You are browsing the archive for Elections.

Ron Paul video 2008 – Peace and Respect

07 Feb 2012 in Elections, Force

The proponents of Force have continued since long before the founding of America. If we allow their drive for the common good to continue, our Right to Life will be completely negated as they continue their nonsense, which is always the repression of Liberty.
This Ron Paul Video (below) is not new, but instead shows the consistency which has endured for years, is the best possible example of his moral position that War holds no answers for the survival of our human species. 
Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate of the Dem-Reps who stands upon the foundation of Liberty.
For example, those who refuse to grasp that Iran is most unlikely to attack while the Nuke count is 5000:0000 against it.  Iran’s rulers may be a little crazy, but who really sees them as starting a war which would guarantee the end of their nation and exterminate their entire populace?
Please listen carefully, and with an open mind, if that’s possible!

<object width=”640″ height=”360″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/XtQTTSmc-CU&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3″></param><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><param name=”allowScriptAccess” value=”always”></param><embed src=”http://www.youtube.com/v/XtQTTSmc-CU&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowfullscreen=”true” allowScriptAccess=”always” width=”640″ height=”360″></embed></object>

2
0
  

What if Voters were Free to Chose?

07 Jan 2012 in Elections, GOVERNment, NewPosts

This article will discuss voiding the stranglehold of our “2 Party System”.
We’ll use Judge Andrew Napolitano to stir your mind and set the mood:

What IS this stranglehold?  By various means, of which I don’t pretend to know all, the Dem-Reps have managed to assert a monopoly which serves to restrict the rights of citizens to freely vote their choice of either a party or their candidates. 

This is hardly the first time – it’s been going on for decades.  The Vote2012 campaigns are the finest current example. Ron Paul, being more libertarian than republican, is running well to perhaps win the republican nomination.  With several candidates in the race, most are little better than “more of the same”, while Ron Paul stands outside that mainstream.  It seems that the Rep Party bigwigs like that not at all, and so many of the party members are blindly loyal to their party– which of course it true of both parties.

Therefore, we see a great hue and cry that no matter who wins the republican nomination, all must vote for the republican presidential nominee.  Why?  Because otherwise you’re just voting for Obama.  Of course that is a braindead falsehood.  Any vote not for Obama, no matter who, is NOT a vote for Obama.  Elementary, my dear Watson! 

The many supporters of Ron Paul (my own feelings about him are rather mixed) are saying that, come the general election, that rather than vote for any other republican, they will write-in Ron Paul  Further, despite that Ron Paul repeatedly says he will not run as a Libertarian or Independent, I think that if those chips come down, he will continue under another label.

So then America will face the problem of the Dem-Rep monopoly.  Most remember when Ross Perot ran against Dem Clinton and Rep Bush I.  Perot pulled a substantial vote, resulting in nobody winning the majority vote.  Thus Clinton, not with a majority, but rather with only 43% of the total vote, became President.

TWO PROBEMS are thus obvious.  

First, those who did break from the mold to vote for Perot found their votes wasted, and along with that, Perot probably got far fewer votes because the “rebels” who voted for him were fewer because so many don’t wish to waste their votes.  Those are the too-many people who will vote for “the lesser of evils” rather than vote their Convictions and Principles.  So every election results merely in “more of the same”, regardless of which Monopoly Party’s nominee might win. 

Second, if our voting system merely provided for RUNOFF VOTING whenever nobody wins with a majority vote, this problem could not exist.  The two-party monopoly is broken, and the door is wide open for other candidates to have an equal chance based upon the voter’s preference.  The RunOff voting system merely eliminates those who got too few votes to make the RunOff Election.  There would be various ways in which a proper law would make that determination. 

There are also problems with State Election Laws which the Dem-Reps brought upon the citizens.  Those may be different between states.  In Arizona, the qualifications to establish a new party are heavy, and if that party does not get a substantial percentage of votes each election, if it wishes to continue it must re-qualify.  Again, it serves to preserve the Dem-Rep monopoly under the guise of a “two party system”, despite that the differences between the parties has diminished to virtually meaningless.  That’s another subject for another day.

