This is a terrible bit of news I got from Andrew Sulivan and which he got from The Huff Post's Matt Simon. Apparently Congressman Ron Paul gave an interview to ABC News' John Stossel -- one that ABC didn't show on television, but confined to the World Wide Web.
This is the latest and ultimate example of a mainstream media fix that has been in the works in different forms, from polling to television coverage. New Media to the rescue as bloggers and vloggers uncover a fix that would have determined the election in the past.
No more.
According to Matt Simon, Stossel wrote this:
Despite relatively low poll numbers, Paul has had a big influence on the presidential campaign. That's in part because he's raised a ton of money, and in part because of the passionate following he has on the Web. It's one reason we're posting my interview with Paul only on the Internet, where the debate about Paul is very active. In fact, he's the most Googled presidential candidate.
Yeah, right.
Any Internet expert know that television drives web searches. If the interview were shown on ABC, it would have compelled many undecided viewers to go to their computers and search for news on Ron Paul.
ABC either knew this and punted, or didn't know this, and still worked to deny the Paul interview full disemenation. In either case, it's wrong what was done. Here's the ABC interview.
Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Barack Obama and Ron Paul Win National Presidential Caucus
I just saw this on my Facebook profile news update, and clicked on the headlines, reveling this press release below. Let's see how CNN and Fox and the other main stream news outlets handle this news. It flies in the face of their polls and adds ammo to the idea that some news people there are trying to steer the election toward Hillary Clinton.
For example, in New Jersey, the finish was Obama, Edwards, and Kucnich -- yep. See it here:
Stay tuned.
Video on The National Presidential Caucus:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
National Presidential Caucus Announces Results From First-Ever National Caucus
--
Washington, DC (December 12, 2007) -- On December 7, 2007 in cities and small towns across the country, Democrat, Republican and "Open" Caucus groups formed independently online and Caucused face-to-face on National Caucus Day. The first-ever National Presidential Caucus is now history and the results are in.
Barack Obama wins over Democrat voters generating 40% of Democrat Caucus voter preferences. Obama was followed by a three-way tie for second, with John Edwards, Bill Richardson and "Undecided" each generating 20% of Democratic Caucus preferences.
On the Republican side, Ron Paul obliterated the field for the GOP generating the preference of 50% of GOP Caucuses. Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson follow, generating 33.3% and 16.6% of Republican Caucus preferences, respectively.
Among votes in Open Caucuses, Ron Paul wins with 62.5% of Open Caucus votes, followed by Barack Obama (18.75%), Fred Thompson (12.5%), and Hilary Clinton (6.25%).
Results were tallied from 19 independently formed Caucus groups (Republican, Democrat, and Open) that met on Friday, December 7th, 2007 in Dallas, TX (2D); Sarcoxie, MO (O); Boise, ID (R); Needham, MA (D); Carthage, MO (O); Manhattan, KS (D & R); Pineville, MO (O); Richmond, MO (O); Costa Mesa, CA (O); Springfield MO (R); Winston-Salem, NC (O); Overland Park, KS (R); New York City, NY (O); and Joplin, MO (R), Warrensburg, MO (R), Roselle Park, NK (D), and Philadelphia, PA (O).
Some caucuses used multiple voting rounds with minimum vote thresholds to give citizens a chance to change their minds and switch candidate preferences, but all meetings were built on a first round of issue discussion and deliberation. Multiple rounds of voting were not prohibited and each group was encouraged to create the most engaging caucus format possible. However, threshold voting eliminates all but the top vote-getters. While that may have been the intention for some groups, the NPC feels obligated to recognize the efforts and opinions of all caucus goers.
Issue results reflected opposition to Iraq involvement, foreign intervention in general, and health care, immigration and erosion of civil liberties rounding out the top concerns of all caucusers.
Self-organized and independent, most gatherings were small, informal discussion sessions, while others attracted hundreds of participants including party officials and campaign operatives in a raucous bid for supporters. The NPC feels that the results at each caucus is of greatest importance and relevance to those in that caucus room and to that local community where those ideas were exchanged, relationships were created, passions were shared. We believe this is social capital formation at its finest.
The NPC was previewed by major media from CBS News, The Washington Post and The New York Times, among others. The actual Caucuses are receiving a fair amount of local attention from the mainstream media, including front page newspaper coverage in Greensboro, NC and TV coverage by WNBC news in NYC, the largest NBC affiliate in the nation.
But even better, people reported on their own caucus events. Using numerical reports, commentary, pictures & video, and through a growing number of blogs, each caucus tells its own story. Some reports from those who participated, include Kansas City: "Wow, what a great evening it was in Kansas City!"; New Jersey: "It was a fun night with close to 200 people participating in this exercise."; Chicago: "It was a very informative experience."; Boise, Idaho: "It was an extremely fun event..." Video footage is being compiled on the official National Presidential Caucus channel on YouTube. Visit http://www.youtube.com/NationalCaucus to view.
"The NPC wants to applaud everyone who took the time and made an effort to engage their neighbors in this evening of passionate civic discourse, said Don Means, NPC's primary organizer. "You have just ushered in a new era of participatory democracy in America. Your country should be proud of you!"
National Presidential Caucus is the product of a consortium of partisan, bi-partisan and non-partisan interests who seek to demonstrate how local, self-organized, web-enabled face-to-face gatherings is the new basis for participatory democracy. To view National Caucus endorsers visit: http://www.nationalcaucus.com/endorsements . For more information about the National Presidential Caucus vision visit: http://www.nationalcaucus.com/about
CONTACT:
Myles Weissleder
National Presidential Caucus
myles@nationalcaucus.com
Office: 415-332-3205
Mobile: 415-990-0970
# 30 #
For example, in New Jersey, the finish was Obama, Edwards, and Kucnich -- yep. See it here:
Stay tuned.
