Posts tagged beltway
By Preston James
The Secret Transformation of Our Elected Officials and What It Means for The American Republic
This transformation of most of our elected officials once they are seated inside the beltway (DC) is perhaps the greatest mystery of our modern political system.
FEW OBJECTIVE FACTS ARE KNOWN BY THOSE OUTSIDE TOP INNER CIRCLES WITH “BEYOND-BLACK” SECURITY CLEARANCES, BUT THE BEST EVIDENCE SO FAR SUGGESTS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS TRANSFORMATION IS REAL, AND IS BASED ON A HIGHLY CLASSIFIED “ALIEN AGENDA” USED AS A COMPLEX COVER STORY TO MANIPULATE HIGHER SEGMENTS OF ELECTED OFFICIALS AND INTEL—AND, IT SEEMS POSSIBLE THAT THIS APPARENT ALIEN AGENDA IS ONGOING, VERY, VERY STRANGE, AND IS ABSORBING ALMOST ALL EARTHLY ASSETS, BRINGING THE WORLD TO UTTER ECONOMIC COLLAPSE, WAR AND CHAOS IN ORDER TO CONVERT THE WORLD INTO A GLOBALIST NWO SYSTEM
Why do so many Congressmen and Congresswomen, and Senators seem to be quickly turned after they are elected and seated, so easily abandoning their Oaths to the US Constitution and passing so many laws which themselves are completely unConstitutional and against everything the Republic stands for? What happens to these folks after they go to work inside the Beltway? Is this transformation strictly a product of peer pressure from other senior legislators who control powerful positions in the Senate and House, or is it based on yielding to the particular social pressures of the political party they belong to?
Ex-Governor Jesse Ventura has written an excellent book, The Democripts and the Rebloodlicans, in which he explains why he believes there is very little difference between the two parties. Gerald Celente the World’s top Trends Analyst has suggested that these two parties are like two different organized crime families families, the Gambinos and the Genoveses.
This political transformation that occurs to elected politicians once they are elected and are seated is a great mystery and this opinion piece is one attempt to clarify these issues and provide some possible answers as to what really happens to transform these folks to so rapidly into individuals who appear to have abandoned “we the people” in order to serve only the Shadow Govt super-elite controllers who occupy the highest positions of the Invisible Secret Shadow Govt. and the NWO Globalist Agenda.
This article is long and complicated and will take many into the ozone of credulity. It will make much more information available than most will want. So, perhaps it is best to skip over the parts that bore you and focus on what grabs your eye and interest.
With the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary right around the corner, I thought I would look at the candidates from a campaign perspective (sans Media Spin).
As any campaign expert will tell you, short of the economy tanking, carving off chunks of Obama’s support is the best way to guarantee Republicans beat Obama. Ron Paul is the only candidate positioned to do this.
THE YOUTH VOTE
The youth vote which Obama won by 34% in 2008 is abandoning him. Ron Paul has proven strong appeal with the young voters. He is by far the best candidate capable of not only appealing to this demographic but energizing it towards defeating Obama. Anyone who thinks the youth vote will abandon Obama for one of the other candidates is kidding themselves. This is one of Obama’s Achilles heals and ONLY Ron Paul can not only exploit it – but use it against Obama.
Most Americans think that with Bin Laden dead, our job is done and we should bring the troops home. Obama is vulnerable on this issue against Ron Paul. Any other GOP candidate will galvanize these supporters to Obama. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who appeals to these voters disenchanted with Obama – carving away votes.
76% of Americans agree with RP that the federal war on drugs is a failure, in fact, only 8% think it has been a success. 89% of the people who voted for Obama 4 years ago believe the war on drugs is a failure. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who is positioned to cleave off a chunk of these Obama supporters. Any other GOP candidate will galvanize these supporters to Obama.
A record number of Americans do not trust politicians. Obama is a status qua politician, Romney is the poster child of insider politician. Ron Paul is the anti-politician and a doctor – and Americans have a high level of trust in doctors. The media and elites hate him. Ron Paul is the candidate who can appeal to these voters.
ENERGIZED ARMY OF SUPPORTERS
Obama is not going to be defeated by a slick DC Beltway campaign alone. It is going to take a nationwide passionate, energized army of supporters. Ron Paul has clearly demonstrated that he can energize his base of supporters like no other candidate can. We all know that if Ron Paul isn’t the nominee, this army of energy disappears. But with Paul as the nominee, this army will mushroom.
Ron Paul’s message isn’t engineered to win a GOP beauty contest – it’s engineered to beat Obama.
THE “PAUL or NOBODY” Problem
If Paul is not the nominee and just stays home, the Republicans lose a significant part of his supporters. He has a large “Paul or Nobody” base. If Paul grows weary of the Republican assaults and runs 3rd party, it is game over for them.
My advice to the Republicans – just do it.
Some of you may need to get more liquored up than others.
Now more than every we need the Champion of the Constitution!
Please visit Ron Paul’s official campaign site by following the link below and donate today!
by John Nichols
John Nichols is the author of several books that examine the legacy of old-right conservatives such as Taft and Buffett, including Against the Beast: A Documentary History of American Opposition to Empire.
Ron Paul represents the ideology that Republican insiders most fear: conservatism.
Not the corrupt, inside-the-beltway construct that goes by that name, but actual conservatism.
And if he wins the Iowa Republican Caucus vote on January 3—a real, though far from certain, prospect—the party bosses will have to do everything in their power to prevent Paul from reasserting the values of the “old-right” Republicans who once stood, steadily and without apology, in opposition to wars of whim and assaults on individual liberty.
Make no mistake, the party bosses are horrified at the notion that a genuine conservative might grab the Iowa headlines from the false prophets. Already, they are claiming a Paul win won’t mean anything. If Paul prevails, says Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, “People are going to look at who comes in second and who comes in third. If [Mitt] Romney comes in a strong second, it definitely helps him going into New Hampshire and the other states.”
The party’s amen corner in the media is doing its part. Republican-insider radio and television programs have begun to go after Paul, the veteran congressman from Texas who is either leading or near the top in recent polls of likely caucus goers. Rush Limbaugh ridicules Paul on his radio show, while Sean Hannity’s Fox show has become a nightly Paul-bashing fest, with guests like former Education Secretary Bill Bennett trashing the congressman with lines like: “his notion of foreign policy is impossible.”
Actually, Paul’s notion of foreign policy is in line with that of conservatives used to believe. The congressman is often referred to as a libertarian, and he has certainly toiled some in that ideological vineyard. But the truth is that his politics descend directly from those of former Ohio Senator Robert “Mr. Republican” Taft and former Nebraska Congressman Howard Buffett—old-right opponents of war and empire who served in the Congress in the 1940s and 1950s and who, in Taft’s case, mounted credible bids for the party’s presidential nomination in 1940, 1948 and finally in 1952. In all three campaigns, Taft opposed what he described as the “Eastern establishment” of the party—the Wall Streeters who, he pointedly noted, had little in common with Main Streeters.
Taft was a steady foe of American interventionism abroad, arguing very much as Paul does today that it threatens domestic liberty. Indeed, just as Paul joined US Senator Russ Feingold in opposing the Patriot Act, spying on Americans and threats to freedom of speech and assembly in the first days of what would become an open-ended “war on terror,” so Taft warned during the cold war that “criticism in a time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government.”
“The maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country…more good than it will do the enemy,” explained Taft, who challenged President Truman’s attempts to use war powers as an excuse to seize domestic industries and otherwise expand what Dwight Eisenhower would eventually define as the military-industrial complex.