Can we possibly manage a Constitutional Amendment or something otherwise to get Runoff Elections in place BEFORE Vote2012?  If we don’t, the future of America becomes even bleaker if somehow the absence of Runoff Elections does result in reelecting the most dangerous so-called president America has ever endured.

 

6
0
  
Avatar of Tasine

by Tasine

Democratic Party/US Communist Party

29 Dec 2011 in Collectivism, Elections, GOVERNment, Liberty, NewPosts

CPUSA Labor Commission Chairman, Scott Marshall emphasized their working relationship with the AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka, in what he calls their continuing efforts of “independent” union organizations operating in, or for political campaigns.  This occurs beginning at the 12:05 mark of the 11/8/2010 video, “CPUSA analysis of the  Mid Term Elections,” presented below.

Marshall’s words: “Not only did the campaigning take place from union halls et cetera, et cetera, but this time, as, uh, Trumka told us when he was in Chicago, they began with the nuts and bolts a’ building independent labor campaign organizations in specific five key cities around the country, of which Chicago was one.  I think the question of how we…”

One should be apprised, this broadcast and interview were produced by PoliticalAffairs.net and the Progressive Podcast Network.  This further underscores a working solidarity between self avowed Communists and America’s progressives.

It is a good idea to understand how the opposition thinks.

Here, leading members of the highly influential Communist Party USA analyze the recent Mid Term election results.
http://gulagbound.com/8554/communist-party-usa-analysis-of-mid-term-elections/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Over all, they’re not happy, and in their analyses they naturally accuse the opposition (Republican Party) of spending a LOT of money to put forth lies, fear, hatred, all the jargon we’ve been listening to from Progressives for 3 years now.  This tells me they are not analytical at all – they are stuck on the mantra I once called the Democrat mantra ……… now I find the Democrat mantra was actually one and the same as the Communist mantra.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the communist magazine (2008) was a plea from Quentin Young, a long-time Obama friend and socialist activist, calling for socialized medicine, which is is a major platform issue for both the Communist Party USA and the Democratic Socialists for America.

“The only effective cure for our health-care woes is to establish a single, publicly financed system, one that removes the inefficient, wasteful, for-profit private health insurance industry from the picture,” said Young, who is the national coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program.

“Our country is hailing the remarkable and historic victory of Barack Obama and the mandate for change the electorate has awarded him.”

Young said the adoption of a single-payer health system should be a “major component of the new president’s economic rescue of Main Street.”

Young noted Obama previously expressed support of a single-payer universal health-care program, although he later waffled when asked about his position.

Read more: Communist Party hails role of labor unions in Obama  http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=80925#ixzz1hvrltb5x

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So from this article,  http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=80925
we see that a really large part of Obama’s agenda was not Obama’s agenda, but in fact the Communist Party agenda.  Obama was merely the tool used to force socialized medicine on the American people.

In my mind, what we who are not communist sympathizers should be doing is to constantly tie the Democrat Party and Labor Unions to the Communist Party.  It wouldn’t be a lie, and it wouldn’t hurt when they accuse us of hatred – it is a FACT that I hate Communism, and I always will.

5
0
  

Voting in America, for Principle, or for the Lesser of Evils?

31 Oct 2011 in Congress, Elections

There is constant debate on the www over this question.  America has a desperate need to get rid of Obama, his cohorts and his insane agenda of collectivist force.  at this time the Republicans are thrashing about in the haystack, hoping to select a candidate who can beat Obama.  It seems that objective is considered by many to be the first priority of Election2012, and that group obviously feels principle takes the hind-seat.  IOW they will vote for the “Lesser of Evils” even if that means compromising the principles held firmly for their lifetime.  Many have never considered their principles to be important, leaving me to wonder why they bother to vote at all!

Being a Libertarian, I have no vote in the Republican primaries.  No matter what, I will never vote for Obama just as I didn’t vote for him in 2008.  I have always voted my Principles, holding those far above any “Lesser of Evils”.  In 2008 I did not vote for McCain despite realizing that Obama was the most dangerous candidate for president America has ever seen.  That year there were 132 million votes – what are the odds that any single vote will make a difference?  That’s a huge joke indeed!

America’s voting system has several deficiencies, one being no option to vote “none of the above”.  Were that an option with real potential, if None of the Above were to win the vote of the majority, it would or should have the effect of rejecting all candidates, thus starting over again from Square One.

