We didn’t pick up the Win last night but we still want to thank all of you for voting Republican!
” You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” Abraham Lincoln It looks like many people have been fooled in America. This is good news for the Antinewworldorderparty Patriots because we have only just begun to fight for the Truth to be heard so the Song of Liberty can be sang once again so the tree of Liberty will grow strong roots in the hearts and minds of we the people. Long live the United States of America the Republic that we so love.
Barack Obama wins reelection: Mid East faces nuclear Iran, Brotherhood grip
The prospect of another four years of Obama in the White House fills some Middle East nations, including the Persian Gulf and Israel, with trepidation. For Israel, this policy translates bleakly into American backing for the two most forbidding ideological foes it has faced in all its 63 years: Iran, whose leaders call openly for Israels extinction – even from the UN platform although this is achievable only by nuclear aggression; and the hostile US Government funded and creation of the CIA its own brain child, Muslim Brotherhood the best enemy money can buy.
Well done, now support our statehood bid, Palestinians tell Obama
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday issued a statement congratulating US President Barack Obama on his election victory and encouraging him to continue his efforts to achieve peace in the Middle East.
More than 300 people — or nearly a quarter of the roughly 1,200 individuals USA TODAY has identified as Romney fundraisers — come from the world of finance, more than any other sector. More than a dozen come from the ranks of a single company, investment powerhouse Goldman Sachs, which spent nearly $4.4 million to influence Washington policymakers last year.
By comparison, 77 of Obama’s 532 fundraisers work in the securities and investment industry, according to a tally by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. Obama has slammed Romney’s record in private equity, while Romney has pledged to dismantle financial-industry regulations enacted during the Obama administration.
NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for the 2012 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data released electronically on Thursday, October 25, 2012.
(“Help! The numbers don’t add up…”)
(ABC News) – Forget Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. The most exciting matchup of the night was between Karl Rove and his employer, Fox News.
A little after 11 p.m., Fox News and every other news outlet called the presidential race for Obama. Rove, the mastermind of George W. Bush’s campaign and now a political commentator on Fox, didn’t buy it. Read more… 417 more words
After a long and often times, highly contested election cycle, the balance of power on Capitol Hill remains essentially the same. Despite failing to capture the White House, Republicans were able to maintain control over the House by winning 231 seats compared to 186 on the Democratic side of the isle.
SOUTH CAROLINA – Freshman Congressman Jeff Duncan (R-SC) has won a second term as the representative for the 3rd Congressional District of South Carolina.
Folks I almost forgot to mention as I’ve been talking about Barack being the last president, according to the prophecy of St. Malachi, there will be 112 popes and our current pope (Nazi youth Razinger aka pope Benedict) is pope 111. So Barack being the last president and our next pope being the last makes sense as we head into the Tribulation as prophesied in the book of Revelation.
Once again emphasizing there is no fundamental difference between Obama and Romney when it comes to attacking Iran, the American Jewish Committee has published the answers to a questionnaire sent to the candidates.
“I am prepared to use all elements of American power” to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, Obama said in the questionnaires released Oct. 18 by the AJC, “including a political effort to further isolate Iran, a diplomatic effort to sustain our coalition, an economic effort that has imposed crippling sanctions, and a military effort to be prepared for any contingency.”
Romney’s response was nearly identical:
“I will press for ever tightening sanctions on the regime, acting multilaterally where we can and unilaterally where we must, and leave no doubt in the mind of the regime’s leaders that the military option remains on the table.”
Romney tried to make political points by sucking up to Israel and the Israeli lobby in the United States: “Unlike President Obama, I understand that distancing the U.S. from Israel doesn’t earn us credibility in the Arab world or bring peace closer,” he said. “Instead, it encourages Palestinians to hold out and wait for Washington to deliver more Israeli concessions.”
Romney said he plans to create “regional directors” who “will possess unified budgetary and policy authority.”
The JTA’s response to this development: “With such powers concentrated in an individual, pro-Israel groups would likely closely watch and want to influence whomever a Romney administration would name to the Middle East post.”
In fact, pro-Israel neocons already dictate Romney’s Middle East foreign policy. Fifteen of the 22 members of Romney’s foreign policy team were policy advisers under Bush, and six of them are former members of PNAC, Joseph Sarkisian points out.
Neocons from the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institute, and the Hudson Institute dominate Romney’s advisors. “The American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) thinks highly of these policy advisers, who are all ardent supporters of the Israeli desire to end Iran’s nuclear program with force if necessary,” writes Sarkisian.
