collapse, and personal devastation await Americans no matter who they vote for - and what we should do instead.

A vote for Obama will bring war with Syria, Iran, and eventually Russia and China. The economy will continue to suffer in order to bolster the interests of off-shore corporate-financier interests, while  the collective prospects of Americans continue to whither and blow away. A vote for Romney, however, will also bring war with Syria, Iran, and eventually Russia and China. The economy will also continue to suffer in order to bolster the interests of off-shore corporate-financier interests, while the collective prospects of Americans continue to whither and blow away. Why?

Because the White House is but a public relations front for the corporate-financier interests of Wall Street and London. A change of residence at the White House is no different than say, British Petroleum replacing its spokesman to superficially placate public opinion when in reality the exact same board of directors, overall agenda, and objectives remain firmly in place. Public perception then is managed by, not the primary motivation of, corporate-financier interests.

It is the absolute folly to believe that multi-billion dollar corporate-financier interests would subject their collective fate to the whims of the ignorant, uninformed, and essentially powerless voting masses every four years. Instead, what plays out every four years is theater designed to give the general public the illusion that they have some means of addressing their grievances without actually ever changing the prevailing balance of power in any meaningful way.

The foreign policy of both Obama and Romney is written by the exact same corporate-financier funded think-tanks that have written the script for America's destiny for the last several decades.

Bush = Obama = Romney

As was previously reported, while the corporate media focuses on non-issues, and political pundits accentuate petty political rivalries between the "left" and the "right," a look deeper into presidential cabinets and the authors of domestic and foreign policy reveals just how accurate the equation of "Bush = Obama = Romney" is.



Image: Professional spokesmen, representative not of the American people but of Fortune 500 multinational corporations and banks. Since the time of JP Morgan 100 years ago, the corporate-financier elite saw themselves as being above government, and national sovereignty as merely a regulatory obstacle they could lobby, bribe, and manipulate out of existence. In the past 100 years, the monied elite have gone from manipulating the presidency to now reducing the office to a public relations functionary of their collective interests.

George Bush's cabinet consisted of representatives from FedEx, Boeing, the Council on Foreign Relations, big-oil's Belfer Center at Harvard, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Circuit City, Verizon, Cerberus Capital Management, Goldman Sachs, and the RAND Corporation, among many others.



Image: The Henry Jackson Society is just one of many Neo-Conservative think-tanks, featuring many of the same people and of course, the same corporate sponsors. Each think-tank puts on a different public face and focuses on different areas of specialty despite harboring the same "experts" and corporate sponsors.

His foreign policy was overtly dictated by "Neo-Conservatives" including Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Paul Wolfowitz, James Woolsey, Richard Armitage, Zalmay Khalilzad, Elliot Abrams, Frank Gaffney, Eliot Cohen, John Bolton, Robert Kagan, Francis Fukuyama, William Kristol, and Max Boot - all of whom hold memberships within a myriad of Fortune 500-funded think-tanks that to this day still direct US foreign policy - even under a "liberal" president. These include the Brookings Institution, the International Crisis Group, the Foreign Policy Initiative, the Henry Jackson Society, the Council on Foreign Relations, and many more.



Image: A visual representation of some of the Brookings Institution's corporate sponsors. Brookings is by no means an exception, but rather represents the incestuous relationship between US foreign and domestic policy making and the Fortune 500 found in every major "think-tank." Elected US representatives charged with legislative duties, merely rubber stamp the papers and policies drawn up in these think-tanks.

Obama's cabinet likewise features representatives from JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, the Council on Foreign Relations, Fortune 500 representatives Covington and Burling, Citi Group, Freedie Mac, and defense contractor Honeywell. Like Bush's cabinet, foreign policy is not penned by Obama sitting behind his desk in the Oval Office, but rather by the very same think-tanks that directed Bush's presidency including the Council on Foreign Relations, RAND Corporation, the Brookings Institution, the International Crisis Group, and the Chatham House. There are also a myriad of smaller groups consisting of many of the same members and corporate sponsors, but who specialize in certain areas of interest.



Image: Obama, not a Marxist. A visual representation of current US President Barack Obama's cabinet's corporate-financier ties past and present. As can be plainly seen, many of the same corporate-financier interests represented in Obama's administration were also represented in Bush's administration.

