The co-chair of Romney's campaign in in New York is William Weld, who co-chaired the Independent Task Force on North America under the Council on Foreign Relations, which is studying the integration of the USA, Canada, and Mexico. Take a look.
Posted on 02/11/2008 12:40:30 AM PST by incindiary
I know that many people are extremely frustrated with politics these days and the current state of the Republican party. Many people are sad that their first-choice candidate dropped out, then their second-choice, and they keep having to compromise more and more until we get to the point where we feel pressured to vote for a liberal, open-borders, unconstitutional insider politician who we ordinarily would never dream of voting for. But have you asked yourself: how is it that we find ourselves in this predicament? And is there anything more to it than meets the eye? I know that anything that remotely resembles a conspiracy theory is not usually accepted on this site (by the owner and many freepers) but we're getting closer to the point of losing our republic, so I hope that in light of that, you will let this thread stay, and at least consider what is being said. I wanted to share an excerpt from a speech, by G. Edward Griffin. In this portion of the speech, he talks about what is happening in our country today, and why it is that we find ourselves feeling forced to pick a candidate that is not much different than the opponent. And the point is, until people become aware of what is happening, it is just going to continue, and get worse - because we are being willing participants in this game which is destroying not only the GOP, but our country. We are being enablers, and I think that when more people realize that, they will not allow themselves to throw all principle out the window, they will take a stand and fight to restore our values and our beloved republic. I put together a little intro in this video, and following that is the excerpt of the speech. Here's the link: Do we have a one-party system masquerading as two? It's about 5 minutes long total. Thanks and God bless!!
I'll vote for "all of the above."
Yep, that is the one thing that gives peace (to believers, anyway) that we do know, ultimately, how the story ends. But I don't think God intended for us to throw in the towel and allow crooks to be elected, just because we know in the end He will prevail. IMO, I still think God wants us to stand up for truth and justice and not throw our principles out by supporting a "lesser evil."
I don’t care to waste my time. His “views” and conspiracy theories are well known. He is a nutcase. When the GOP needs unity, we get a kook from my state to further divide the party.......
Yea...a liberal or a nutcase like Ron Paul. Great Choices.
SARCASM.
Ford competes with GM, Toyota, and Mercedes. In some ways it's going to differentiate itself from them, but in other ways it can't help making and selling a similar product (personal transportation).
So while the management has a good deal of freedom, it's constrained by consumer demand and the market. It has to pay attention to what people want and what they're willing to pay for it.
With both parties appealing to the consumer it may look like we have a "one party system," but that's because we have to work within existing constraints and appeal to what the voters want. They end up appealing more to the middle, rather than the edges.
If you want to figure things out, look at what voters want and what they're indignant about and look at the competititon of parties and factions to win over those voters. If you just say, "They don't want our wonderful product" or "We're not pounding the pavement enough to make sales" you may be missing something.
Agreed, but in this case, we have a bunch of lemmings being told to buy an AMC Gremlin, the best car ever built. They are being told the car can fly, swim, cook and clean house... and they are falling for it hook, line and sinker. None took the time to look at maintenance records or reliability reports, they just listen to the salesman, and none will admit to their mistake after they find out it can’t fly and strands them continuously while costing large dollars in maintenance and repairs. They will just keep buying them without realizing reality.
Wake up and smell the new world order people.
It's the same as with my personal health. Even though I am certain that my mortal existence will end within the next few decades, I still do more with each passing day to keep my mortal body alive and healthy.
In each case, it's not the destination, but the journey. In each case, it's about living our lives as free and vigorous men, to the best of our abilities, so long as we are able to act.
And in each case, we live on in our deeds and vision, long past our mortal demise.
I doubt that the Athenians of 2500 years ago could have envisioned how their ideas of liberty would still be alive, standing astride history like a Colossus, 2500 years later, in the hearts and dreams of billions of humans around the world.
Nor can we know now in what way, 2500 years hence, the Statue of Liberty will beacon future souls to liberty, across the oceans.
Perhaps this gives us a key to understanding what is good in Ron Paul, and what is fatally flawed with him.
One of the negative points on Ron Paul that I hear from my favorite radio talk show hosts is that, while Ron himself has not endorsed the druggies or skin heads that are attracted to him, still he has not adequately denounced them.
Perhaps this gives us more keys to understanding.
Ron Paul seems to follow the ideas of Ayn Rand. But these ideas, and Ron Paul, have been discredited as kookie, because additional ideas, that are markers for kookiness, have attached themselves to Ayn Rand's original objectivism.
It resembles how the body attaches markers to hostile foreign proteins, so that other cells, the 'enforcers' know what to kill or isolate.
Whether it be the notion of "isolationism", which Ron Paul does endorse, or "free drugs" or "anti-Semitism" or "New World Order conspiracies", which I don't recall Ron Paul speaking to as much, in each case a "kooky" idea has attached itself to the philosophy of objectivism, marking it as alien, to be rejected.
It's just how the main stream body politic is protecting itself from ideas it finds too threatening.
The end result is that a minority find some, even most, of Ron Paul's ideas to be very attractive, while the majority rejects him as a kook, because of one or more of the kooky ideas which he endorses (isolationism) or with which his supporters are associated.
I've seen some of it now (before it jammed up on my computer).
I used to think that the world was the way it is because of a conspiracy the politicians were all in cahoots about.
But people do disagree. They take all kinds of crazy positions and opinions. And they get together to promote what they believe. It only looks like a conspiracy when you disagree with them.
Politicians of the same era in the same country who deal with the same issues and problems and institutions (and the same contributors) are bound to look more similar than different if you look at them from far enough away.
So I doubt it's all Cecil Rhodes's fault. The man loved the British Empire. And now it's gone. If the conspiracy were that effective, how did Rhodesia become Zimbabwe or Mugabia or whatever it is today?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.