“Just like in Iraq, there is no verifiable proof of WMD in Iran, yet once again the same group of people want to use the same methods to start a similar war for the interests of the few, with no regard for the consequences,” he concludes.
Poll results are, of course, highly misleading, but if we are to believe the latest results Romney and Obama are locked in a dead heat sixteen days out from the election.
Establishment fount Forbes predicts that if Obama gets re-elected, Israel will attack Iran in January, a move that will undoubtedly be supported by the United States.
Despite Romney’s coterie of neocons, Democrat Chuck Schumer believes Obama is more likely to attack Iran than his opponent. “I’ll tell you this on Iran, and I’ve said this to a couple of Romney supporters who agree, that if the sanctions fail, and military action is warranted, a re-elected President Obama is far more likely to launch that kind of military action, probably in concert with Israel, than would Mitt Romney,” Schumer told CNN in September.
Following Obama’s lackadaisical performance during the first debate, his administration “leaked” a plan for striking Iran’s nuclear facilities. CFR member and visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, David Rothkopf, wrote in Foreign Policy earlier this month that the White House and Israeli officials “assert that the two sides behind the scenes have come closer together in their views [regarding Iran] in recent days.”
Rothkopf quoted a “source close to the discussions” as saying that a surgical strike aimed at Iran’s enrichment facilities “might take only ‘a couple of hours’” at best and would be conducted by air using bombers and drones.
Despite the outcome of the election, a strike on Iran – limited, surgical or otherwise – will occur within the next few months, if not weeks.
This article was posted: Sunday, October 21, 2012 at 9:59 am
Its an outrage that a foreign company will count the 2012 presidential election. That right a Spanish Company Will “Count” American Votes Overseas In November! If you want to put salt in the wounds the foreign company is owned by NWO card carrying Communist party member George Soros. This story was Broadcast Sept 11, 2012 on coast to coast am. Its looking like a two headed snake is what we have to vote for, once again the NWO has both of their dogs in this fight. Now that Ron Paul is out of the fight and Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party is not given a voice on the Main Stream Media stage.
This same company also is counting votes for many other countries around the world. Bain alumni, now raising big money as Romney bundlers are also in the electronic voting machine business. This appears to be a repeat of the the infamous former CEO of Diebold Wally O’Dell, who raised money for Bush while his company supplied voting machines and election management software in the 2004 election.
Perhaps Obama had reason for supreme confidence when he said “after my election” rather than “in case of” to Russian President Medvedev! It was once said “It doesn’t matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes”. Joseph Stalin
Spanish online voting company SCYTL bought the largest vote processing corporation in the United States, it also acquired the means of manufacturing the outcome of the 2012 election. For SOE, the Tampa based corporation purchased by SCYTL in January, supplies the election software which records, counts, and reports the votes of Americans in 26 states–900 total jurisdictions–across the nation.
And although the votes will be cast in hometown, American precincts on Election Day, with the Barcelona-based SCYTL taking charge of the process, they will be routed and counted overseas.
SCYTL itself is a leader in internet voting technology and in 2010 was involved in modernizing election systems for the midterm election in 14 American states.
But although SCYTL’s self-proclaimed reputation for security had won the company the Congressionally approved task of handling internet voting for American citizens and members of the military overseas, upon opening the system for use in the District of Columbia, the University of Michigan fight song “The Victors” was suddenly heard after the casting of each ballot. The system had been hacked by U of M computer teachers and students in response to a challenge by SCYTL that anyone who wished to do so, might try!
Nevertheless, in spite of warnings by experts across the nation, American soldiers overseas will once again vote via the internet in 2012. And because SCYTL will control the method of voting and—thanks to the purchase of SOE–the method of counting the votes as well, there “…will be no ballots, no physical evidence, no way for the public to authenticate who actually cast the votes…or the count.”
The American advocacy group Project Vote has concluded that SCYTL’s internet voting system isvulnerable to attack from the outside AND the inside, a situation which could result in “…an election that does not accurately reflect the will of the voters…” Talk about having a flair for understatement!