Video on The National Presidential Caucus:
National Presidential Caucus Announces Results From First-Ever National Caucus
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
National Presidential Caucus Announces Results From First-Ever National Caucus
--
Barack Obama Wins Democrat Caucuses; Ron Paul Dominates Both GOP And "Open" Caucuses
--Washington, DC (December 12, 2007) -- On December 7, 2007 in cities and small towns across the country, Democrat, Republican and "Open" Caucus groups formed independently online and Caucused face-to-face on National Caucus Day. The first-ever National Presidential Caucus is now history and the results are in.
Barack Obama wins over Democrat voters generating 40% of Democrat Caucus voter preferences. Obama was followed by a three-way tie for second, with John Edwards, Bill Richardson and "Undecided" each generating 20% of Democratic Caucus preferences.
On the Republican side, Ron Paul obliterated the field for the GOP generating the preference of 50% of GOP Caucuses. Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson follow, generating 33.3% and 16.6% of Republican Caucus preferences, respectively.
Among votes in Open Caucuses, Ron Paul wins with 62.5% of Open Caucus votes, followed by Barack Obama (18.75%), Fred Thompson (12.5%), and Hilary Clinton (6.25%).
Results were tallied from 19 independently formed Caucus groups (Republican, Democrat, and Open) that met on Friday, December 7th, 2007 in Dallas, TX (2D); Sarcoxie, MO (O); Boise, ID (R); Needham, MA (D); Carthage, MO (O); Manhattan, KS (D & R); Pineville, MO (O); Richmond, MO (O); Costa Mesa, CA (O); Springfield MO (R); Winston-Salem, NC (O); Overland Park, KS (R); New York City, NY (O); and Joplin, MO (R), Warrensburg, MO (R), Roselle Park, NK (D), and Philadelphia, PA (O).
Some caucuses used multiple voting rounds with minimum vote thresholds to give citizens a chance to change their minds and switch candidate preferences, but all meetings were built on a first round of issue discussion and deliberation. Multiple rounds of voting were not prohibited and each group was encouraged to create the most engaging caucus format possible. However, threshold voting eliminates all but the top vote-getters. While that may have been the intention for some groups, the NPC feels obligated to recognize the efforts and opinions of all caucus goers.
Issue results reflected opposition to Iraq involvement, foreign intervention in general, and health care, immigration and erosion of civil liberties rounding out the top concerns of all caucusers.
Self-organized and independent, most gatherings were small, informal discussion sessions, while others attracted hundreds of participants including party officials and campaign operatives in a raucous bid for supporters. The NPC feels that the results at each caucus is of greatest importance and relevance to those in that caucus room and to that local community where those ideas were exchanged, relationships were created, passions were shared. We believe this is social capital formation at its finest.
The NPC was previewed by major media from CBS News, The Washington Post and The New York Times, among others. The actual Caucuses are receiving a fair amount of local attention from the mainstream media, including front page newspaper coverage in Greensboro, NC and TV coverage by WNBC news in NYC, the largest NBC affiliate in the nation.
But even better, people reported on their own caucus events. Using numerical reports, commentary, pictures & video, and through a growing number of blogs, each caucus tells its own story. Some reports from those who participated, include Kansas City: "Wow, what a great evening it was in Kansas City!"; New Jersey: "It was a fun night with close to 200 people participating in this exercise."; Chicago: "It was a very informative experience."; Boise, Idaho: "It was an extremely fun event..." Video footage is being compiled on the official National Presidential Caucus channel on YouTube. Visit http://www.youtube.com/NationalCaucus to view.
"The NPC wants to applaud everyone who took the time and made an effort to engage their neighbors in this evening of passionate civic discourse, said Don Means, NPC's primary organizer. "You have just ushered in a new era of participatory democracy in America. Your country should be proud of you!"
National Presidential Caucus is the product of a consortium of partisan, bi-partisan and non-partisan interests who seek to demonstrate how local, self-organized, web-enabled face-to-face gatherings is the new basis for participatory democracy. To view National Caucus endorsers visit: http://www.nationalcaucus.com/endorsements . For more information about the National Presidential Caucus vision visit: http://www.nationalcaucus.com/about
CONTACT:
Myles Weissleder
National Presidential Caucus
myles@nationalcaucus.com
Office: 415-332-3205
Mobile: 415-990-0970
# 30 #
Sunday, December 09, 2007
John McCain - In TV Ad Claims A Backbone Of Steel - But Do Voters Care?
U.S. Senator John McCain, a person I admire very much even though I don't back him for president, has come out with a new campaign ad with Red Sox pitcher Curt Shilling stating that McCain has "a backbone of steel" -- but will the 30 second spot translate to votes?
I think the basic error is really in that not a lot of people who vote know who Curt Shilling is without a proper annoucement; that wasn't in the video.
Stay tuned.
Monday, December 03, 2007
CNN / YouTube Debates - My Message To Steve Grove and Dave Bohrman
This video and post present my message to Steve Grove, the News and Politics editor for CNN, and to Dave Bohrman, the Executive Producer of the CNN / YouTube Debates for CNN.
My take is that CNN/YouTube was lucky to realize the ratings record that was set for the debate, and this was achieved for two reasons: 1) the time of year -- it's the fall holiday season, and 2) the fact that all of the Republican Presidential Candidates were there, which is no small feat.
Still, CNN/YouTube handled this debate differently than the Democratic Debate. First, the level of promotion of the event was dramatically scaled back compared to the first. Second, there were fewer questions picked out of the 5,200 that were submitted : 34 questions versus 43 for the first debate. Third, there was an annoying tendency to pick Blacks who submitted questions about Black issues, when there were videos from people who were not Black, but did ask questions about Blacks and the Republican Party.