In 1992 we had Clinton vs Bush Sr for Dem/Reps, and Perot as a real live candidate getting 18.9% of the vote representing “None of the Above”.  Clinton was awarded with the presidency with, not a majority, but with only 43% of the vote. That seems totally wrong to me.  That should have required a  new election with all new candidates.  ‘Tis bad enough to be subject to “Majority Rule” and worse still when we are Ruled by less than a majority.

The Democrats and Republicans have ganged up against Americans by getting laws in most states which make unreasonable requirements preventing other parties and/or candidates from being on the ballot.  No Party should EVER be superior to the Individual.  There should be no place on any ballot to choose straight party voting, which serves only to allow voters who have not bothered to study and know either the candidates or the issues to vote without engaging their brains.  Going a step beyond that, listing the party of each candidate results in much the same — it requires no real knowledge and very little thinking beyond looking for that (R) or (D).

Bottom line:  To spin that not voting for a candidate of a “major” party is somehow a vote for Obama is not only stupid, it’s downright insulting.  The Lesser of Evils is still Evil.

 

 

 

 

 

4
0
  
Avatar of Tasine

by Tasine

What If?

01 Jul 2011 in Congress, Constitution, Elections, Force, NewPosts, Taxation

Old Glory

 

I hear the comment constantly on TV, “We want to make sure this neeeveeeer happens again”, and I always sneer because of course it is going to happen again no matter what steps are taken because human nature will win out.
Since I believe human nature does always win out, I’ve thought about how to avoid ever again having an illegal President in the White House, and how we avoid ever again having a corrupt Congress when we cannot replace all members at the same time except violently and none of us wants violence.? Goodness, most Americans don’t even want to have to see someone slapped, let alone injured.
So, in thinking of this, I’d like to throw out a few thoughts to all interested parties to see how this would fly.
I am not sure in what order the following would need to be done, but the steps would be:

Eliminate the federal government as we know it – NO elected officials in a centralized place denoting federal government.

Return all issues to the states, restoring their rights and sovereignties.

Have ONLY state elections

Have the governor of each state or his appointee represent that state on a Board that would set standards for management of the nation’s business

There would be no federal laws

There would be a military, and the governors would appoint a commander in chief to oversee the military.

There would be a hired management company to manage the nation’s business, and the governors would hire them and could fire them.? This company would make none of the rules, and would write NO laws and would have NO legal force except with their own employees,? but would follow the governor’s directives.

There would be transparency, openness.?? There would be no paid agency or bureau within the national? scene.

States would be supreme, and NO ONE would overrule them.? This would involve setting some rules – any state official caught taking bribes or having the appearance of same could be fired on the spot by the state legislature, and if they would not do their job, THEY could be fired immediately and replaced by the district they represented.? States could divvy up on what would be needed in the way of programs, agencies, etc, and those would be paid by the state.

No taxes could be levied at the federal level.? All taxing would come from the state, and if the state is smart, it will only tax for those things citizens are willing to be taxed for.

In essence the US Constitution would have to be altered to take these changes into account and make them legal.? The only Amendments allowed to stand would be the Bill of Rights.

There is still much to add, but I honestly believe this type of change would make what has happened to our country a lot more difficult to replicate, would provide more freedoms to individuals and to companies, would return sovereignty to the states and to the individuals within each state.? Politicians would HATE this idea because it would pull them back where they belong – working for the US citizens.

0
0
  

JUST THINKING; HISTORY REPEATING ITSELF

08 Jun 2011 in Congress, Constitution, Elections, Force, Immigration, Secession

I created a blog on Sodahead the other day named ?WILL 2012 LEAD TO THE RE-BIRTH OF A NATION ??

My thoughts were seeing the amazing parallels of the times in early America and what lead up to the final act of war. ?I see today the policies of the Progressive Democratic Party repeating history.

So what were the signs and happenings of that day that eventually led to the birth of a new Nation …

In 1766, a new government came into power in Great Britain. This new government, like those before it, came to the conclusion it needed to raise additional money from the colonies. Charles Townshend was the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Townshend immediately began investigating means to increase revenue from the colonies and to make colonial governors and judges independent of colonial control, to create a more effective means of enforcing compliance with trade regulations, and to establish the controversial precedent that Parliament had the right to tax the colonies. He came up with the idea of placing a duty on items imported into the colonies.