Austerity Measures and Bailouts are just payments to the Illuminati Family’s by way or proxy! First the Banksters get Nations in dept by loans and bailouts that can not be paid back, like what is happening in America. Second The Nation makes governmental cuts like what is happening in EUROPE aka stealing pensions , cutting services like Parks, Police Teachers Firemen ect ect! Then the Government sells off Parks Government owned property, Roads Water ways Parks ect ect to the Illuminati Bankster Familys AKA the MOBSTERS!
This is all part of the(The Hegelian Dialectic) aka The Problem Reaction Solution method! .. the Illuminati family’s or the ruling elite create a problem, anticipating in advance the reaction that the population will have to the problem and then have the prepared Solution! Example an Global Economic Melt down. The after the people react and demand a solution to the created problems that was the desired agenda of the ruling elite. Then and only then the Pre prepared agenda of the Global Elite Banksters presented as the solution such as a one world Governmental Monetary system or Global Governmental system to fix the problem.
The bad part about this conspiracy is that along with the reaction to the problem the population becomes violent, in protesting the Austerity Measures implemented by the Governments! And once again (The Hegelian Dialectic)comes into place with FEMA CampsAKA Concentration Camps for the protesters dissidents and homeless people effected by the Illuminati s Global Agenda
The Expansionary fiscal contraction hypothesis is the economic theory that explores whether government austerity can result in economic expansion. This hypothesis indicates that expansion from austerity is very limited and occurs only during periods when consumption is not constrained.
Austerity measures are typically taken if there is a threat that a government cannot honor its debt liabilities. Such a situation may arise if a government has borrowed in foreign currencies that they have no right to issue or they have been legally forbidden from issuing their own currency. In such a situation, banks may lose trust in a government’s ability and/or willingness to pay and either refuse to roll over existing debts or demand extremely high interest rates. In such situations, inter-governmental institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) may demand austerity measures in exchange for functioning as a lender of last resort. When the IMF requires such a policy, the terms are known as ‘IMF conditionalities‘.
Development projects, welfare, and other social spending are common programs that are targeted for cuts: Taxes, port and airport fees, train and bus fares are common sources of increased user fees.
In many cases, austerity measures have been associated with protest movements claiming significant decline in standard of living. A case in point is the nation of Greece. The financial crisis—particularly the austerity package put forth by the EU and the IMF— was met with great anger by the Greek public, leading to riots and social unrest. On 27 June 2011, trade union organizations commenced a forty-eight hour labor strike in advance of a parliamentary vote on the austerity package, the first such strike since 1974. Massive demonstrations were organized throughout Greece, intended to pressure parliament members into voting against the package. The second set of austerity measures was approved on 29 June 2011, with 155 out of 300 members of parliament voting in favor. However, one United Nations official warned that the second package of austerity measures in Greece could pose a violation of human rights.[5]
Austerity programs can be controversial. In the Overseas Development Institute briefing paper “The IMF and the Third World” the ODI addresses five major complaints against the IMF’s austerity ‘conditionalities’. These complaints include these measures being “anti-developmental”, “self-defeating”, and “they tend to have an adverse impact on the poorest segments of the population”. In many situations, austerity programs are implemented by countries that were previously under dictatorial regimes, leading to criticism that the citizens are forced to repay the debts of their oppressors.[6][7][8]
Economist Richard D. Wolff has stated that instead of cutting government programs and raising taxes, austerity should be attained by collecting (taxes) from non-profitmultinational corporations, churches, and private tax-exempt institutions such as universities, which currently pay no taxes at all.[9]
In 2009, 2010, and 2011, workers and students in Greece and other European countries demonstrated against cuts to pensions, public services and education spending as a result of government austerity measures.[10][11] Following the announcement of plans to introduce austerity measures in Greece, massive demonstrations were witnessed throughout the country, aimed at pressing parliamentarians to vote against the austerity package. In Athens alone 19 arrests were made while 46 civilians and 38 policemen had been injured by June 29, 2011. The third round austerity has been approved by the Greece parliament on February 12, 2012 and has met strong opposition especially in the cities of Athens and Thessaloniki where the police have clashed with demonstrators.