(As a momentary aside, I think that practice shows an America that does not exist. It shows an America where only Blacks care about Black or minority issues, and not the real America, where a diverse set of people care about all Americans, and will ask questions regarding how Blacks are treated. To not show this -- the real America -- is criminal and paints America as far more racist than it really is. This country has come a long way and is better than it's ever been.)
CNN/YouTube also didn't handle its video talent properly. In the video I present myself as an example. In the begining I was -- and still am -- part of the sample video for the CNN/YouTube Debates. I'm also on the YTDebates channel, at least as of this writing and you can see my photo on the channel here in this blog post. So when I learned that YouTubers were being flown out by Google to the debates, I thought -- rightfully -- that somone would call.
Nope. Didn't happen.
I also sent an inquiry to determine if this was the case, and didn't get an answer from Steve Grove.
So it makes one wonder -- in this case, me -- what's going on over at CNN / YouTube and why they treat people in this way - or at least me. But given the thousands of people who have made and submitted videos, and the other talent that was promoted, I can't believe it's just me that had the problem.
CNN itself showed little regard for my time when they contact me for the first debate. Three show producers contacted me separately and in one case I thought I was to get on a flight. Then didn't get a call back. Then was essentially made to wait for a few days, then got a call saying I wasn't being flown out, only to get a call from another show flying me to New York.
Nuts.
What bothered me this time around was not that I was not called, but Steve didn't answer my emails attempting to learn what he and YouTube were going to do. If they'd said "Zennie, we don't need you this time", or "Hey CNN thinks you're an Obama supporter, and they've got a problem with that" then I'd be fine. I just wanted communication. I didn't get it.
As for the debate itself there were a lot of problems in addtion to the ones I discussed above. Not a single video question on Health Care was presented, leaving one to think the Republican Party doens't care about it. Is that CNN's call or the Republican Party? One has to assume they were working together. But in eliminating that series of questions, CNN / YouTube and the Republican Party pissed off a country.
Plus, CNN / YouTube did't tell video submitters they were going to do this, and the video makers -- given the Democratic Debate with YouTube, had full reason to think they would do so. Moreover, CNN / YouTube didn't tell anyone what they were going to do -- I learned it from CNN's David Bohrman being quoted in the New York Times.
That's not good.
In closing, I think CNN / YouTube owes YouTubers an appology and I'm also disappointed with how Steve Grove handled things this time around. I have high standards for him and I expect that -- givent the historic nature of what he's doing with YouTube and CNN that he will reach and maintain them. It's not personal -- I like Steve -- just professional.
I don't know Dave Bohrman, but I expect that he's a fine and upstanding person who will take these crticisms to heart and act on them. I think all of us want to see the CNN / YouTube system reach its potential.
My take is that CNN/YouTube was lucky to realize the ratings record that was set for the debate, and this was achieved for two reasons: 1) the time of year -- it's the fall holiday season, and 2) the fact that all of the Republican Presidential Candidates were there, which is no small feat.
Still, CNN/YouTube handled this debate differently than the Democratic Debate. First, the level of promotion of the event was dramatically scaled back compared to the first. Second, there were fewer questions picked out of the 5,200 that were submitted : 34 questions versus 43 for the first debate. Third, there was an annoying tendency to pick Blacks who submitted questions about Black issues, when there were videos from people who were not Black, but did ask questions about Blacks and the Republican Party.
(As a momentary aside, I think that practice shows an America that does not exist. It shows an America where only Blacks care about Black or minority issues, and not the real America, where a diverse set of people care about all Americans, and will ask questions regarding how Blacks are treated. To not show this -- the real America -- is criminal and paints America as far more racist than it really is. This country has come a long way and is better than it's ever been.)
CNN/YouTube also didn't handle its video talent properly. In the video I present myself as an example. In the begining I was -- and still am -- part of the sample video for the CNN/YouTube Debates. I'm also on the YTDebates channel, at least as of this writing and you can see my photo on the channel here in this blog post. So when I learned that YouTubers were being flown out by Google to the debates, I thought -- rightfully -- that somone would call.
Nope. Didn't happen.
I also sent an inquiry to determine if this was the case, and didn't get an answer from Steve Grove.
So it makes one wonder -- in this case, me -- what's going on over at CNN / YouTube and why they treat people in this way - or at least me. But given the thousands of people who have made and submitted videos, and the other talent that was promoted, I can't believe it's just me that had the problem.
CNN itself showed little regard for my time when they contact me for the first debate. Three show producers contacted me separately and in one case I thought I was to get on a flight. Then didn't get a call back. Then was essentially made to wait for a few days, then got a call saying I wasn't being flown out, only to get a call from another show flying me to New York.
Nuts.
What bothered me this time around was not that I was not called, but Steve didn't answer my emails attempting to learn what he and YouTube were going to do. If they'd said "Zennie, we don't need you this time", or "Hey CNN thinks you're an Obama supporter, and they've got a problem with that" then I'd be fine. I just wanted communication. I didn't get it.
As for the debate itself there were a lot of problems in addtion to the ones I discussed above. Not a single video question on Health Care was presented, leaving one to think the Republican Party doens't care about it. Is that CNN's call or the Republican Party? One has to assume they were working together. But in eliminating that series of questions, CNN / YouTube and the Republican Party pissed off a country.
Plus, CNN / YouTube did't tell video submitters they were going to do this, and the video makers -- given the Democratic Debate with YouTube, had full reason to think they would do so. Moreover, CNN / YouTube didn't tell anyone what they were going to do -- I learned it from CNN's David Bohrman being quoted in the New York Times.
That's not good.
