No products in the cart.

News

Republican Presidential Debate An Exercise In Mind Control

 

GOPdebate1

This article was written by Jon Rappoport and originally published at No More Fake News

If a human mind were composed of a dozen eggs, and you soft-boiled them, broke them open, and let the goo run all over the plate, down on to the table, soon dripping on to the floor, that would be mind control, in the sense that you’re creating meaningless chaos, where no thought is important or makes sense or adds up to a cogent point.

That was the CNN-hosted Republic Presidential debate, with what was it, nine candidates sounding off, interrupting one another, and mentioning Trump so often it seemed like they were afflicted with a one-note samba syndrome.

You could conclude CNN, a Democratic stronghold, wanted the chaos, to throw the Republicans into an exceedingly bad and foul light, but other recent Presidential debates, hosted by other networks, have come across in the same basic fashion.

The problem starts with networks hosting these lunatic events. Since when does a debate need a moderator who controls and asks all the questions? Since when does a network need to have any role at all?

A debate is supposed to be two people contending over an important issue.

For contrast, consider the 1858 Abraham Lincoln-Stephen Douglas face-off—when apparently citizens still had a semblance of intelligence. Both men were running for a US Senate seat in Illinois. In those days, state legislatures chose US Senators.

But the issue in the debates was slavery, so the interest was intense and it was national. Here was the agreed-upon format: seven debates in seven Illinois towns over the course of three weeks; in each debate, the opening candidate would speak for 60 minutes, his opponent would speak for 90 minutes, and then the first candidate would return for 30 minutes.

The debates drew large crowds. Chicago newspapers had stenographers in each town. The stenos took down every word, and newspapers across the nation printed, in full, the texts.

Those were debates. No one with sprayed hair was in control. The men talked. And talked.

If you could transport the CNN Republican debate back in time to one of those Illinois towns, the audience would conclude, in short order, that all the participants were insane, possibly suffering from brain damage.

“These people are running for…what did you say? President??!!?? You’re joking. This a joke, yes?”

What do you think the 1858 audience would conclude about the state of the country in 2015? A country that actually acquiesced in a “debate” of this sort?

What do you think the 1858 audience would conclude about the two political parties, in 2015, who permitted such debates, and about the general electorate who expressed partisan support for either party?

“And in your time, 2015, no third or fourth party of any strength has arisen to sweep these mad Democrats and Republicans into the dustbin?”

No, the Lincoln-Douglas debates didn’t settle the issue of slavery. Something called the Civil War broke out. But that fact doesn’t excuse what these crazed Presidential debates have devolved into.

I’d really like to see one of these 2015 Presidential candidates take the podium and speak for 90 minutes about a single issue. You’d have to have support teams standing by to administer oxygen and possibly meth, just to keep them upright.

We’re talking about a candidate staying on point, on one issue.

“I remember my grandmother telling me, when I was nine, you can do it, you can be anything you want to be. I’d like to thank Mrs. Gallbladder, my third-grade teacher, for spending time with me when I—people say we should have a balanced budget, but they just don’t understand how economics—there weren’t any emails, well there were but none of them compromised—ownership of the means of production isn’t—better schools for our children—attacking terrorists by insulting them isn’t—equality isn’t just for—my father was President and so was my brother but—I made great deals to put up those hotels—when I look at a human brain on the operating table, I know what this universe—this isn’t the first time a woman has tried to win the Presidency but—“

Goo and more goo running everywhere.

Reporters and PR flacks and party hacks seizing on a few words of the opponent and highlighting them on social media. “Can you believe he slipped up and said Afro-American?” “Did you see that fly on his nose?” “A red tie with a blue suit is supposed to look Presidential?” “I counted. He interrupted nine times.” And these are the more intelligent tweets.

On the other hand, the current TV debates preclude the possibility of something dangerous happening. For example, in a real contest, suppose the single issue was Syria and a candidate stepped up to the podium and said:

“During my remarks in the next sixty minutes, with no interruptions—yes, we’re going back to a much older format—I’ll be the making the case that the current US administration has essentially created ISIS, in part for the purpose of overthrowing the present government of Syria. Consider this fact alongside our declared ‘war’ against ISIS. This is more than an outrageous contradiction. It’s an intentional deception, and a crime of the highest order, considering what ISIS has been carrying out in terms of the destruction of human life. Now, I’m not just saying these things. I have evidence in the form of documents, which I’ll be explaining in detail. Some of these documents and reports are already public. Others are not. I also have statements, on the record, from US military officers and Pentagon executives. So bear with me, stay with me, I’m going to take this one step at a time…”

There are many ways to keep this sort of thing from happening. The easiest way: never let a true debate occur.