And with Mitt Romney, "running for president" against Obama in 2012, we see already his foreign policy advisers, Michael Chertoff, Eliot Cohen, Paula Dobrainsky, Eric Edelman, and Robert Kagan, represent the exact same people and corporate-funded think-tanks devising strategy under both President Bush and President Obama.

While Presidents Bush and Obama attempted to portray the West's global military expansion as a series of spontaneous crises, in reality, since at least as early as 1991, the nations of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and many others that previously fell under the Soviet Union's sphere of influence, were slated either for political destabilization and overthrow, or overt military intervention. While the public was fed various narratives explaining why Bush conducted two wars within the greater global "War on Terror," and why Obama eagerly expanded these wars while starting new ones in Libya and now Syria, in reality we are seeing "continuity of agenda," dictated by corporate-financier elite, rubber stamped by our elected representatives, and peddled to us by our "leaders," who in reality are nothing more than spokesmen for the collective interests of the Fortune 500.



Image: The International Crisis Group's corporate sponsors reveal a pattern of mega-multinationals intertwined with not only creating and directing US, and even European foreign policy, but in carrying it out. ICG trustee Kofi Annan is in Syria now carrying out a ploy to buy time for NATO-backed terrorists so they can be rearmed, reorganized, and redeployed against the Syrian government for another Western-backed attempt at regime change - all done under the guise of promoting "peace."

....

No matter who you vote for in 2012 - until we change the balance of power currently tipped in favor of the Fortune 500, fed daily by our money, time, energy, and attention, nothing will change but the rhetoric with which this singular agenda is sold to the public. Romney would continue exactly where Obama left off, just as Obama continued exactly where Bush left off. And even during the presidencies of Bill Clinton and Bush Sr., it was the same agenda meted out by the same corporate-financier interests that have been driving American, and increasingly Western destiny, since US Marine General Smedley Butler wrote "War is a Racket" in 1935.

What Should We Do About It?

1. Boycott the Presidential Election: The first immediate course of action when faced with a fraudulent system is to entirely disassociate ourselves from it, lest we grant it unwarranted legitimacy. Boycotting the farcical US elections would not impede the corporate-financier "selection" process and the theatrical absurdity that accompanies it, but dismal voter turnout would highlight the illegitimacy of the system. This in many ways has already happened, with voter turnout in 2008 a mere 63%, meaning that only 32% of America's eligible voters actually voted for Obama, with even fewer voting for runner-up John McCain.

Ensuring that this mandate is even lower in 2012 - regardless of which PR man gets selected, and then highlighting the illegitimacy of both the elections and the system itself is the first step toward finding a tenable solution. People must divest from dead-ends. Presidential elections are just one such dead-end.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
The Political Illusion Of The ‘Lesser Of Two Evils’
« Reply #82 on: September 05, 2012, 09:58:46 AM »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-political-illusion-of-the-lesser-of-two-evils.html

The Political Illusion Of The ‘Lesser Of Two Evils’

Brandon Smith
Alt Market
Sept 4, 2012

As I stated in my article ‘The Lesser Of Two Evils Con-Game’, one of the great dangers of the upcoming 2012 elections is the psychological trap presented by the Mitt Romney campaign.

Some conservatives are so terrified of a second Obama term that they are willing to strap on the blinders and ignore the overwhelming facts that reveal Romney to be no more than another globalist puppet with an almost identical policy record to the man they despise.

If a citizen votes at all, he should first understand that the election process, especially at the federal level, is utterly corrupt and beyond repair.  Believing that you can affect change by replacing one traitor with another is absurd.  Secondly, he should at the very least vote based on his deepest principles.

Every American should ask themselves one question:  Why participate in the farce if there is nothing to gain?  We have been voting for the “Lesser Of Two Evils" for decades, and the strategy hasn’t been working out too well for us so far.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/obama-is-worse-than-bush-in-favoring-the-super-elite-bailing-out-the-big-banks-protecting-financial-criminals-targeting-whistleblowers-secrecy-and-trampling-our-liberties.html

Even Democratic Party Loyalists Starting to Wake Up to the Fact that Obama Is As Bad As Bush … Or Worse

by Washington's Blog
March 17, 2013



Obama Is Worse than Bush In Favoring the Super-Elite, Bailing Out the Big Banks, Protecting Financial Criminals, Targeting Whistleblowers, Keeping Government Secrets, Trampling Our Liberties and Starting Military Conflicts In New Countries

Glenn Greenwald notes that even Democratic party loyalists are getting fed up with Obama’s Bush-like actions:

    Even the most loyal establishment Democrats are now harshly denouncing the president for his war on transparency ….
     