In closing, I think CNN / YouTube owes YouTubers an appology and I'm also disappointed with how Steve Grove handled things this time around. I have high standards for him and I expect that -- givent the historic nature of what he's doing with YouTube and CNN that he will reach and maintain them. It's not personal -- I like Steve -- just professional.
I don't know Dave Bohrman, but I expect that he's a fine and upstanding person who will take these crticisms to heart and act on them. I think all of us want to see the CNN / YouTube system reach its potential.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
CNN / YouTube Debate - Nursing Homes & Private Equity Firms
There's a disturbing trend in the nursing home industry today, and forms the basis for my CNN / YouTube debate question submitted at 10:45 PM PST, 11-25-07, just under the deadline!
The question is are you as a presidential candidate concerned that private equity firms are buying nursing homes, laying off staff, and pocketing the difference, resulting in poor service? If you are concerned, what will you do about it?
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Ron Paul - Republican - Will Not Support The Republican Nominee Because Of Iraq War
Congressman Ron Paul said that he will not support the GOP nominee for the Presidential election because of the Republican Party's stance on the Iraq War.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
J.C. Watts, Mitt Romney, Diversity - CNN / YouTube Question
This is my latest CNN / YouTube Republican Debate Question. and it was inspired by today's "The Situation Room":
Hi I'm Zennie Abraham in Oakland, CA.
On November 21st, Former Oklahoma Congressman and CNN "The Situation Room" Contributor J.C. Watts asserted and complained that your campaign Governor Romney didn't have a single African American staffer.
This question is for all of the candidates: do you have more than one African American employee on your campaign, and if you're going to ask for votes of African Americans, can you realistically do so without having someone who works for you who looks like they do?
Monday, November 19, 2007
Mike Gravel - "Hillary, Your Lips are Moving and You're Lying'
In this video, Former Senator and U.S. Presidential candidate Mike Gravel -- who was not invited to be in the Nevada debate -- held his own event where he responded to the answers given by the candidates, well, ok, Senator Clinton here. He says she's lying about Clinton's position on Iran, saying "Hillary, Your Lips are Moving and you're lying. She's ignorant. The law that was past right after 9-11, coupled with the resolution that (U.S. Senator Joe Libermann) put in, gave the President the power to go to war."
It's not right that he was excluded; he'd have made the event informative and unforgetable as well as providing a great check for Hillary Clinton.
Ron Paul Kicks Fox News Chris Wallace Into Abyss - Video
In this cool video that places Congressman and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul in the role of a Spartan as in the movie "300", Paul kicks Fox News Chris Wallace into an abyss. You've got to see it.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Liberty Dollar Factory Raided By FBI - Plant Makes "Ron Paul Dollar"
First, I didn't know it was legal to make an alternative currency, but the backers of Libery Dollar claim this is so. Their headquarters was raided by the FBI on Thursday. But before we get to that, here's the information on the Liberty Dollar:
The Federal Reserve creates inflation when it issues US dollars backed by government debt. Since 1913, when the Federal Reserve was created by Congress, your money has lost 96% of its purchasing power due to inflation. The more "money" the Federal Reserve creates - the less your Federal Reserve "money" will buy.
From 1913 to 2001 the national debt grew to $6 trillion in 88 years. In the next three years it climbed to $7 trillion dollars in 2004. In just one year it climbed sharply to over $8 trillion dollars. The acceleration of the national debt is alarming. The corresponding loss of your purchasing power may also accelerate in the near future.
Now you can profit from the coming inflation with the inflation proof REAL money - the 100% gold and silver Liberty Dollar.
Hi. My name is Bernard von NotHaus. I was so concerned about what is happening to our "money" that I designed and developed the Liberty Dollar. For 25 years, I was the Mintmaster at the Royal Hawaiian Mint and have devoted my life to the study of money, why it is valuable, and how we use it to fulfill our dreams. Like you, I am paying a lot higher gas prices, but I am also making a lot more money because I am using the Liberty Dollar. Here is what G. Edward Griffin, the noted author on the Federal Reserve said:
Below is the letter that appears on the Liberty Dollar website after the FBI raid.
Dear Liberty Dollar Supporters:
I sincerely regret to inform you that about 8:00 this morning a dozen FBI and
Secret Service agents raided the Liberty Dollar office in Evansville.
For approximately six hours they took all the gold, all the silver, all the
platinum and almost two tons of Ron Paul Dollars that where just delivered last
Friday. They also took all the files, all the computers and froze our bank
accounts.
We have no money. We have no products. We have no records to even know what was
ordered or what you are owed. We have nothing but the will to push forward and
overcome this massive assault on our liberty and our right to have real money as
defined by the US Constitution. We should not to be defrauded by the fake
government money.
But to make matters worse, all the gold and silver that backs up the paper
certificates and digital currency held in the vault at Sunshine Mint has also
been confiscated. Even the dies for mint the Gold and Silver Libertys have been
taken.
This in spite of the fact that Edmond C. Moy, the Director of the Mint,
acknowledged in a letter to a US Senator that the paper certificates did not
violate Section 486 and were not illegal. But the FBI and Services took all the
paper currency too.
The possibility of such action was the reason the Liberty Dollar was designed so
that the vast majority of the money was in specie form and in the people’s
hands. Of the $20 million Liberty Dollars, only about a million is in paper or
digital form.
I regret that if you are due an order. It may be some time until it will be
filled... if ever... it now all depends on our actions.
Everyone who has an unfulfilled order or has digital or paper currency should
band together for a class action suit and demand redemption. We cannot allow the
government to steal our money! Please don’t let this happen!!! Many of you read
the articles quoting the government and Federal Reserve officials that the
Liberty Dollar was legal. You did nothing wrong. You are legally entitled to
your property. Let us use this terrible act to band together and further our
goal – to return America to a value based currency.