Opponents argue that austerity measures tend to depress economic growth, which ultimately causes governments to lose more money in tax revenues. In countries with already anemic economic growth, austerity can engender deflation which inflates existing debt. This can also cause the country to fall into a liquidity trap, causing credit markets to freeze up and unemployment to increase. Opponents point to cases in Ireland and Spain in which austerity measures instituted in response to financial crises in 2009 proved ineffective in combating public debt, and placing those countries at risk of defaulting in late 2010.[12]
The term “Age of austerity” was popularized by British Conservative leader David Cameron in his keynote speech to the Conservative party forum in Cheltenham on April 26, 2009, when he committed to put an end to what he called years of excessive government spending.[13][14]
Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary named the word “austerity” as its “Word of the Year” for 2010 because of the number of web searches this word generated that year. According to the president and publisher of the dictionary, “austerity had more than 250,000 searches on the dictionary’s free online [website] tool” and the spike in searches “came with more coverage of the debt crisis”.[15]
This section is in a list format that may be better presented using prose. You can help by converting this section to prose, if appropriate. Editing help is available. (June 2011)
Anti-austerity protests, chiefly taking the form of massive street protests by those affected by them and some of them also involving a greater or lesser degree of militancy, have happened regularly across various countries, especially on the European continent, since the onset of the present-day worldwide financial crisis. The phenomena are, collectively, decidedly separate, conceptually, from the austerity measures themselves, even though the enactment of the latter is a prerequisite for the former. This is because they are of the sizes they are; that they cut across age groups (e.g., both students and older workers) and other demographics; that they can incorporate many different types of actions in many different segments of a given country’s economy including educationfunding, infrastructure funding, manufacturing, aviation, social welfare, and many many others; and that the phenomenon of austerity, when explained by itself, is inadequate to properly encompass the phenomenon of widespread opposition to it, and that opposition’s nuances and fluctuations.
Anti-austerity actions are varied, ongoing, and can be either sporadic and loosely-organised or longer-term and tightly-organised. Theycontinue as of the present day. Recent upheavals in Tunisia and in Egypt in 2011 were originally largely anti-austerity and anti-unemployment before turning into wider social revolutions.
Most recently, the global and still-spreading Occupy movement has arguably been the most noticeable physical enactment of anti-austerity and populist sentiment.
Austerity is mainly noticed by a country when its aspects (usually known as ‘cuts’) are implemented unilaterally and forcibly (a “hatchet job“) rather than through a more careful strategy of creeping normalcy wherein such cuts are made to seem reasonable, or at least tolerable. Austerity is usually only referred to by that name when it is part of a sweeping package or packages of reforms that have the openly-admitted effect of great or even complete overhaul of major aspects of a society’s socioeconomic core facilities, programs and/or services. Because of this nature, austerity programs in general often are virulently opposed by the populations experiencing them, as they tend to have an impact on the poorest segments of the population. Those who are pro-austerity (who usually refer to the process as “deficit reduction”) usually counter that these poorest segments of the population would also suffer the most should a debt crisisoccur[citation needed], an argument rejected by most anti-austerity individuals.
Prior to the 2010 European sovereign debt crisis, in many situations, austerity programs were implemented by countries that were previously under dictatorial regimes (e.g., Portugal, Greece, Spain), leading to criticism that the citizens are forced to repay the debts of their oppressors.[1][2][3] In Greece, for example, the current austerity measures are popularly viewed as a combination of leftover policies of the 1967-1974 military dictatorship in that country on the one hand, and the “betrayal” of socialist principles by the current parliamentary-majority Panhellenic Socialist Movement on the other hand, due to that party’s wholesale enactment of extremely severe austerity measures in the country, which most everyday Greeks conceive of as intensely right-wing in nature, at least when compared to the party’s officially-stated core beliefs.[citation needed]
In the present-day enactments of various “austerity budgets”, however, a prior history of dictatorship is not necessarily a precondition for the implementation of such a budget by a given government. Examples of countries implementing severe austerity measures without a history of what the world’s mainstream media would typically consider a ‘dictatorship’, include the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, the latter of which witnessed its housing market completely (rather than partially as elsewhere) collapse, and the Republic eventually appealing for a massive bailout from the International Monetary Fund, “in exchange for” implementation of a very severe austerity programme. The austerity measures and the terms of the IMF bailout became major aspects of the 2008–2011 Irish financial crisis, and popular anger over these issues played a very major role in the loss of governmental power of Fianna Fáil to opposition parties in the 2011 Irish general election. The loss was so complete and so total for Fianna Fáil that many commentators remarked that the results were “historic”. Fine Gael and the Labour Party entered in to a coalition government with one another, and Fine Gael’s leaders have vowed to re-negotiate the terms of the IMF bailout so that austerity can be slowed or stopped and the Irish economy can be given a chance to grow again.[4]Sinn Féin, which for the first time also won a notable percentage in the election, has called for a nationwide referendum over whether the bailout agreement should be scrapped altogether, but this suggestion has been met with dismissal by officials.[5]
Austerity in most European countries, including Spain and Italy — where there have been massive anti-austerity protests, wildcat strikes, and union-organized industrial actions of various types at semi-regular intervals since late 2008, earning for the most part massive worldwide media attention — is by no means limited to what could be the ‘expected’ areas of the economy that might in theory experience direct penalties as a result of gross mismanagement, such as financial institutions. In fact, financial institutions rarely, if ever, truly receive such ‘punishment’ by a country’s government; austerity-like levies could perfectly well be imposed on them for causing, or helping to cause, the crisis that leads to the austerity measures in the first place, but typically are not. Instead, it is argued (chiefly by people engaging in anti-austerity protests, but also some economists as well) that rather than ‘punish’ the banks and others truly responsible for the crisis, the government is instead ‘punishing’ regular people for the ‘crimes’ of others, namely the ‘elite’ and/or greedy professional money-handlers engaging in market manipulation.
