Democracy or Socialistic Society? Trump Exposes That Your Vote May Mean Nothing
Whether you like him or not, Donald Trump has brought to the fore major corruption in both political parties that has affected the political process. Only a true outsider not dependent on crony capitalism and ‘insider trading’ could do this, so give Trump credit at least for opening up a new anti-government wave against the corruption. What we just saw in ‘rigged’ voting in Colorado, Louisiana and states before has been largely overlooked or ignored in past elections-until now. Trump is that guy many people have been waiting for to finally stand up against the mainstream media and establishment ‘system’ while having some impact. Trump may not be as organized or up on the issues as others but he offers something that other candidates have not, heretofore. Trump’s campaign is in the hearts of many average American voters who haven’t been really heard until now.
No wonder we see candidates once far ahead in primary voting, such as Rick Santorum in 2012, suddenly cast aside by party elite assistance to, e.g. Mitt Romney.
Let’s face it. The insider party candidates are by and large all tied into money, dependent on lobbyists and crony capitalists in buying votes. And, other non- candidate party members are largely beholding to the party line for their jobs. Same goes for members of the media, who are nowadays tied into advertisers who favor certain candidates, usually Democrats or liberal-leaning persons. President Obama’s entire presidency has been politically-based with every decision tied to political gain. Only can someone like Trump come in and shake things up.
DOES YOUR VOTE REALLY COUNT?
Party manipulation has long been part of the voting process, with parties tweaking the electoral delegate process as the Republicans did in 2012 to help Romney gain the Republican ticket. The electoral process may make sense to give small states a fair chance against big states but when it comes to delegate count, that shouldn’t be manipulated every election, if ever. Certainly, the electorate must wonder, at times, what their vote is really worth if the party is going to make the ultimate decision who wins elections.
Voters must wake up, appreciate and ACT with Trump,Cruz and a few other outsiders like Carly Fiorina and Mike Lee who have exposed the political game – on both sides of the isle. And, it CAN bring results against political insider corruption , going against the party plan. The party Republicans have lost the last two elections with their guys, Romney and John McCain, but in the 1980s it was an outsider, like Trump, with the requisite personal money and and name recognition, one RONALD REAGAN, WHO won two terms despite the party, which did not initially support him.
Today, more than ever, the United States is approaching a ONE PARTY system, thanks to Obama, who continues to get away with murder with self-serving followers and media, who benefit directly or indirectly from Obama’s handouts, whether it be the growing number of poor thinking they’re really benefitting from all the favors or the well-heeled corporates and Hollywood wealthy raking in profits from Wall Street, propped up the past seven years by Obama’s zero interest rates ; the lower class seem to benefit in the short run (but not really in the long run) by the various increasing handouts, from food stamps to health care to welfare; meanwhile we’ve seen the middle class shrink with many ending up in that lower class. Sounds more and more like totalitarianism than capitalism with the small higher class proletariat and the large lower class bourgeoisie, with many of its victims still blind to the REAL picture that’s been happening. Meanwhile, Obama continues to bring in left-leaning refugees to help swell the Democrat voting ranks.
Whether Trump makes it all the way or not, what he has achieved already in exposing the corruption will carry forth to other outsider candidates for the future. Just look at how outsiders Trump and Cruz have skyrocketed form nowhere to the top of their party candidates. Other ‘outsider’ candidates such as Ted Cruz can thank Trump for helping to expose the faulty system, which has brought over independents and even some Democrats. To a lesser extent, Bernie Sanders has done the same thing as Trump for the Democrat party. Hopefully, we’ll see other Republicans , and perhaps Democrats learn from Trump, as long as they’re willing to forego their deep pocket alliances. After all, Sanders has done pretty well without major sponsors as has Cruz to a lesser extent.
No, Trump is far from a perfect candidate, but he should be given credit and even a chance at the Presidency. Sure, it would be a gamble with someone like him; but then, that’s what they said about Reagan, too, who had no real government experience before being elected President.
In a perfect world, outsiders like Trump and Cruz would band together to present what would appear to be an unbeatable ticket. Trump’s bombast and personal attacks might have already gone too far for Cruz to swallow and take a Vice President position on the ticket. But, if it were the only way for the Republicans to win, just maybe they would reconsideR.