Please forward this important Alert... so everyone who possess or use the
Liberty Dollar is aware of the situation.
Please click HERE to sign
up for the class action lawsuit and get your property back!
If the above link does not work you can access the page by copying the following
into your web browser. http://www.libertydollar.org/classaction/index.php
Thanks again for your support at this darkest time as the damn government and
their dollar sinks to a new low.
Bernard von NotHaus
Monetary Architect
What's interesting as well, is that Bernard von NotHaus was making a "Ron Paul Dollar." Now what do you suppose such a dollar could be used for? That's right: paying for his campaign. Think I'm kidding? Look at this:
In celebration of The 4th of July, 2007 you are invited - even urged - to flex your independence with the Volunteer Network's 'secret weapon' - the Ron Paul Dollar bringing new meaning to the U.S. Mint's "Presidential Dollars" and symbolizing the Congressman's values. WOW! Now the Internet's favorite Presidential candidate has his own money to help turbo-charge his shot at the White House.
I'll bet the FBI raid was intended to derail that attempt to subvert the government. I'm not sure how I feel about what they've done, but I can't help but see it as a form of monetary terrorism.
Stay tuned
The Federal Reserve creates inflation when it issues US dollars backed by government debt. Since 1913, when the Federal Reserve was created by Congress, your money has lost 96% of its purchasing power due to inflation. The more "money" the Federal Reserve creates - the less your Federal Reserve "money" will buy.
From 1913 to 2001 the national debt grew to $6 trillion in 88 years. In the next three years it climbed to $7 trillion dollars in 2004. In just one year it climbed sharply to over $8 trillion dollars. The acceleration of the national debt is alarming. The corresponding loss of your purchasing power may also accelerate in the near future.
Now you can profit from the coming inflation with the inflation proof REAL money - the 100% gold and silver Liberty Dollar.
Hi. My name is Bernard von NotHaus. I was so concerned about what is happening to our "money" that I designed and developed the Liberty Dollar. For 25 years, I was the Mintmaster at the Royal Hawaiian Mint and have devoted my life to the study of money, why it is valuable, and how we use it to fulfill our dreams. Like you, I am paying a lot higher gas prices, but I am also making a lot more money because I am using the Liberty Dollar. Here is what G. Edward Griffin, the noted author on the Federal Reserve said:
Below is the letter that appears on the Liberty Dollar website after the FBI raid.
Dear Liberty Dollar Supporters:
I sincerely regret to inform you that about 8:00 this morning a dozen FBI and
Secret Service agents raided the Liberty Dollar office in Evansville.
For approximately six hours they took all the gold, all the silver, all the
platinum and almost two tons of Ron Paul Dollars that where just delivered last
Friday. They also took all the files, all the computers and froze our bank
accounts.
We have no money. We have no products. We have no records to even know what was
ordered or what you are owed. We have nothing but the will to push forward and
overcome this massive assault on our liberty and our right to have real money as
defined by the US Constitution. We should not to be defrauded by the fake
government money.
But to make matters worse, all the gold and silver that backs up the paper
certificates and digital currency held in the vault at Sunshine Mint has also
been confiscated. Even the dies for mint the Gold and Silver Libertys have been
taken.
This in spite of the fact that Edmond C. Moy, the Director of the Mint,
acknowledged in a letter to a US Senator that the paper certificates did not
violate Section 486 and were not illegal. But the FBI and Services took all the
paper currency too.
The possibility of such action was the reason the Liberty Dollar was designed so
that the vast majority of the money was in specie form and in the people’s
hands. Of the $20 million Liberty Dollars, only about a million is in paper or
digital form.
I regret that if you are due an order. It may be some time until it will be
filled... if ever... it now all depends on our actions.
Everyone who has an unfulfilled order or has digital or paper currency should
band together for a class action suit and demand redemption. We cannot allow the
government to steal our money! Please don’t let this happen!!! Many of you read
the articles quoting the government and Federal Reserve officials that the
Liberty Dollar was legal. You did nothing wrong. You are legally entitled to
your property. Let us use this terrible act to band together and further our
goal – to return America to a value based currency.
Please forward this important Alert... so everyone who possess or use the
Liberty Dollar is aware of the situation.
Please click HERE to sign
up for the class action lawsuit and get your property back!
If the above link does not work you can access the page by copying the following
into your web browser. http://www.libertydollar.org/classaction/index.php
Thanks again for your support at this darkest time as the damn government and
their dollar sinks to a new low.
Bernard von NotHaus
Monetary Architect
What's interesting as well, is that Bernard von NotHaus was making a "Ron Paul Dollar." Now what do you suppose such a dollar could be used for? That's right: paying for his campaign. Think I'm kidding? Look at this:
In celebration of The 4th of July, 2007 you are invited - even urged - to flex your independence with the Volunteer Network's 'secret weapon' - the Ron Paul Dollar bringing new meaning to the U.S. Mint's "Presidential Dollars" and symbolizing the Congressman's values. WOW! Now the Internet's favorite Presidential candidate has his own money to help turbo-charge his shot at the White House.
I'll bet the FBI raid was intended to derail that attempt to subvert the government. I'm not sure how I feel about what they've done, but I can't help but see it as a form of monetary terrorism.
Stay tuned
Monday, November 12, 2007
"Meet The Press'" Tim Russert Misquotes Senator Barack Obama
Recently, NBC and MSNBC have been agressively working to change the terms of debate in the 2008 Presidential Race. This video's a great example. According to MediaMatters..