To help enforce the Townshend Acts, 4,000 British army troops were sent to Boston beginning in 1768.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Townshend.html

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/british.html

The event began on King Street, today known as State Street, in the early evening of March 5, 1770 in front of Private Hugh White, a British sentry, as he stood duty outside the Custom house. ?A young wigmaker’s apprentice called out to a British officer, claiming he had not paid his bill. The officer had in fact settled his account and ignored the insult. ?The apprentice gathered some friends and continued his complaints and some began throwing rocks. ?Each side exchanged insults until a Private White left his post and challenged the boy apprentice striking him on the side of the head with a musket. This attracted a larger crowd.

When threatened by the mob the troops fired leaving three civilians dead at the scene, eleven injured, and two died later.? This act of aggression helped spark the rebellion, which culminated in the American Revolutionary War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boston_Massacre

On the evening of December 16th, 1773 thousands of Bostonians and farmers from the surrounding countryside packed into the Old South Meeting house to hear Samuel Adams. Adams denounced the Governor for denying clearance for vessels wishing to leave with tea still on board. After his speech the crowd headed for the waterfront. From the crowd, 50 individuals emerged dressed as Indians. They boarded three vessels docked in the harbor and threw 90,000 pounds of tea overboard.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Tea.html

In 1774 the British parliament gave its speedy assent to a series of acts that became known as the “Coercive Acts”; or in the colonies as the “Intolerable Acts”.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Coercive.html

Great Britain hoped that the Coercive Acts would isolate radicals in Massachusetts and cause American colonists to concede the authority of Parliament over their elected assemblies. It was a calculated risk that backfired, however, because the harshness of some of the acts made it difficult for moderates in the colonies to speak in favor of Parliament.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts

In 1774 Jefferson wrote ?A Summary View of Rights of British America? to the King ?

?Scarcely have our minds been able to emerge from the astonishment into which one stroke of parliamentary thunder has involved us, before another more heavy, and more alarming, is fallen on us. Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.?

http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/Jefferson/Summaryview.html

On May 25th, 1774, the Massachusetts General Court elected members to the Governor’s Council. Governor Hutchison vetoed 12 of the members, including John Adams.

On August 10th, 1774 John Adams and the delegation set off for Philadelphia. The delegation arrived in Philadelphia twenty days later, after visiting Hartford, New Haven and New York on the way. They began meeting members of the other delegations.

On September 5, 1774 the entire delegation met. All of the colonies, with the exception of Georgia, had sent representatives. The Congress was divided between militant and conservative delegates. The conservative delegates wanted to buy time to allow the British government to come to its senses. The more militant delegates wanted to take immediate action against the British.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Cont.html

The Revolutionary War started in 1775.? Five years after the Boston Massacre.

Whether you wish to admit it or not we are losing our citizenship and becoming subjects to the Progressive Democratic Party and exploited in whatever way best suits Washington.

It?s a shame and it is scary but I believe history is going to repeat itself as more and more states gather together in a common alliance against illegals, drug cartels, loss of state rights, and the constant attacks against our 1st (Speech), 2nd, (Arms) and 4th (Privacy) Amendments.

I believe we better vote for a strong leader in 2012 to bring us through it and that strong leader is NOT the Obama!

0
0
  

Rand Paul Slams Obama, Defends Israel

22 May 2011 in Elections, Voluntary

Posting this article from The American Spectator By on 5.20.11 @ 3:36PM is somewhat off the mark for NoRuler, but I’m posting this simply because Rand Paul is the ONLY person in Congress who makes sense every time he speaks.

At this juncture, nobody else on the horizon makes sense to me.

