Watch Out When Pols Expouse The Values Of Democracy

There is a political and subversive word that has been created and is promoted by the establishment as a major key to formulate and channel the public mind. The word has more than saturated the public conscience. It's uttered hundreds of times a day on political talk shows and in the halls of government. Very "intellectual" people spout this word assuming it means human freedom and liberty.But this word has a dark and hidden meaning. It is a cover and disguise for fascism and socialism and tyranny. It is workhorse of the American propaganda ministry. It is taught in schools (government indoctrination centers) as the source of all freedoms. Politicians love to hear it and use it. Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels used it. The word is "democracy." Mainstream Democrats and government propaganda media political pundits are clamoring for the end of the Electoral College. Why? "Democracy." This is not new. They say that the Electoral College is an affront to freedom because it prevents democracy. After all, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. But the Electoral College gave us what they have determined is an abomination of a president in Donald Trump. Electors had not even yet met to cast their Electoral College (EC) votes for Trump in December 2016 before Senator Barbara Boxer had introduced a bill to abolish the EC. Boxer's bill was followed by the predictable propaganda from government propaganda organs claiming it's time to do away with the "archaic" EC and become a "real democracy." As we approach another presidential election the calls for "democracy" in elections have only grown louder. In April, leading Democrat senators took a new swipe at the EC, introducing a new bill to abolish it. Most of the leading contenders for the Democrat presidential nomination support the bill. Abolishing it this way will be long shot as it will have to happen via constitutional amendment. The process for amending the Constitution through congress requires approval by two-thirds of both houses of congress plus ratification by three-fourths of the states. But there is an attempted work-around under way. Called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, a growing number of blue states have signed on to a process by which their electoral votes would go to the presidential candidate that wins the national popular vote, regardless of how their state voted. So far, 14 states and the District of Columbia have signed on. They represent 189 electoral votes, just 81 short of the 270 needed for election. Many leftists applaud this movement, not recognizing or caring — or perhaps even embracing — that it will disenfranchise them if their state happens to vote one way while the popular vote goes another. Proponents of eliminating the EC claim it will make the U.S. more "democratic." And therein lies the rub. Democracy is an esoteric belief system that manipulates the people in such a way that all power flows to the state. As with pure dictatorships, power flows from the top down. Democracy implies freedom in the public's mind while power and wealth is constantly channeled to the federal government. Human liberty is regressively crushed under "democracy." Democracy is a political word that is embraced by all political parties and all politicians under many labels in every country of the modern world. It is a cover and a facade for communism, socialism, fascism, for class warfare, for the exploitation and manipulation of minorities against stability, cultural heritage and private property. (By the way; communism, socialism and fascism are all equal. Don't be fooled by claims that one is a right wing and another is a left wing philosophy. They all transfer power to the state. The difference is simply semantics.) When politicians utter the word democracy, they are using a code word that signifies their total allegiance to the state. They are using mass hypnosis to manipulate the people against human liberty. The U.S. was founded as a republic. When asked what type of government they had created, Benjamin Franklin replied, "A republic, if you can keep it." The Founding Fathers feared two things above all else: a democracy and an overly powerful executive. The Electoral College was designed to prevent both. For a good history of the Electoral College and its evolution over the years, read "Origins of the Electoral College," by Randall G. Holcombe. In Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the Founders established the method of electing the president, with electors from each state, not the people — the number of electors being equal to the states' congressional delegations — casting their votes for president. The candidate getting a majority of the electoral votes would be named president. If no candidate received a majority the House of Representatives would select the president from the top three vote-getters. The people played little part in early presidential elections. Instead, presidents prior to 1828 were selected by political elites. The election process has drifted far from where the Founders intended. Still, the Electoral College is essential for preventing the U.S. from becoming a democracy with the president elected by popular vote. Democracies are mob rule or groupism. Democracy is anathema to individual liberty. Democracy is tyranny with a pretty face. Without the Electoral College a presidential candidate would merely have to win a big majority of the population in the five or six of the most populace states to carry the election — say California, New York, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. As it is, Democrats hold a decisive advantage in the Electoral College math because they advocate for socialism. Minorities love socialism, and minorities tend to congregate in the urban areas. In a Facebook post, the Uncle Sam's Misguided Children group explained it this way: ELECTORAL COLLEGE It's a safety net so that EVERYONE's vote counts. 1: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57. 2: There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16. 3: Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes. 4: In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. 5: These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles. 6: When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don't and shouldn't speak for the rest of the country. And this is WHY you have an Electoral College. And even if "democracy" did equal freedom, how is a presidential election based on the outcome of the vote of five New York counties in any way "democracy?" Anyone seeking human liberty, privacy and private property under the mental deception of democracy is under the greatest illusion. Let us purge our minds of this seductive appeal, this spiritual despotism. It has stolen our conscience, our soul and our honor. It is our legacy to future generations to whom we are passing on our slavery. Shame could have no greater victory. Democracy is a faith, a state religion, a state of mind. It is the progressive destruction of the person — the individual. It is covered and masked with benevolence, philanthropy and brotherhood. Democracy is the opposite of the common belief. It is "democratic" tyranny, a camouflage for despotism. Its goal is nothing less than universal slavery. If the people imagine that they are free, all sorts of crimes by the political system can be imposed, without protest, upon the people. It is an invisible armed guard. Mental democracy is a psychological weapon of the state that motivates the people to obey the system and to love the state. As George Orwell wrote in his book, 1984, the people come to love Big Brother (the state). The elimination of the Electoral College will not usher in "democracy." It will usher in the complete end of personal freedom and liberty. Remember that Hitler said Germany was a "democracy in the best sense of the word." Yours for the truth, Bob Livingston Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter™