-- During his November 11 Meet the Press interview with Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama (IL) on NBC's Meet the Press, host Tim Russert asserted that "critics will say you've not been a leader against the war," and then read a quote he attributed to Obama: "In July of 2004, Barack Obama: 'I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. ... What would I have done? I don't know,' in terms of how you would have voted on the war." After quoting two other Obama statements on the war, Russert concluded: "It doesn't seem that you were firmly wedded against the war and that you left some wiggle room that, if you were in the Senate, you may have voted for it." However, in citing Obama's comment "What would I have done? I don't know," Russert did not quote the very next sentence of Obama's statement, which was, "What I know is that from my vantage point the case [for authorizing the war] was not made." --
In other words, Tim Russert Misquoted Barack Obama, and perhaps deliberately. I think NBC's new approach is based on the idea that all politicians tell "less" than the truth about their beliefs. But it's easier to approach a line of questioning following that idea with Senator Clinton than it is with Senator Obama, who's quite authentic in his views -- that is, he's not always changing his stance, if he ever has, or has had to. This consistency of message damages NBC's approach, and results in this situation where Russert should appologize to Senator Obama.
Friday, November 09, 2007
Ron Paul Questions Ben Bernanke On Fed Policy
Texas Congressman and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul is really giving great questions to Ben Bernanke on Federal Reserve Policy, particularly dealing with exchange rates. Watch for yourself.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Americans Are Unhappy With America - USA Today / Gallup Poll
This USA Today article reads:
"In all, 72% of those surveyed in a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Oct. 12-14 say they are dissatisfied with how things are going in the USA while just 26% are satisfied. Not since April have even one-third of Americans been happy with the country's course, the longest national funk in 15 years."
This sparks the sign of political change. But in what direction? Could it mean victory for Barack Obama or Ron Paul? It's hard to tell from the article's comments. But here's the rest of it:
raq dominates the political agenda. In the poll, four in 10 Americans volunteer that the Iraq war will be one of the most important issues determining their vote in 2008. That's more than twice as many who cite the second-ranking issue: health care.
Six in 10 call the invasion of Iraq a mistake, equal to the highest levels of anti-war feeling during the Vietnam conflict. Despite reports of progress after this year's rise in U.S. force levels, a majority say the situation in Iraq is getting worse for the United States. Only 16% say it's getting better.
In conversations at four locales across the nation — at a farmer's market in Salem, Ore., outside a public library in Phoenix, at a shopping mall and bus stop in downtown Milwaukee and in a roundtable at the New Jersey shore — Americans struggled over what to do next in Iraq.
Not one of several dozen people interviewed expressed optimism that the next president, whoever is elected, will be able to turn things around militarily or to extricate U.S. troops without significant complications, even chaos.
"The next person coming in, it's going to take him at least eight years to clean up," predicts Geraldine Buie, 49, a food-service worker in Milwaukee who wants U.S. troops withdrawn now.
"On the one hand, people say we should pull out, but if we just pull out, everything will collapse and we'll have done nothing," says Antonio Carlos, 24, a student in Phoenix. "We've been committed for six years. Are we going to give up already? But at the same time, do we have the money (to continue)? And do we want our people over there dying left and right?"
The satisfaction divide
Not everyone has a dismal view of the future, of course.
"I think things are going along fine," said Tanya Rider, 32, a medic from Salem, though she worries about her brother and best friend, both deployed to Iraq. "The job market is going up. There's less homeless people." (The National Alliance to End Homelessness says the difficulty of counting homeless people makes it hard to assess whether their numbers are falling.)
Predictably, those who rate the economy as good are much happier with the country's direction than those who rate it as poor. Affluent Americans are more satisfied than those with lower incomes. Conservatives are more satisfied than liberals, and men more than women.
Even in the most optimistic demographic category, however, a majority is dissatisfied with the country's direction — including, for instance, 55% of Republicans. Among Democrats, the conclusion is almost universal: 84% say things are on the wrong track.
"The war in Iraq is clearly a major drag on the public's sense of how the country's doing," says Lawrence Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. "And there's a kind of longer-term impact of the economy. Overall the economy is doing quite well but the sense of insecurity, the sense of anxiety of what the future might hold — that's having a downward effect."
Assessments of the current economy, while downbeat, are no worse than they were one year before the presidential elections in 1992, 1996 and 2004.
What's driving today's negative mood is pessimism about the future: Two-thirds predict economic conditions are getting worse, by far the highest number since 1992.
At a roundtable discussion in Neptune, N.J., only one of the 11 participants was looking for a job; the rest were retired or employed, most in jobs they like.
But Bob Cohen, 61, said he was "scared looking around the corner at the demographics of the country" and the pressure the looming retirement of the baby boom generation will put on Social Security.
Tish Ferguson, 48, a global recruiting manager, says she "works in a market where we're worried about a recession."
Eugene Kelsey, 82, expressed alarm about the impact of illegal immigration on American culture.
Americans are glummer about the economy than economists are. By the traditional measure — back-to-back quarters of economic contraction — the nation isn't in a recession. Yet more than one-third of those surveyed say it is. Four in 10 say a recession is likely during the next year.
For many Americans, good economic news about steady growth and low unemployment and inflation has been overshadowed by the rising cost of gasoline, turmoil in the housing market and uncertainties about health care coverage.
"I keep hearing there are positive indicators in the economy," says Dave Hendrick, 30, an Americorps volunteer in Milwaukee. "I have a hard time understanding that when I see skyrocketing foreclosure rates."
There are significant differences in views of the economy by region. The mood is brightest in the Southwest and the Rocky Mountain states, where 46% rated the economy as good in an aggregation of seven Gallup Polls taken since May.
The mood is darkest in the Great Lakes, where just 31% called the economy good. Jobs are a big reason as the region tries to recover from the loss of manufacturing plants. Michigan has the highest unemployment rate in the nation; Ohio the fifth highest.