100,000 peaceful anti-austerity protesters in front of the parliament of Greece on 29 June 2011.
The May–July 2011 Greek protests, also known as the “Indignant Citizens Movement” or the “Greek indignados”, started demonstrating throughout Greece on 25 May 2011;[6] the movement’s largest demonstration was on 5 June, with 300,000 people gathering in front of the Greek Parliament,[7] while the organizers put the number to 500,000.[8] The protests lasted for over a month without any violent incidents, while on 29 June 2011, amid a violent police crackdown and accusations of police brutality by international media and Amnesty International,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15] the square was evacuated but demonstrations continued the next day despite the crackdown;[16][17] they officially ended on 7 August 2011,[18] but resumed in October.
The 2011 Spanish protests, whose participants are sometimes referred to as the “indignados“, are a series of ongoing anti-austerity demonstrations in Spain that rose to prominence beginning on 15 May 2011; thus, the movement is also sometimes referred to as the May 15 or M-15 movement as well. It is a collection of several different instances of continuous demonstrations countrywide, with a common origin in internet social networks and the Democracia Real Ya web presence, along with 200 other small associations.[19]
In late March 2011 the Portuguese Prime Minister resigned a few hours after the latest austerity bill he backed was rejected by the rest of government. The government called that particular austerity round unacceptable.[20] In his resignation speech, Jose Socrates expressed concern that an IMF bailout akin to Greece and Ireland would now be unavoidable.
In mid-March 2011 the British Medical Association held an emergency meeting at which it broadly decided to emphatically oppose pending legislation in the British Parliament, the Health and Social Care Bill, that would overhaul the functioning of the National Health Service. Dr Layla Jader, a public health physician, said: “The NHS needs evolution not revolution – these reforms are very threatening to the future of the NHS. If they go through, our children will look back and say how could you allow this to happen?” And Dr Barry Miller, an anaethetist from Bolton, added: “The potential to do phenomenal damage is profound. I haven’t seen any evidence these proposals will improve healthcare in the long-term.”[21] There have also been various grassroots groups of UK citizenry virulently opposing the pending new bill, including NHS Direct Action,[22] 38 Degrees,[23] and the trade unionUnite.[24]
One of the United Kingdom‘s most severe austerity measures came into the force of law on 9 December 2010: spending for higher education and tuition subsidies and assistance in Englishuniversities — historically rather substantial in scale — was cut by an astounding total of 80%.[25] That announcement and its implications, which included a near-tripling of student tuition fees from their previous levels[26] up to a new ceiling of £9000/year, led to a huge backlash amongst students who almost immediately took to the streets over various non-sequential days against this announcement, squaring off with police on several occasions including an instance where some students angrily entered the Conservative headquarters and smashed windows and destroyed its interior.[27]On the day of the passage of the measure itself, there was an explosion of street violence by enraged students and their allies, especially in London. There is an ongoing law enforcement investigation into, and even active pursuing of,[28] the participants of the violence over the various protest days, with particular attention focusing on the moments when a number of protesters successfully attacked a royal car driving on its way to a London event,[29] although they did not injure its occupants. Shouts of “off with their heads” were reportedly heard.[30] On 25 March 2011, Charlie Gilmour, son of Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour, became one of the more high-profile individuals to be officially charged in relation to those events.[31] As a result of these protests, a number of groups formed to combat the austerity measures that began with the cuts to higher education. One such example is Bloomsbury Fightback!, which is a group of radical students and workers in Bloomsbury, London, centred around the Bloomsbury Colleges in theUniversity of London and focusing on organising around education and employment issues, of which many are the result of the austerity measures, .