Want The Elections To Be Controlled By California And New York? If So, Support Ending The Electoral College. If You Want The Rest Of The Country To Have A Say In Who Is President, Keep It.

Democratic Senator Introduces Bill To Abolish The Electoral College

by Tyler Durden

Nov 16, 2016 2:36 AM

204

SHARES

TwitterFacebookReddit

Back when Donald Trump was lagging badly in the polls - as recently as just over a week ago - any time the republican candidate accused the electoral system of being rigged, Democrats would scream over each other to explain to him just how fair, balanced and sensible is the mandated framework of the US presidential election. Well, Trump won, and the roles are now flipped, with such pundits as Michael Moore, and even Paul Krugman earlier today, slamming the concept of the Electoral College, which Trump won decisively despite losing the popular vote.

In retrospect, Krugman may have been the rational one.

According to the LA Times reports, retiring California Democratic senator Barbara Boxer filed legislation Tuesday to abolish the Electoral College altogether in light of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote but still losing the election.

Boxer announced in a statement that the bill, which she introduced later on Tuesday afternoon, would determine the winner of presidential elections by the outcome of the popular vote. She cited President-elect Donald Trump's victory in the Electoral College despite Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton's apparent popular vote advantage.

"In my lifetime, I have seen two elections where the winner of the general election did not win the popular vote," Boxer said in a statement. "The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts."

 Follow

Sen. Barbara Boxer 

✔@SenatorBoxer

The presidency is the only office where you can get more votes & still lose. It's time to end the Electoral College. http://bit.ly/2fRVBgh 

1:21 PM - 15 Nov 2016

 
•  4,6024,602 Retweets
 
•  6,6106,610 likes

"In 2012, Donald Trump tweeted, 'The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,' " Boxer added. "I couldn't agree more. One person, one vote!"

While such legislation makes a symbolic statement after an election that shocked Democrats, is unlikely to gain traction with Republicans holding control of both chambers of Congress in a lame duck session.

Her bill calls for an amendment to the Constitution that would end the Electoral College system. Should such a thing pass, the amendment would only take effect if ratified by three-fourths of the states within seven years after its passage in the U.S. Congress.

Boxer was a vocal advocate for Clinton throughout the campaign and had said that electing the first female president was on her to-do list before leaving the Senate in January.

This is the fifth time in history that a nominee has won the popular vote but not the Electoral College. The same situation happened to Al Gore in 2000, when he lost to George W. Bush.

While one can debate the merits of changing the constitution just so one's preferred candidate can win, we'll pass and instead conclude with the following cartoon which explains everything.

* * *

Boxer's full proposed legislation is below:

Boxer Introduces Bill To Abolish The Electoral College

Donald Trump to Become Fifth Person in U.S. History To Lose Popular Vote and Still Become President

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) will introduce legislation when the Senate comes into session later today that would eliminate the Electoral College and determine the winner of presidential elections by the outcome of the popular vote.

Hillary Clinton currently leads the popular vote by nearly a million votes (990,758). By the time all the ballots are counted, the New York Times estimates that Clinton may win the popular vote by more than two million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. Donald Trump will become the fifth President in U.S. history to lose the popular vote and still win the election.

"In my lifetime, I have seen two elections where the winner of the general election did not win the popular vote," said Senator Boxer. "When all the ballots are counted, Hillary Clinton will have won the popular vote by a margin that could exceed two million votes, and she is on track to have received more votes than any other presidential candidate in history except Barack Obama. This is the only office in the land where you can get more votes and still lose the presidency. The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts."

"In 2012, Donald Trump tweeted, 'The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,' " Boxer added. "I couldn't agree more. One person, one vote!"

During his interview on "60 Minutes" on Sunday, Trump said his views on the Electoral College haven't changed. "You know, I'm not going to change my mind just because I won. But I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win," he said. This morning, he tweeted that the Electoral College is "actually genius."

As of early Tuesday, Hillary Clinton had received 61,929,605 votes (47.8 percent) and Donald Trump had received 60,938,847 votes (47.0 percent), according to the Cook Political Report national popular vote tracker.