Hopefully, voters can overlook the Trump bombast and see him and Cruz as the best two candidates running for President. Rather than being locked in, we should appreciate having one one but two outsiders as compared to the last two election losers. Once we all get behind one or both of these refreshing outsider candidates we can have VERY GOOD CHANCE of beating the very weak Democrat candidates Clinton and Sanders. So, if you’re against ‘government as usual’ including crony captialism, dirty tricks, executive actions, try to appreciate the sleeping giant that Trump has awoken. It has brought many new GOP voters and exposed the lies in the SYSTEM, which can only help the anti-‘government-as-is’ movement. No longer is supporting anti-establishment candidates considered so ‘kooky’ and terrible. We’re not supporting Trump – Cruz has many different qualities to offer , which is why he and Trump could make a great team, but Cruz may not have the votes or the unique media skills as Trump. Trump may be the last chance for saving this country from the one-party, socialist system it is becoming.
BOTH GOOD INDIVIDUALLY, BUT TOGETHER TRUMP and CRUZ
Donald Trump-king of the political soundbites and noted twitter
Love him or not, RUSH LIMBAUGH has been around awhile and makes some good, unbiased points that have little to do with taking sides. In trying to explain away what seems to be an especially hostile election atmosphere, Limbaugh drew a parallel to late night TV… He noted that the new Late Night with Steven Colbert show is having real ratings problems while Jimmy Fallon of the Tonight Show is doing well. It’s not necessarily that the Fallon show is any better than Colbert – we, personally, never saw any extended humor or quality content in the former – and it has nothing to do do with the actual viewership of the show but, rather, how many tweets and/or likes that are generated. Fallon’s show is set up on short bits, playing right into the hands of the Twitterers and Youtubers.
It’s no wonder we don’t see much in the way of extended interviews anymore. Everything’s a 30-second soundbite with social media carrying it forth. Johnny Carson would never have good ratings today doing what his top-rated show did in the Seventies and Eighties. It’s a different world, notes Limbaugh, and one must adapt if one wants to have a successful show -ratings-wise that is –or win in politics. Fortunately, audiences that are tied into the latest trends, there’s always cable with its 57 +channels and, yes, some good material, albeit not necessarily highly rated. But, again, to be successful, e.g. high ratings, one must follow the new line -whether you like (say, twitter) or not. No longer is quality and content necessarily tied to success. And, when it comes to politics and the Presidential election it’s not longer necessarily who’s really the best qualified but who is best at generating the most ‘soundbites,’ i.e. social media. How else would a neophyte senator like Barrack Obama beat out much more experienced, ‘qualified’ people like Mitt Romney or even Hillary Clinton for the Presidency? How is a businessman with no political experience like Donald Trump continuing to lead the polls despite saying the most outlandish things? Because they know how to get the media attention. Even with ‘high negatives’ someone like Trump can out-poll a seemingly better, more qualified candidate (on paper) like a Rubio or Cruz.
The whole, mean-spirited nature of not only poliltics but culture, in general, probably goes back even before social media, perhaps even to the assassination of President Kennedy, but, no doubt social media has accelerated the angry culture. Polite, upstanding citizens like a Ben Carson, qualified or not, don’t have a chance today. Yes, it’s a different world, politics or otherwise. Like it or not….
Don’t be fooled like all or most of the media, democrat or conservative, who couldn’t see the full politics in the capture of the supposed ‘Mastermind’ of the Bengahzi attacks, 6-15.
1)Timing: Not only did politics play a part
in that the capture of Ahmed Abu Khatallah was made Sunday , yet it wasn’t announced until Tuesday. That alone is suspicious in that it wasn’t announced immediately , but when one discovers that,
2) That Tuesday was the day that Hillary Clinton would be doing her big interview on Fox TV with Van Sustern and Baer (promoting her new book) it becomes doubly obvious that the capture was about politics…so that Hillary would have a nice ace in the hole to help deflect questions on Benghazi
and other topics. No questions were asked of Clinton as to why Abu Khatallah was not captured sooner despite his openess to do media interviews and almost thumbing his nose at America.
3) Then, you add the fact, that the Abu Khatallah
was caught without a bullet fired, easily lured to
capture with the help of local Libyan intelligence
the Obama administration could have probably captured him most anytime they wanted. In fact, Abu Khatallah was known to have done a number of media interviews out in the open over the past two years since Benghazi
and was even interrogated by U.S. officials but not brought to bare.
4) There is some question whether Ahmed Abu Khatallah was even the ‘mastermind’, as claimed by the Obama administration, but, rather, simply a
pawn (as he has already purportedly claimed) who was there as one of the flame throwers. Perhaps the truth may or may not come out when and if he is interrogated.