The group UK Uncut is one outgrowth of the anger felt by average citizens at austerity, albeit the group focuses not so much on combating the cuts themselves as on demanding that the rich, rather than the poor, pay the shortfalls causing the austerity in the first place — a sort of “tax the rich” movement. UK Uncut attempts to organise flash mob protests inside the highest-profile buildings of the businesses of the rich people avoiding tax or paying less than they should.
Around the same time as the heating-up of the England protests (but before the passing of the bill), students in Italy occupied theleaning tower of Pisa in a similar protest regarding its own educational system.[32]
On 27 November 2010, a massive protest against pending austerity took place in Dublin;[33]The Irish Examiner news service also reports on a 7 December 2010 clash around the Dáil where protesters threw smoke bombs and flares at police.[34] Additionally, La Scala in Italy experienced a clash on 8 December 2010 including scuffles with police.[35]
More generally, throughout 2009 and 2010, workers and students in Greece and other European countries demonstrated against cuts to pensions, public services and education spending as a result of government austerity measures.[36] There was a brief airport strike in Spain in December 2010, and assorted brief “general strike”-like actions in France have taken place, particularly around the very controversial plan of the French government to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62, a proposal which eventually successfully passed.
Further protests have since taken place in Greece and elsewhere, have continued throughout 2011 and 2012,[37] including in Nigeriawith major large street clashes against the withdrawal of fuel subsidies. There was also a major protest in London by UK groups from across that country on 26 March 2011,[38] centred around a protest call initially made by the Trades Union Congress but subsequently involving many other groups. In general, the UK’s round of austerity measures, or “cuts”, from April 2011 onward are understood by most of the population to be, as an aggregated phenomenon, the worst withdrawal of public services since those services’ foundings, in the early 20th century and the post-World War II era. The coalition government currently in power in Britain repeatedly reassures the public that these public sector cuts will be replaced by a “Big Society” underpinned by charities, start-up businesses and private enterprise. Critics counter on the one hand that such a model is effective back-door privatisation, and on the other hand that even assuming the “Big Society” is a genuine populist initiative, it still fails conceptually, since the very charities and start-up businesses touted in this model are also the ones being severely slashed or eliminated by the new austerity-fuelled economics of the government.
Participants in more militant forms of protest engaged in during the 26th March demonstration, who in total only comprised 1,500 people out of the estimated 250,000-500,000 total participants, have been relentlessly attacked by the government as “mindless thugs”[39] with the UK’s mainstream media including the BBC generally supporting this perception. This remains the case even though the fundamental seriousness of damage thus far remains debatable; much reporting seems to have focused on the smashing of a Santander bank branch’s glass entranceway doors by largely anarchist activists, who would have also been behind the simultaneous destruction of several automated teller machines and the scrawling of “class war” in graffiti on neighbouring walls — rather than destruction of infrastructure such as roads, bridges, schools or homes that would have indisputably comprised terrorismby any objective measure. There are those who would therefore argue that the activists, even if misguided in their actions, still technically only targeted the institutions (i.e., banks) perceived responsible for the cuts, and did not cross the line into more general mayhem. Nevertheless, the Home Secretary Theresa May vociferously advocates the review by authorities of UK terrorism law to determine whether the Metropolitan Police can legally extend their own powers of arrest and detention using those provisions. Talk of the approximately 1,500 people involved in the militant aspects of the anti-cuts march almost totally eclipsed the more general event of up to half a million peaceable, albeit still angry, protesters who say they have very real, very personal grievances against the government’s cuts plans.
Economist Richard D. Wolff has stated that instead of cutting government programs and raising taxes, austerity should be attained by collecting from non-profitmultinational corporations, churches, and private tax-exempt institutions such as universities, which currently pay no taxes at all.[40] Groups like UK Uncut and the campaigners for a Robin Hood tax argue for a “tax the banks” strategy that is similar, as well as to argue that the banks and corporations severely underpay the taxes they already owe, and need to stop tax-dodging.