Give Rand Paul 90 uninterrupted minutes to explain what his father was explaining? The criminality of the Federal Reserve? Are you kidding?

And just in case you think the American public is so addled they wouldn’t be able to follow such a presentation, I have a secret for you. At first, it would be a problem, yes. But if more and more true debates took place, a change would bleed in. People would begin to wake up. They’d find themselves, bit by bit, intensely interested in the proceedings.

After all, part of the reason the public is brainwashed springs directly from the fact that so few politicians or media people tell the truth or explore any issue in depth. Reverse that trend and the mind begins to reassemble itself.

How about something like this? Crossing party lines, Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul debate, seven times, as Lincoln and Douglas did, the following: “What is socialism, and is it good for America?”

If either candidate were unable to do more than spout vapid generalities and programmatic fumes during his seven hours, it would surely become obvious.

How about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, in the same format, debating the question: “Describe in detail the best immigration policy for America.” If their seven events turn into a Niagara of opposing non-sequiturs and self-inflating jive, so be it. It’ll be on parade for all to see.

Seven hours. Quickly, all Presidential candidates would discover their usual manner of presentation doesn’t stand up. It doesn’t make the grade. That would be a good thing. Maybe we find out that no one currently running for President can remain coherent. That would be a very good thing.

And maybe someone emerges from the shadows, someone most people have never heard of, and he can pass the test with flying colors. He can make sense, he can make a case, he can present details and specifics, he can inspire confidence, he can paint a picture of what America and freedom and true justice are all about.

Because he has the time. Because he has the courage and the intelligence. Because he makes people remember what they really want.

Would that be terrible? Would that be treasonous? Would that be dangerous?

No.

That would be waking up out of amnesia.

0

Brandon Smith

Oath Keepers Merchandise

4 comments

  1. Excellent article, Brandon, and true.

    Is it not now the time for us to start demanding what we want for OUR elections, what WE require in “candidates”? Is it time yet to dump ALL machine voting to stop election fraud happening that way? Then to put ALL counts at every level in front of the people (but protected) and under multiple videos? What about haivng all counts done here in America? Anyone disagree?

    How about before anyone can run as a candidate for any office they must pass a US Constitution test created by some of out better constitutionalists? Nothing too hard, but covering at least the very basics?

    When one thinks about these people who were NOT elected but put into positions within our government, and the treasonous acts they are committing – First Degree Murder, giving authority over the USA to an entity and foreign nations, “State Secret Privilege” (not found any where within the US Constitution or codes) yet used to hide other crimes that are being committed by those serving within our governments and to stop those who are REVEALING those criminal acts (whistle blowers), etc – and the state of our nation today it shows the importance that WE the People have honest elections.

    Election Fraud has been going on for a long time – WW2 vets Battle of Athens https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5ut6yPrObw

    The American people has both the right to INSPECT BALLOTS and the right to a SECRET BALLOT.

    That is correct, “We the People…” have a right to both of those actions. We have the constitutional right to inspect the voting system and change it if found corrupt; the right to privacy in who we vote forand the way we vote on other things. Basically the public also has a right to a secret, anonymous ballot, yet also the right to maintain inspections that determine if the voting process was honest.

    In almost every election for decades some election “official” have been fusing these two issues (the right to inspect the voting process and private voing of individuals) when they claimed that if we examine ballots WE can see how people voted. If this is so then that means that those same election officials and vendors can also figure out how every, or any, person voted if they want to.

    We know today (or should) that election officials and vendors believe that THEY have the right to know how we vote. They have even authorized unique marks to be placed on some or all ballots, and they have exploited their own intrusion into our privacy to deny us the lawful right to examine ballots.

    The right to inspect – The public, in exercising its right to self govern, and under principles of Freedom of Information, has a right to examine the original evidence (the ballots) to authenticate reported results in elections.

    The right to privacy – “We the People of the United States also has a right to a secret, anonymous ballot.

    AR, 1998 – A contractor with ACORN-affiliated Project Vote was arrested for falsifying about 400 voter registration cards.