5)The capture of Ahmed Abu Khatallah was just another political chess move by Hillary and the Obama administration, in the tradition of Alinsky* Rules for Radicals, a militant doctrine subscribed to by by both Obama and Clinton.
Not only does the capture score points for Clinton and Obama with a sycophantic media and party base after their likely involvement in allowing the Benghazi attack by not providing ample (requested) security and the following probable cover-up, but it deflects attention away from the probably scandals that have
beset the administration , of which Clinton was a big part and continues to defend.
Timing has always been a big part of the Obama ‘game plan,’ whereby the administration has made sure to announce things that would affect it NEGATIVELY on a Friday afternoon or weekend (when they would largely be ignored by media and forgotten over the weekend, or, in the case of GOOD things (positive points for the administration) they would be announced during the week preferably on light news days like this past Tuesday , June 17, to garner plenty of positive media attention and have Wed- Fri to ride the wave.
Despite Clinton’s poor book reviews and sales, to date – she is said to have ‘lifted’ the book’s title, ‘HARD CHOICES,’ from another Secretary of State’s book a few decades earlier – Clinton managed to skate through the half hour Fox interview Tuesday largely by answering questions in generalities or non-answers (eg not siding with the 30% pro or 64% vs government in recent urvey) and prolonging them so as to cut down on the number of questions that could be asked, much like we have noted in President Obama press conferences.. . Even though Clinton may have to separate herself from the falling current adminstration, make no doubt that Hillary and Obama are two political lpeas in a pod, raised on the Alinsky doctrines of community organizing and Rules for Radicals.
HILLARY INTERVIEW, BOOK ‘A BOMB’
In an email this evening, a veteran publishing source calls the latest Hillary Clinton book, Hard Choices, a memoir of her State Department years, a “bomb.” The source is referring to the early but underwhelming sales figures. “Between us, they are nervous at S&S [Simon & Schuster],” says the source, who gave permission for his email to be published. “Sales were well below expectations and the media was a disaster.” According to this source, a Simon & Schuster insider, “They sold 60,000 hard covers first week and 24,000 ebooks.” The publishing house was “hoping and praying for 150,000 print first week.” “The 60k represents a less than 10% sell thru based on what they shipped,” says the source. It’s been reported that one million copies of Clinton’s book were shipped weeks before the June 10 publication date. “They will be lucky to sell 150,000 total lifetime,” the source writes in the email. Hillary reportedly received a near-$14 million advance, a sum the publishing house will unlikely make back. “It’s a bomb but it will be interesting to see how they spin it.” Ruby Cramer of BuzzFeed reported earlier today that Barnes & Noble sold 24,000 of Clinton’s book. (WEEKLY STANDARD)
ALINSKY RULES FOR RADICALS
*Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing.He is often noted for his book Rules for Radicals.In the course of nearly four decades of political organizing, Alinsky received much criticism … In the 1950s, he began turning his attention to improving conditions in the African-Americanghettos, beginning with Chicago’s …Hillary Clinton‘s senior honors thesis on Saul Alinsky, written atWellesley College, noted that Alinsky’s personal efforts were a large part of his method. Both she and President Barack Obama were described in promotional material for a radio interview of an author of an Alinsky biography as having been indirectly influenced by Alinsky’s work. His ideas were adapted in the 1960s by some US college students and other young counterculture-era organizers, who used them as part of their strategies for organizing on campus and beyond.[5]Time magazine once wrote that “American democracy is being altered by Alinsky’s ideas,” and conservative author William F. Buckley said he was “very close to being an organizational genius.”[4](Wikipaedia)
Now, Hillary gets in the act. Though she can’t (yet) make presidential decisions she can assert herself as she did on the Congressional stand Wednesday, trying to defend herself and the administration from the potential Benghazi ‘coverup’ .
How someone who has taken ‘full responsibility’ for the Benghazi disaster,can emphatically state ‘ it doesn’t matter’ what happened but that we just need to prevent it from happening again, we have a major problem. This, from the leading candidate to be the Democratic nominee for President in 2016? And, of course that’s not all.
She went on to admit she doesn’t like to do Sunday morning talk shows, thus we had Susan Rice erring big time, which contributed mightily to Hillary and the administration’s subsequent problems. And, further, we saw Hillary continuously referring to ‘the ARB’, the investigative report on Benghazi done by her own state staff, whenever there was something she didn’t want to talk about. ‘It’s too lengthy to go into now, but you can find it in the ARB.’ Or, she would state that some things were STILL not resolved and she couldn’t give an answer, as she’s been for the past four months.