Read the link please, it won’t take long

0
0
  

A Journey to Understand

06 May 2011 in Collapse, Debt, Economics, Elections, Forums, Inflation, NewPosts

On April 25th, USW posed a question to me, which was based on my response to JustACitizen. Concerning the 2012 national elections, I had replied to JAC that I did not believe they would occur. USW then asked why I think such a thing and that he certainly didn’t feel the same. The answer isn’t as easy as some would think. I began to feel this way over three years ago, after Obama was elected. Not that Obama did anything wrong, I just had a strong gut feeling that there would be no 2012 elections, as they will be cancelled or delayed for some time. There was something wrong, that I could not pinpoint, but I felt so strongly about it that I told people who were closest to me. But when asked why I felt this way, I could not answer, thus began my journey to understand!

So how many of you, at some point in your life, had a sudden feeling come over you that something was very, very wrong? You know, that sixth sense that we all claim to have but can’t be proven. That happened to me, several years ago, and the first words out of my mouth, was ” There will not be an election in 2012″. For the sake of legalities, I claim sole ownership of this statement, therefore I own it. Any use of it must come with expressed permission from the owner, ME! (humor intended)?At the moment of uttering these words, my first thought was why? So I ventured into a fact finding mission that turned into a journey. A journey that has blessed me with knowledge, understanding and a sense of peace within myself.

I was lacking in political, economic and philosophical knowledge, that over the last few years I have been able to greatly improve. I credit those here on SUFA for a majority of that, and I have learned to research and come to conclusions based on this new found knowledge. I can honestly say, that because of the current geopolitical and economic conditions that we are facing, I am holding to my prediction that the 2012 national elections will not take place on the scheduled date, if at all. I have many reasons for this now, not just a gut feeling.

Our Government: It’s simple. They are corrupt to the core. The two party system is a joke that does not serve the people any justice. They are supposed to be “of the people, by the people and for the people” They are none of the above. They have as a whole in 2008 ignored the will of the people and voted to bail out Wall Street. They did it again with Obama’s stimulus, which failed miserably. It continued, until the most recent actions of President Obama, when he sent our troops into harms way in Libya, without Congressional approval, as required by the Constitution and the War Powers Act. Congress will do nothing on this matter, furthering my beliefs of things to come.

Our Economy: We are in deep poopoo here folks. Unemployment is not getting better and prices are rising. Gas is soon going to cost what $5, $6, $7 or even more by the end of the year. I predicted this winter that gas would be $4 to $5 a gallon by October. It looks like that will occur by Memorial Day, as traditionally, gas goes up for the summer travelling season, which for many, is cancelled already. The dollar is devaluing, in 2008 when oil hit $100 a barrel, gas hit $3.05 a gallon, this year, oil hit $100 and gas was $3.79. That’s a very big difference in just three years. Food prices are going to begin to hurt for those on government aid, if that’s not already occurring.

The Future: Ugly! Economically it could be the most violent time within our borders since the Civil War. This country can’t sustain 7 or more dollars a gallon for gas for very long at all. Can you imagine what 10 bucks a gallon would do to this nation? Most people will only consider their personal situation in assessing the what ifs , while discounting others who aren’t so lucky to have enough wealth to weather the storm (ask Charlie, he’ll tell you). The dangers of these possibilities and how you deal with them could make a difference in survival, not just for you and your immediate family, but relatives and friends who may become displaced.

The Future II: Ugly! Politically, how will government handle this if it comes to be? If their recent actions are any indication, not very well for us. If major civil unrest occurs, the government will likely do the same thing they did in New Orleans after Katrina, if not worse. How are they treating the citizens today? The TSA, the DHS, the President’s actions with Libya. All a tell tale sign of what could be coming to our cities if the economy drops out. When people are hungry, it’s gonna be a tough ride for this nation and it’s citizens.

So why am I predicting no elections in 2012? Because it’s gonna take time to get to where I think we are going. Once we get there, and the government cracks down on the civil unrest, what politician will be able to campaign, much less get many votes. They would all be gone where violence occurred on the citizens by the government. They will need time, to try and save their sorry hides, so the easiest thing to do, cancel or delay elections. If anyone thinks for one minute that with this nation under a State of Emergency, or worse, Marshal Law, that Congress will not vote to do this, think again.

So there you have it, my journey to understand one simple statement made in 2008. Some of you will think I’m bat shit crazy, some a conspiracy theorist, some a Black Flag waiving nut or just plain whacko. That’s OK! I hope I’m wrong. I want to be wrong! But what if I’m not?

Live Free!

G!

0
0