There are also those like Nobel PrizelaureatePaul Krugman, who argue that austerity measures tend to be counterproductive when applied to the populations and programs they are usually applied to.[41] This argument holds that austerity measures tend not to revitalize economies by ‘getting people off of benefits and back to work,’ and similar, but rather that austerity simply depresses economic growth wholesale, which ultimately causes governments to lose more money in tax revenues than they would have if they had not enacted the austerity and instead created jobs and new infrastructure and industries. In countries with already anemic economic growth, austerity can engender deflation which inflates existing debt. This can also cause the country to fall into a liquidity trap, causing credit markets to freeze up and unemployment to increase. Advocates of these positions point to cases in Ireland and Spain in which austerity measures instituted in response to financial crises in 2009 proved ineffective in combating public debt and the countries got in ever more dire financial straits as 2010 and 2011 progressed.[42]
# 1 : You must be a registered Republican in most states.
# 2 : The rules to become a delegate vary from district and county, you must obtain your bylaws to see what your area requires you to become a delegate. Many cases you just need to register to become a delegate, that simple. Some areas try to make it extremely complicated to keep the avg joe citizen out of the way.
# 3 : In some cases delegates are elected by the members of your local party, in many other cases there are not enough people that register to become a delegate so your area may allow you to be a delegate just by simply you apply to become a delegate.
# 4 : You must learn Roberts rules of order, this is a must, Roberts rules is the language used during conventions and meetings, if you don’t understand roberts rules you will be at an extreme disadvantage.
# 5 : You must show up to every delegate meeting, if you do not, you could and probably will lose your spot as a delegate and your spot will go to an alternate delegate. You must stay in it until the end.
# 6 : If all of your delegates slots are filled, you need to register to become an alternate delegate, the alternates will obtain the spot of a delegate should the delegate not show up for a meeting and the alternate will take their place as a delegate.
# 7 : To become a delegate you must contact your local chairman or officer(s) of the party and ask for the form to register to become a delegate. Make a copy of your signed application for your own records.
# 8 : I encourage everyone who is not a delegate to become one NOW, some of you have probably already missed your chance to become a delegate because the registration process has ended, call your chairman tomorrow.
There is a delegate forum that has been up for months and saw very little interest, so we stopped posting information, if we see the site gain action (people actually posting and asking questions) we will finish the site and continue to post information and answer questions there once again.
If you REALLY want to be a delegate, contact your local Ron Paul Meetup ,ronpaul.meetup.com or
The only way for Ron Paul to become President is if he gets the GOP nomination; The only way for Ron Paul to get the GOP nomination is if we become delegates. As delegates, we’ll be voting to pick the GOP nominee just like the electors in the electoral college vote to pick the President; Delegates determine and decide who the GOP nominee is—it’s that critical!
There hasn’t been a brokered convention for more than 60 years! And the good news is that Ron Paul doesn’t have to win a single state to get the GOP nomination; He just needs to win the delegates! So your delegate vote will count that much more; In other words, Ron Paul can secure the GOP nomination with your vote!
You typically start at your precinct (district) convention as a delegate and work your way up to state, and finally, the RNC; But it may even be as easy as calling your Secretary of State Elections Division, signing some forms and getting signatures! Ron Paul supporters will walk through rain, snow, ice, fire, hazardous waste for this revolution so performing the aforementioned will be a cakewalk.
The GOP nomination will ultimately be decided at the Republican National Convention which will take place in St. Paul, Minnesota. September 1-4, 2008.
Please watch the video below and peruse the instructions on how to become a delegate for Ron Paul. Afterwards, get together with your family, friends, local Meetup groups (ronpaul.meetup.com ) to discuss and organize how to flood your conventions with Ron Paul delegates.
“We Only Have One Shot At This!” – Debbie Hopper, RPCC Assistant Campaign Manager
If we don’t become delegates, then Ron Paul will not get the GOP nomination. If Ron Paul doesn’t get the GOP nomination, then the Ron Paul Revolution is OVER. Don’t let this happen: Become a Delegate!
Super Tuesday 2012 is the name for March 6, 2012, the day on which the largest simultaneous number of state presidential primary elections are held in the United States. It includeds Republican primaries in seven states and caucuses in three states, totaling 392 delegates (17% of the total). Super Tuesday involves Republicancontests in: Alaska (24), Georgia (76), Idaho (32), Massachusetts (38), North Dakota(25),Ohio (63), Oklahoma (40), Tennessee (55), Vermont (17), and Virginia (46). Eighteen RNC delegates from the states are not bound to the voting result.