    This secrecy has become so oppressive and extreme that even the most faithful Democratic operatives are now angrily exploding with public denunciations.

(Greenwald gives numerous examples.)
 
The Hill reported last month:

    A majority of voters believe President Obama has been no better than his immediate predecessor, President George W. Bush, when it comes to balancing national security with the protection of civil liberties, according to a new poll for The Hill.
     
    Thirty-seven percent of voters argue that Obama has been worse than Bush while 15 percent say he has been “about the same.” {In other words, a total of 52% think Obama is just as bad as Bush. That was before the drone controversy - discussed below - went viral.}
     
    ***
     
    The results cannot be fully explained as party line responses. More than one in five self-identified Democrats, 21 percent, assert that the Obama administration has not improved upon Bush’s record. So do 23 percent of liberals.

Indeed, more and more Democrats are waking up the fact that Obama is doing a lot of the same stuff Bush did.
 
Bush was a horrible president. His warmongering, disrespect for civil liberties, redistribution of wealth from the poor and middle class to the super-elite, and obsession for secrecy were all abysmal.
 
But how does Obama stack up by objective measurements?
 
Let’s compare …

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Election Reform!
« Reply #84 on: July 13, 2013, 05:08:23 AM »
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/07/larry-sabato-about-half-the-state-is-going-to-gag--91093.html

Virginia governor's race goes negative

By Skip Wood
ABC7News
July 9, 2013

So here we are at the conclusion of the mid-summer apex, more readily known as the conclusion of the long Fourth of July holiday weekend, and there have been fireworks aplenty in Virginia’s gubernatorial race between Republican Ken Cuccinelli and Democrat Terry McAuliffe.

Or not.

For an election that’s fewer than four months away, this one continues to loom as a conundrum-based affair on relatively long-ago happenings.

Take this past week and weekend.

Cuccinelli goes on the stump to supposedly talk about his business initiatives for Virginia but winds up spending much of his time bashing McAuliffe for the Mississippi-and-not-Virginia electric car plant.

McAuliffe goes on the stump to supposedly show his support for science and technology potential in Virginia but winds up spending much of his time bashing Cuccinelli about the Michael Mann/U.Va. controversy.

Will this thing ever become interesting and not just a regurgitation of long-ago happenings?

In a word, no.

So says noted political observer Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, when asked Monday about the race’s tenor.

[Continued...]


Analysis: Top issues among N.J. voters largely avoided in governor's race

By Melissa Hayes and John Reitmeyer
NorthJersey.com
July 8, 2013


    Governor Christie; state Sen. Barbara Buono

Standing in the center of a crowded and stuffy high school gymnasium in Sussex County late last month, Governor Christie said that New Jerseyans, by voting for Republicans in November, can “really send a message” to Democrats in the Legislature who have yet to embrace his income-tax credit.

His Democratic opponent for governor, state Sen. Barbara Buono, has been using a different issue to try to galvanize supporters. She argues that Christie isn’t the moderate he appears to be, citing his veto last year of a bill that would have allowed same-sex couples to marry in New Jersey.

Yet New Jersey voters don’t really care that much about either of those issues, recent statewide polls have shown. Nor do they appear to care much about the state’s recovery from Superstorm Sandy, which Christie emphasized in the weeks leading up to the July 4 holiday, or about funding for women’s health care, a priority of Buono’s.

Instead, the economy, jobs and New Jersey’s sky-high property tax bills are what voters tell pollsters they want to hear more about as they prepare to decide one of only two gubernatorial contests being held in the United States this year.

So why are the two candidates largely ignoring the issues foremost on the minds of New Jersey voters?

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Vote on Amash Amendment Reveals Ruse of Two-Party System
« Reply #86 on: July 26, 2013, 12:53:47 PM »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/vote-on-amash-amendment-reveals-ruse-of-two-party-system.html

Vote on Amash Amendment Reveals Ruse of Two-Party System

Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.
New American
July 26, 2013

For all those who still believe that Republican=Constitutionalist and Democrat=Liberty-hating liberal, something happened on Capitol Hill that might change your mind.