Senator Boxer's legislation would amend the Constitution of the United States and abolish the Electoral College. The amendment would take effect when ratified by three-fourths of the states within seven years after its passage in the U.S. Congress.

The "Outsiders" Debate. Would You Listen? Would It Be The Ultimate Cage Match?

Trump-Sanders Debate Buzz Stirs Up Excitement, Doubt

(Getty Images)

By Mark Swanson   |   Friday, 27 May 2016 08:27 AM

Short URL|

Email Article|

Comment|

Contact|

Print|

    A   A

• 0
  inShare

Born out of a tongue-in-cheek response to a planted question on a late-night talk show, the notion of a Donald Trump-Bernie Sanders debate has taken on a life of its own.

The pair have a $1 million offer on the table to stage the event, according toPolitico; Trump said he thinks such an event could generate $10 million to $15 million; Sanders wants "the biggest stadium possible."

"This would be a complete circus," Democratic media strategist Brad Bannon told The Hill. "To me, it shows more than anything else that American politics has become entertainment."

But everybody loves a circus.

"I think it would be fun to watch," Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer told The Hill — and she's a Hillary Clinton supporter.

Other Democrats, however, are not as amused and condemn this as a ploy by Sanders.

"That confirms what we've been saying." Sen. Joe Manchin told Politico. "Why would you expect Bernie should be considerate or be nice or be working to bring everyone together? Why? He's not a Democrat."

To recap how things spun forward so quickly:

On Wednesday night, Trump appeared on the "Jimmy Kimmel Live" where the host had a challenge waiting for Trump from Bernie Sanders: Debate me. Trump said he'd be open to a debate with Bernie, as long as proceeds went to charity.

Sanders tweeted:


Though a Trump campaign official called it a tongue-in-cheek response, the Sanders camp pounced and whipped up buzz to debate Trump before the June 7 primary in California, perhaps Sanders' last best chance to gain ground on Clinton.

And what does the Democratic front-runner think of all this?

"You know, I know they've gone back and forth on this, and they seem to be saying it's some kind of joke," The Hill quoted Clinton telling MSNBC. "Trump doesn't sound very serious."

Related Stories:

• Trump, Sanders Say They'll Debate to Raise Money for Women's Charity
• Democrats Irked at Bernie Sanders Challenging Trump to Debate

© 2016 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Trump-Sanders-Debate-Buzz/2016/05/27/id/731055/#ixzz49syjoQup
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!

If IRS Places Lien On You, You Can't Leave The Country. Is US Now One Big Concentration Camp?

If you owe the IRS, Congress wants to confiscate your passport

Posted on November 25, 2015 by Ben Bullard

The GOP-led Congress wants to hand the IRS the keys to your freedom.

The highway funding bill now making its way past lawmakers includes a provision that would allow the government to yank your passport if you owe the IRS more than $50,000.

As part of the 864-page H.R. 22, the Transportation Funding Act of 2015, the House Ways and Means Committee has inserted language that, if left intact, will allow the State Department to deny or revoke the passports of “seriously delinquent” taxpayers.

That means that, should you find yourself in litigation with the IRS over a big, disputed tax bill, you could be banned from leaving the country. Worse, because those who work overseas are subject to U.S. taxes on everything they earn, a revoked passport could fundamentally trap them in a very, very small world.

“This provision creates a tax-collection mechanism that is frankly far too draconian,” the American Citizens Abroad (ACA) nonprofit wrote to lawmakers earlier this month.

The law “puts disproportionate pressure on the taxpayer and risks mistakes and unforeseeable consequences, which would be life-changing for the individual. It discriminates against Americans abroad who, unlike Americans living in the U.S., are overwhelmingly reliant upon their U.S. passports in their everyday lives.”

The measure appears to be a blind stab at raising revenue.

“You may wonder what past-due taxes and passports have to do with funding transportation infrastructure,” CNN Money’s Jeanne Sahadi writes. “The answer is pretty much nothing, except that the measure is estimated to raise nearly $400 million over a decade.”

The language would target those who have had a tax lien placed against them by the IRS and would take effect on Jan. 1 of 2016. The ACA is asking lawmakers to withhold the passport language from H.R. 22 until they have held hearings.

This is not the first time Congress has attempted to link passports with taxes, and it’s an idea that apparently appeals to lawmakers from either party. Although the GOP-controlled Congress would squarely be to blame if the current language becomes a part of the law, a 2012 highway funding bill sponsored by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) sought the same power. The passport-taxes link in that bill was struck before Congress approved the funding package.

“A $50,000 tax debt is easy to amass today,” Rob W. Wood wrote for Forbes in February. “In addition, tax liens are pretty standard. The IRS files tax liens routinely when you owe taxes. It’s the IRS way of putting creditors on notice so the IRS eventually gets paid. In that sense, the you-can’t-travel idea seems extreme. Some commentators noted that a far smaller sum of unpaid child support can trigger similar passport action. Others attack the proposal as potentially unconstitutional.”