1. In the six congressional districts where Rick Santorum submitted only a partial slate of district delegates and district alternates by the late December 2011 deadline, he will be automatically awarded only the number of delegates he submitted, assuming he wins the particular district. The Ohio Republican Party said on March 2, 2012, that the remaining delegates in such districts will be “considered unbound” until a panel composed of three members of the Ohio GOP’s central committee decides which campaign (if any) is permitted to appoint such delegates.[1]
2. In three congressional districts (OH-6, OH-9 and OH-13), Rick Santorum did not make the district-specific portion of the ballot.
3. In every district, each of the six candidates listed above appears on the “at-large” portion of the ballot. The results of the at-large ballot will determine the allocation of fifteen national convention delegates.
In Virginia, the ballot restrictions were more restrictive than in most states, resulting in most of the candidates failing to get on the ballot. Several candidates unsuccessfully sued to reverse the decision.
I was encouraged by some of my fellow Ron Paul 2012 Patriot Campaign supporters to make a post on the Daily Paul some who also have been banned and kicked out of the Rochester Ron Paul meetup group. Why? Because they are free thinking Patriot Americans like myself not afraid to speak up for what they believe.
“In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.”
Mark Twain
How do you like this I applied and was trying to join this meetup Ron Paul 2012 Campaign meetup group in Rochester NY and this was the response that I was sent by the Organizer Mike Deming of 1310 AM. I was not given a reason or explanation for why!
You have been removed from Ron Paul Rochester 2012.
I know this is a private group, and not all the people in the group are Control Freaks or fools I have a few people in the group who are people I would call Friends or are they really just Frenemy! but if I was a real jerk I would scream discrimination or call the main stream media and complain. Not that they would listen or anything but I would not do that because it would make Ron Paul look Bad, because of one simple minded control freak! I personally like and support Ron Paul for the 2012 presidential nomination. I just wanted to see what would happen if I tried to join a group organized by a Neo-Con, Liberal turned Republican!
It was best said that “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
I don’t think that the leader of the group is a traitor or has gone the way of treason but I do feel that they have made a mistake in acting like fools. I have dealt with these kinda people who call themselves Patriots but act more like dictator’s and tyrants or how I best said in the title of this blog CONTROL FREAKS! So if you want to be told what to do and how to think by all means join that group of Followers!
“Mainstream Republicans” decide who is leading, not actual polls of likely voters
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, December 22, 2011
If you thought the establishment’s tactic of ignoring who wins the Iowa primary was bizarre enough, try this one on for size. A USA Today story about how polls show Ron Paul is leading in Iowa is entitled ‘Ron Paul still not in lead’.
The mental gymnastics required to unravel this convoluted premise are somewhat intense, so concentrate…
The gist of the story is that Ron Paul is in fact in the lead according to the polls, but because “mainstream Republicans” insist that he shouldn’t be leading, that means the voters are meaningless and that Ron Paul is in fact not in the lead.
So now we’re being told that surveys of likely voters, the three most recent of which show Paul is leading Romney and Gingrich, have no legitimacy because the establishment doesn’t like Ron Paul.
“Paul received 21.7% of potential caucusgoers, according to an average of three recent polls compiled by the website Real Clear Politics. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney trails him slightly with 20.3% and former speaker Newt Gingrich comes in third with 15.7%,” reports Kucinich, conceding that Ron Paul is leading, but on the other hand noting that “He’s the second choice of only 9% of likely caucusgoers”.
So it matters little that Ron Paul is actually leading in Iowa, the fact that he isn’t leading the race for second place is more important. Get it? No, neither do I.
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
The corporate press has now moved on from trying to mislead its readers through sheer ignorance to engaging in outright brazen delusions, pretending that Ron Paul is not leading in Iowa while simultaneously having to admit the fact that he is the current frontrunner.
Just forget the actual voters, Ron Paul is only the frontrunner if the likes of CNN, USA Today, Fox News and “mainstream Republicans” anoint him as the frontrunner.
At least in places like Communist China, where dictators are hand-picked by Party members, there is no pretense of any kind of democratic process.
As we highlighted yesterday, whether “mainstream Republicans” like it or not, Ron Paul is the current frontrunner in Iowa. A New York Times Iowa primary projection, using figures collated from all the latest poll results and surveys, shows that Ron Paul is the clear favorite to win the crucial first Republican primary.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show