As was reported by The New American, the House of Representatives narrowly defeated an amendment to the defense appropriations sponsored by Republican Congressman Justin Amash (shown) of Michigan and Democratic Congressman John Conyers, also of Michigan.

The Amash Amendment would have revoked authority “for the blanket collection of records under the Patriot Act. It would also bar the NSA and other agencies from using Section 215 of the Patriot Act to collect records, including telephone call records, that pertain to persons who are not subject to an investigation under Section 215” of the Patriot Act.

Despite the threat to the Establishment (or perhaps because of it), Amash’s measure failed by a vote of 205-217.

It’s the identity of the “ayes” and “nays” that tells the rest of the story.

An analysis of the roll call reveals that a majority of Democrats voted in favor of restricting the Obama administration’s wholesale surveillance of Americans, while a majority of the GOP voted to uphold the NSA’s unconstitutional surveillance of all electronic communications.

Though the final tally was close, the fix was in. In a rare demonstration of meddling in the making of the legislative sausage, the White House issued a statement warning, in not-so-elegant language, that a vote for the Amash amendment was a vote for terrorism.

In a statement published on the White House website, press secretary Jay Carney said, referring to the Amash amendment, “In light of the recent unauthorized disclosures, the President has said that he welcomes a debate about how best to simultaneously safeguard both our national security and the privacy of our citizens.”

Does the president really “welcome a debate?” By their fruits ye shall know them.

Ever since the documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden shined the light of disclosure into the shadowy activities of the surveillance apparatus that has categorized every citizen as a suspect, the White House has ferociously and rabidly attacked Snowden. Perhaps nicotine wipes the short-term memory and the president has forgotten calling Snowden a “traitor” and calling for him to be held accountable for the harm he caused national security.

In the spirit of bipartisanship, however, it’s not as if Republicans fell over each other standing up for the Constitution and the oaths they swore to uphold it.

The list of Republicans joining of the chorus of voices calling a vote for the Amash amendment a vote for radical Islam is impressive and instructive.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Why are both major parties silent about election fraud?
« Reply #87 on: April 10, 2014, 04:07:42 AM »
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/04/president-carter-bush-didnt-win-2000.html

President Carter: Bush Didn’t Win in 2000

by Washington's Blog
April 9, 2014

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roTd_X6rQ34

Many commentators – including both liberal and conservative Supreme Court justices such as Sandra Day O’Connor – believe that the Supreme Court wrongfully threw the election to Bush.  Many have called it the “worst Supreme Court decision in history”.

Liberals also believe that the “Brooks Brothers Riot” against the recount was a dirty trick by high-level Republican operatives (and see this):



But the elephant in the room which most Democrats refuse to consider is election fraud. This is odd, given that there is substantial evidence that election fraud has been widespread in the U.S. in recent years.

Why won’t they admit that election fraud is widespread?

Perhaps because they benefit from the false appearance of free and fair elections. As Sonoma State University professor and Project Censored Director Peter Phillips noted in 2005:

    There is little doubt key Democrats know that votes in 2004 and earlier elections were stolen. The fact that few in Congress are complaining about fraud is an indication of the totality to which both parties accept the status quo of a money based elections system. Neither party wants to further undermine public confidence in the American “democratic” process (over 80 millions eligible voters refused to vote in 2004)…. Future elections in the US will continue as an equal opportunity for both parties to maintain a national democratic charade in which money counts more than truth.

A more cynical view: the Democratic “leadership” may simply hope to be able to outspend the Republicans in the election fraud arm’s race.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline iamc2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,825
Re: Election Reform!
« Reply #88 on: April 10, 2014, 05:08:00 AM »
 Sir , I would agree and I believe this political system is so corrupt /on both sides/that it will never be fixed/we will have to replace it with the Real System: which is The Constitution.
"When the Truth was murdered:
Common Sense ran away..."

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Is America Ready for Another Bush-Clinton Campaign?
« Reply #89 on: May 03, 2014, 06:49:22 AM »
The 2008 presidential "election" was the last one I participated in (I voted for Nader), and the following is why it will probably remain so...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lincoln-mitchell/is-america-ready-for-anot_b_5254232.html

Is America Ready for Another Bush-Clinton Campaign?