People in the upper Midwest are "frustrated by the (national) debt, frustrated with the war, frustrated with the health care system that seems to be crumbling," says former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson, who in August abandoned a bid for the Republican presidential nomination. "They want somebody to get something done. They don't like to see problems shunted aside, and that's what they see in Washington."
Both the president and Congress get historically low ratings, another sign of unhappiness with the nation's course and indicator of possible political upheaval ahead.
Since World War II, no party has managed to hold the White House when the incumbent president had a job-approval rating below 45% one year before the election. Bush's approval rating now: 32%.
Congress fares even worse. Its approval rating in August dipped to 18%, equaling the low point in the history of Gallup. It's now bumped up to a still-dismal 29%.
Ethics scandals and opposition to the Iraq war contributed to a Democratic takeover of the House and Senate in last November's elections, but Congress' ratings haven't significantly improved since then. Dissatisfaction is widespread and bipartisan: 76% of those surveyed say Congress has accomplished "not too much" or "nothing at all" this year. Among those, 73% blame both parties equally.
"In all, 72% of those surveyed in a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Oct. 12-14 say they are dissatisfied with how things are going in the USA while just 26% are satisfied. Not since April have even one-third of Americans been happy with the country's course, the longest national funk in 15 years."
This sparks the sign of political change. But in what direction? Could it mean victory for Barack Obama or Ron Paul? It's hard to tell from the article's comments. But here's the rest of it:
raq dominates the political agenda. In the poll, four in 10 Americans volunteer that the Iraq war will be one of the most important issues determining their vote in 2008. That's more than twice as many who cite the second-ranking issue: health care.
Six in 10 call the invasion of Iraq a mistake, equal to the highest levels of anti-war feeling during the Vietnam conflict. Despite reports of progress after this year's rise in U.S. force levels, a majority say the situation in Iraq is getting worse for the United States. Only 16% say it's getting better.
In conversations at four locales across the nation — at a farmer's market in Salem, Ore., outside a public library in Phoenix, at a shopping mall and bus stop in downtown Milwaukee and in a roundtable at the New Jersey shore — Americans struggled over what to do next in Iraq.
Not one of several dozen people interviewed expressed optimism that the next president, whoever is elected, will be able to turn things around militarily or to extricate U.S. troops without significant complications, even chaos.
"The next person coming in, it's going to take him at least eight years to clean up," predicts Geraldine Buie, 49, a food-service worker in Milwaukee who wants U.S. troops withdrawn now.
"On the one hand, people say we should pull out, but if we just pull out, everything will collapse and we'll have done nothing," says Antonio Carlos, 24, a student in Phoenix. "We've been committed for six years. Are we going to give up already? But at the same time, do we have the money (to continue)? And do we want our people over there dying left and right?"
The satisfaction divide
Not everyone has a dismal view of the future, of course.
"I think things are going along fine," said Tanya Rider, 32, a medic from Salem, though she worries about her brother and best friend, both deployed to Iraq. "The job market is going up. There's less homeless people." (The National Alliance to End Homelessness says the difficulty of counting homeless people makes it hard to assess whether their numbers are falling.)
Predictably, those who rate the economy as good are much happier with the country's direction than those who rate it as poor. Affluent Americans are more satisfied than those with lower incomes. Conservatives are more satisfied than liberals, and men more than women.
Even in the most optimistic demographic category, however, a majority is dissatisfied with the country's direction — including, for instance, 55% of Republicans. Among Democrats, the conclusion is almost universal: 84% say things are on the wrong track.
"The war in Iraq is clearly a major drag on the public's sense of how the country's doing," says Lawrence Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. "And there's a kind of longer-term impact of the economy. Overall the economy is doing quite well but the sense of insecurity, the sense of anxiety of what the future might hold — that's having a downward effect."
Assessments of the current economy, while downbeat, are no worse than they were one year before the presidential elections in 1992, 1996 and 2004.
What's driving today's negative mood is pessimism about the future: Two-thirds predict economic conditions are getting worse, by far the highest number since 1992.
At a roundtable discussion in Neptune, N.J., only one of the 11 participants was looking for a job; the rest were retired or employed, most in jobs they like.
But Bob Cohen, 61, said he was "scared looking around the corner at the demographics of the country" and the pressure the looming retirement of the baby boom generation will put on Social Security.
Tish Ferguson, 48, a global recruiting manager, says she "works in a market where we're worried about a recession."
Eugene Kelsey, 82, expressed alarm about the impact of illegal immigration on American culture.
Americans are glummer about the economy than economists are. By the traditional measure — back-to-back quarters of economic contraction — the nation isn't in a recession. Yet more than one-third of those surveyed say it is. Four in 10 say a recession is likely during the next year.
For many Americans, good economic news about steady growth and low unemployment and inflation has been overshadowed by the rising cost of gasoline, turmoil in the housing market and uncertainties about health care coverage.
"I keep hearing there are positive indicators in the economy," says Dave Hendrick, 30, an Americorps volunteer in Milwaukee. "I have a hard time understanding that when I see skyrocketing foreclosure rates."
There are significant differences in views of the economy by region. The mood is brightest in the Southwest and the Rocky Mountain states, where 46% rated the economy as good in an aggregation of seven Gallup Polls taken since May.
The mood is darkest in the Great Lakes, where just 31% called the economy good. Jobs are a big reason as the region tries to recover from the loss of manufacturing plants. Michigan has the highest unemployment rate in the nation; Ohio the fifth highest.
People in the upper Midwest are "frustrated by the (national) debt, frustrated with the war, frustrated with the health care system that seems to be crumbling," says former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson, who in August abandoned a bid for the Republican presidential nomination. "They want somebody to get something done. They don't like to see problems shunted aside, and that's what they see in Washington."