    CO, 2005 – Two ex-ACORN employees were convicted in Denver of perjury for submitting false voter registrations.

    2004 – An ACORN employee admitted to forging signatures and registering three of her friends to vote 40 times.

    CT, 2008 – The New York Post reported that ACORN submitted a voter registration card for a 7-year-old Bridgeport girl. Another 8,000 cards from the same city will be scrutinized for possible fraud.

    FL, 2009 – In September, 11 ACORN workers were accused of forging voter registration applications in Miami-Dade County during the last election. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the state attorney’s office scoured hundreds of suspicious applications provided by ACORN and found 197 of 260 contained personal ID information that did not match any living person.

    2008 – Election officials in Brevard County have given prosecutors more than 23 suspect registrations from ACORN. The state’s Division of Elections is also investigating complaints in Orange and Broward Counties.

    2004 – A Florida Department of Law Enforcement spokesman said ACORN was “singled out” among suspected voter registration groups for a 2004 wage initiative because it was “the common thread” in the agency’s fraud investigations.

    The use of a USB memory stick was used repeatedly the night before election night, on election night and for five hours the next day (when provisions were being processed – and in one election provisionals made up 20% of the vote). Each time the USB memory stick, etc is used, it’s a violation of election law. Each time it was used the people involved did multiple insertions and removals in a pattern that suggests not just “doing a backup” or “uploading results”, but rather copying critical files back and forth and very possibly modifying them on other systems.

    IN, 2008 – Election officials in Indiana have thrown out more than 4,000 ACORN-submitted voter registrations after finding they had identical handwriting and included the names of many deceased Indianans, and even the name of a fast food restaurant.

    The 2008 Democratic Nominating Committee (DNC) document did not include the normal language stating that Obama was qualified to be a candidate whch is not normal. The 2008 Republican Nominating Committee (RNC) document did have the qualifying language, as is normal. (This does not exonerate the RNC, they have also used Election Fraud)

    South Bend, Indiana JURY of the people found that Election Fraud put BOTH Obama and Hillary Clinton on the presidential primary ballot in Indiana in the 2008 election.

    Etc.

    The Constitution gives primary responsibility for conducting elections and safeguarding the voting process to the states, not to the federal government. The federal role in matters involving the conduct of elections is limited. ACORN v. Edgar. 56 F.3d 791 (7th Cir. 1995); Voting Rights Coalition v. Wilson. 60 F.3d 1411 (9th Cir. 1995).

    So we currently have “debates” that are really just “shows” put on the air for entertainment purposes, not for information on the people running and where they stand, do they meet the peoples criteria for who they would want to REPRESENT them. People who are put into positions, regardless of “party”, to do as they are told to do while serving when they get into office. Rampant election fraud in every state.

    We know the problems, or should, isn’t it time to come up with solutions and implement them? Brandon suggests an excellent way to start that would separate the “undesirables” from with just the debates.

  2. Boy that is scary, Brandon and Cal make perfect sense, but these would be leaders of our nation sound like a side show at the circus.And then there is Berney and Hillary!!

  3. In 2012, I was a delegate to the Missouri State Republican Convention for my county. During the caucus in my county, it was decided that both of our delegates would vote for Ron Paul. {Yes, I had a big part in that happening.} During the process, at both the district and state conventions, I saw numerous things happening that were unethical and illegal. Although I reported these things to the proper people, NOTHING was ever done about any of it.
    EXAMPLE:
    The county next to ours only had 3 people show up, and thus decided not to hold their caucus at all. However, when I got to the State Convention in Springfield, MO, two delegates, (for Romney), showed up from that same county.
    So I reported this to the head of the party there at the Convention, he said that “it was all right because they were going to vote for Romney”!
    So I went back to those two people, told them that I knew for a fact that they were not legal delegates and gave them a choice to leave or I would announce what I knew at the top of my lungs on the open floor. They chose to take their leave.
    This shows just how corrupt the system is.
    As a result, I will no longer be participating in a process that has no semblance of fairness or legality. I may still vote at the local level but I’m done with the national level joke.

  4. They should play “bring on the clowns” when these worthless idiots strut out on the stage. I will not cast a vote for any of them. Since when can a Canadian born Cruz run for president anyway..? Talk about a corrupt system…!!!

Comments are closed.