COUNTRY’S REACTION: HOW DO HILLARY, OBAMA and the Administration Get Away with all this Stuff?
After seeing Hillary on the stand, giving what we would consider a very poor performance, -never really telling us anything, e.g. who did what, who made the decisions or didn’t make the decisions – and then the response from the media (or lack therof) we’re beginning to finally understand why we have such a split country.
For the general media Hillary got a pass and was even praised for how she defended herself and the administration. Truly incrediable! What it comes down to now is that virtually anything Clinton says will be defended by today’s media, with the exception of Fox. We’re talking not about talk show hosts so much as the mainstream news media.
There was once something called objectivity in the news but today one must consider the news source and try to find a balance, if possible. For example , any news feed from the NEW YORK TIMES is likely to defend Obama, Hillary, et al. Same for most of the others. You might get an unbiased real news report from the Wall Street Journal if you’re lucky but that’s about it for the mainstream media.
How anyone can defend Clinton’s statement, ‘It doesnt (at this time) matter’ anymore, in reference to Benghazi, is akin to closing down the courts and letting all potential criminals off. Sure, there were the actual murderers who killed Ambassador Stevens and three others but the murders likely would not have happened had Hillary read the ‘cables’ from Benghazi, requesting more security, as Senator Rand Paul noted, or had she showed up, herself at the Sunday morning shows rather than passing the buck to an inexperienced Susan Rice. In a sense, Clinton and/or members of the Administration were the REAL culprits for enabling the murders to happen.
(Afterall, this was the first time an US ambassador was killed in over 30 years
which would indicated something like this just shouldn’t happen.) Yet, inexplicably,
one side of America seemingly goes along with everything and anything the administration
does, even something so incredibly and obviously WRONG! To say something doesn’t matter
why even have court hearings – or rules to live by, for that matter. President Obama
has basically stonewalled the entire proceedings himself. Had Obama taken the stand
we would likely have seem a similar performance of passing the buck.
How someone as intelligent as Clinton – and obama- can get away with this stuff is beyond us.
Worse though, is the half of the American populous that sits by accepting this stuff. Even
the Republican leaders could have done a better job of grilling Clinton. With the exception
of Paul and a few others, it was largely a love fest for Hillary, a probable bump in the
road on the way to a 2016 nomination for President, assuming she still wants this.
Have we become a brain dead nation, so dumbed down by Obama’s ‘giveaway’ culture that
doesn’t encourage work or even much thought. Just live and enjoy while the government
and working stiffs pay for the 50% who don’t .
OBAMA’S 23 DIRECTIVES PLUS
So we have President obama now coming up with not one ,not two but 23 ‘gun’ bills he wants to push through on his own. And. now he’s already made the order to allow women in the front lines of our military. Now, tha he’s been elected and before he goes into true ‘lame duck’ status it’s Seemingly every day something else he’s trying to push through. The idea, of course, is just to ‘goo for it all’ and hope at least some of the directives will stick. And, some probably will.
It’s Obama at his best, which may not necessarily be best for the country.
TRANSPARENCY – word of year
Word of the year, at least in politics, has to be ‘transparency.’ I hear it all the time, from obama to anyone in government and those covering them.
I guess it’s supposed to be a positive thing, but I think of it as a negative , ie ‘How transparent these people are.’ As if , you can see right through them…
- ORGANIZE YOUR EMAIL, get rid of spam, and EARN MONEY while you make life easier with the worlds’ largest (FREE) viral email program – check out: http://vib.cm/burtkauf
TOP ADVERTISING CHOICES - Internet - Email Marketing , Website Development, Text Marketing
In its 2010 study, we learned that Internet Marketing has replaced the old, traditional print (newspaper and phone book ) along with broadcast TV and radio , as the top ad media of choice by business and consumer alike - and more cost-effective (Ad-ology), with direct mail a close second. . Now , within the top-ranked INTERNET, Ad-ology has broken down the internet by category, showing email marketing still leads the way, along with website development (SEO) and mobile marketing coming on strong. Coupon Country and YellowPagesCoupons.net feature these top marketing platforms at unbelievably low rates 1-888-422-6876.
According to Ad-ology’s survey, the top places where small businesses will put their marketing dollars in 2011 are e-mail marketing (72.7 percent in 2011 vs. 56.6 percent in 2010) and company website development (70.5 percent in 2011 vs. 57.7 percent in 2010). CouponCountry does it all… or call 1-888-422-6876 GREAT GIFT IDEA!