Lincoln Mitchell
The Huffington Post
May 02, 2014

With the 2016 presidential election only -- yes, only -- 30 months away, the possibility of a Clinton-Bush contest is something that is looking increasingly likely. That contest would pit the country's two most famous political families against each other for the first time since 1992. Jeb Bush would be the third Bush to seek the presidency since 1980, while Hillary Clinton would be the second Clinton to seek that office since 1992. Since 1980, a Clinton or Bush has either been on the ticket or made a strong bid to be on the ticket in every election but one. A Clinton-Bush matchup in 2016 would be the culmination of that. There have been powerful political families in the US before, including the Kennedy, Adams and Byrd families, but this election could take that dynamic to a new and higher level.

Describing Hillary Clinton as the front-runner for her party's nomination is an understatement. There are no other announced candidates, even though Clinton herself has not yet formally announced. Moreover, other potential candidates, like Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, have gone out of their way to say they are not interested in running so long as Clinton is even considering the race. The extent to which Democrats are trying to make sure Clinton is the nominee by acclimation is striking.

Jeb Bush is in a different situation. The Republican field already includes several candidates who, while not yet formally announced, need to be taken seriously, including Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul. Nonetheless, Bush is among the very strongest Republican candidates in recent polls, and if he runs, will very likely benefit from the organization, name recognition and relationships cultivated over the last three or four decades by his father and brother.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Owais

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: Election Reform!
« Reply #90 on: November 14, 2014, 01:32:14 AM »
When will be Election doing.

Offline thinkitout

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Will most voters fall for the "lesser of two evils" argument YET AGAIN?
« Reply #91 on: August 30, 2015, 06:53:30 PM »
If there's one thing both of the two banker-owned major parties have proven over the last decade, it's that if you put either one in charge of both the legislative and executive branches of government, the parasitic war budget continues to grow more monstrous, the domestic police state continues to become more and more like Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, and the corporatized economy continues to become more and more like that of a poverty-stricken Third World nation.

In view of this reality, can any of you lesser-evil voters out there provide a rational explanation as to why you think voting yet again for one or the other of those two parties will do anything other than bring us more of the same?

Or does the level of thought required to answer such a question spoil the fun of treating politics as just another spectator sport?



       Choices that intelligent voters would deem to be favorable would obviously be unlikely to get the support of those who provide the financial backing for nominees. Standard operating procedures in our election process dictate that significant funds be raised to finance sufficient exposure for prospective candidates, and those most able to provide those funds more often than not expect their selected candidates to represent their own political and economic views.  Thus, the selection process itself is most likely to provide us with only the choices of well-funded special-interest groups, and the best interests of our country and the general population are almost certainly given a lower priority, if considered at all. As long as the American public continues to be fooled  by the highly-funded media popaganda financed by those who continue to exploit us, would even the slightest possibility of the election of the "greater of two evils" be a preferred scenario?  Without considerable support by the media, third party candidates don't stand a chance.

       Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, "The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government." We need to take back our hijacked information network. THE FIRST AMENDMENT WAS MEANT TO PROMOTE FREEDOM, NOT TO PROMOTE PROFIT AT THE EXPENSE OF FREEDOM.  MONEY IS THE SOURCE OF OUR PROBLEMS, NOT THE SOLUTION.

      The media traditionally have had two very important functions in society which only they have been able to perform: increasing public awareness and promoting social justice.  However, they are presently intimidated by the considerable financial influence of the corporate sector.  Our only hope to improve our political situation is through widespread communication, despite the media's unwillingness to cooperate.  We must identify and universally acknowledge the true sources of our problems before we can successfully implement solutions, and in order to do this we must publicly challenge the logic and the motivation of the media-backed forces that enslave us.
 
     Our preoccupation with party politics overshadows our commitment to the once-traditional common values, and the subsequent division has led to an orchestrated government takeover by the corporate sector.  As a result of this, these traditional values are no longer a prerequisite for political office.  Lies are uncovered without consequence, and motivations become less subtle, but those who are totally absorbed with their own self-interests and unconcerned with the welfare of others and even the fate of our nation nevertheless retain their loyal following. We can no longer blame government officials; the fault is ours.  Our public responsibility doesn't end with casting our votes, but in order to effectively monitor and direct our congressional representatives, the American public collectively needs to make a universal commitment to common values, giving us a single, much stronger voice. In order to preserve our heritage and allow its perpetuation into future generations we must put the issues contributing to our division into perspective and make ethical decisions to resolve our differences.  Unity is the most essential component of a democracy.

     Given the fact that we do not trust the government officials who would necessarily initiate and supervise any election reform legislation, shouldn't we closely monitor the process?

      I was encouraged to see your reading recommendations in an earlier post, and I would like to add an ebook which I  published myself on Amazon Kindle, entitled "FREEDOM DOESN'T TRICKLE DOWN: REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGING FACE OF OUR DEMOCRACY".
 
 

Online Al Bundy

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,274
Re: Election Reform!
« Reply #92 on: August 31, 2015, 02:10:11 AM »
I am afraid yes.  :(

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Election Reform!
« Reply #93 on: February 02, 2016, 12:46:54 PM »
Now does everyone see why I created this thread seven years ago?
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Election Reform!
« Reply #94 on: August 13, 2016, 06:23:45 PM »
In response to the seminar caller who called in earlier today, I thought I'd bump this thread.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,075
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Election Reform!
« Reply #95 on: February 21, 2017, 01:34:39 PM »
http://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Electoral_Reform_Act_of_2015

Electoral Reform Act of 2015

History

The Electoral Reform Act of 2015 originated in the Occupy Working Group on Electoral Reform in 2011 when Robert Steele integrated their existing concepts with those of many others to arrive at an 11-point electoral reform proposal. Jim Turner created the Electoral Integrity Pledge and suggested the outlines of the Electoral Statement of Demand. It was preceded by the Electoral Reform Act of 2012, an 11-point aggregation of the ideas of many others that was featured at We the People Reform Coalition as created by Robert Steele when he ran briefly for the Reform Party nomination for President in 2012.

A very important influence on the deliberations of those coming together on the Electoral Reform Act of 2012 and hence 2015 were the Election Integrity Principles devised by Gail Work and others including Eva Waskell.

Provisions

Below are the eight provisions of current Electoral Reform Act of 2015. These are intended as a starting point for a national conversation and an Electoral Reform Summit that issues the Electoral Reform Statement of Demand and requires of each sitting Senator and Representative signature of the Electoral Integrity Pledge.

1.  Free & Equal Ballot Access for all qualified candidates – an end to the two-party tyranny.
2.  Tightly-drawn districts ending gerrymandering, plus at large members for selected voting blocs such as our gay and lesbian communities and religious minorities.
3.  Equal public funding for all qualified candidates – we kill CITIZENS UNITED & all donations from any organizations and all foreign countries.
4.  Free & Equal Access to print and broadcast media for all qualified candidates and their Cabinet appointees – to be a candidate in the General Election the candidate must appoint a coalition cabinet and produce a balanced budget.
5.  Debates to include all Independent and small party candidates including candidates from emerging parties not yet accredited nationally such as Working Families. We terminate the two-party debate Commission and restore the League of Women Voters as debate managers.
6.  Paper ballots will be used with those ballots counted publicly and on site – we take both mail and electronic fraud off the table.
7.  End winner take all plurality voting and implement a new voting system agreed upon by the public – Instant Run-Off seems the easiest for everyone to grasp and embrace.
8.  End party-line voting, demand that all legislation be published in advance for national ballot consideration, end all lobbying, implement line-item citizen vetoes as well as Executive vetoes, and schedule an Article V Constitutional Convention for 2018.

Book

A book is available at Amazon Kindle, OPEN POWER: Electoral Reform Act of 2015 - Open Source Activist Tool-Kit. The book is available free in epub or Word Document version on request to Robert Steele.

Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline iamc2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,825
Re: Election Reform..Vote them OUT!
« Reply #96 on: February 22, 2017, 10:33:14 PM »
 We The People have The Right to vote these morons OUT of Government.

...Now in 2017 we the people are doing this and the Plants in DC are Sh*ting their pants.

...Game is over and, We The people will WIN!

President Trump said: "We will Win" and his word is true at this pint in time...and I say: "AMEN!"

Bottom line is 'Vote out the fools and we may have our Nation back to the truth!;
"When the Truth was murdered:
Common Sense ran away..."