Both the president and Congress get historically low ratings, another sign of unhappiness with the nation's course and indicator of possible political upheaval ahead.
Since World War II, no party has managed to hold the White House when the incumbent president had a job-approval rating below 45% one year before the election. Bush's approval rating now: 32%.
Congress fares even worse. Its approval rating in August dipped to 18%, equaling the low point in the history of Gallup. It's now bumped up to a still-dismal 29%.
Ethics scandals and opposition to the Iraq war contributed to a Democratic takeover of the House and Senate in last November's elections, but Congress' ratings haven't significantly improved since then. Dissatisfaction is widespread and bipartisan: 76% of those surveyed say Congress has accomplished "not too much" or "nothing at all" this year. Among those, 73% blame both parties equally.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Mancow Mueller, Clinton / Peter Paul Story Death Threat - Recorded Discussion - EJFA.Org
This is an update of our earlier story on the death threat Radio Talk Show Host Mancow Mueller says he received after he had former Hollywood business man Peter Paul on his show Friday.
I've just received from a source a copy of the radio show audio file where Mancow discusses the death threat he received with James Nesfield of the Equal Justice Foundation (ejfa.org) on Mancow's radio show, Monday, October 29th.
Here's what was said in text form:
Mancow: Listen, I had a guy on named Peter Paul on Friday.
James Nesfield: Yes. I know.
Mancow: Last week. And want to tell you, I had, a, uh, a very high level call over the weekend, and it was very frightening to me.
And..
James Nesfield: It should be.
Mancow: And I'm being sincere.
James Nesfield: No. I believe it. I...Listen. We were at our ISP, where we host the site. We had a attack from Russian and Chinese hackers.
Mancow: My. Uh. My family was threatened. And it was uh. I know the source, and it's a very dangerous source, and I'm really, uh, nervous about talking about your video, cause I think some very powerful people are going to be very upset about me talking to ya.
James Nesfield: You're right. I've been threatened too.
The "movie" they're talking about is called "Hillary Uncensored" and it's a detailed and hard-hitting documentary that has been playing to audiences at colleges around the country. It's drawn a large web-based following , and is continuing to be offered for view by any group that will ask.
What is the movie about? Well, I like WorldNetDaily's description:
"Hollywood filmmakers normally inclined to support candidates such as Sen. Hillary Clinton are working quietly behind the scenes to put the finishing touches on a documentary alleging the New York Democrat committed felonies to get elected and assisted her husband in defrauding a major donor."
The "major donor" is Peter Paul, and you can learn more about the story here.
The rest of the conversation is in the audio file below.
The audio file is here:
Mancow On Death Threat
Please listen to it. But you may be asking what the "so what" is here? Well, some have claimed that the Clintons have a way of associating themselves with people who in some way eliminate those who can block their path to power. Or as one blogger put it, "This is what happens when you have dirt on the Clintons."
The point is, if this can even be connected to the Clinton's it spells m-a-j-o-r t-r-o-u-b-l-e if the news is spread to a wide audience. It speaks to a lust for power that may even be greater than Hillary Clinton's desire to serve the American People.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Ron Paul Searches Rank High On Technorati Again Today
The appearance of searches for Ron Paul blog posts has become a daily affair on Technorati.com, and today's no exception at all.
Many are writing about Paul's performance in Sunday's Republican Debate, which I did not see. Plus it seems that Fox News is at war with Ron Paul, blocking any positive news about his debate performance, or reporting that he won the post-debate poll Fox established.
Many are writing about Paul's performance in Sunday's Republican Debate, which I did not see. Plus it seems that Fox News is at war with Ron Paul, blocking any positive news about his debate performance, or reporting that he won the post-debate poll Fox established.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
CNN's Wolf Blitzer Interviews Ron Paul - Video
This interview reveals Ron Paul's first CNN interview on the Situation Room. He did well just be speaking planly. It -- this performance -- is why I'd like to see my CNN/YouTube Republican Debate Question answered. I want to hear his response.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Ron Paul and Racism - CNN/YouTube Republican Debate Question
This question for the CNN/YouTube Republican Debates is based on an article I found in the Houston Chronicle and dated May 23, 1996. In the article, which I present below and has this link: Houston Chroncle Ron Paul Article .
9:16 PM 5/22/1996
Newsletter excerpts offer ammunition to Paul's opponent
GOP hopeful quoted on race, crime
By ALAN BERNSTEIN
Copyright 1996 Houston Chronicle Political Writer
Texas congressional candidate Ron Paul's 1992 political newsletter highlighted portrayals of blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues.
Under the headline of "Terrorist Update," for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
Paul, a Republican obstetrician from Surfside, said Wednesday he opposes racism and that his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time."
Selected writings by Paul were distributed Wednesday by the campaign of his Democratic opponent, Austin lawyer Charles "Lefty" Morris.
Morris said many of Paul's views are "out there on the fringe" and that his commentaries will be judged by voters in the November general elections.
Paul said allegations about his writings amounted to name-calling by the Democrats and that his opponents should focus instead on how to shrink government spending and reform welfare.
Morris and Paul are seeking the 14th Congressional District seat held by Greg Laughlin of West Columbia. Laughlin lost the Republican primary to Paul, a former congressman and the Libertarian Party's 1988 presidential candidate.
Paul, writing in his independent political newsletter in 1992, reported about unspecified surveys of blacks.
"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action," Paul wrote.
Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered "as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said.
Paul also wrote that although "we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."
A campaign spokesman for Paul said statements about the fear of black males mirror pronouncements by black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who has decried the spread of urban crime.
Paul continues to write the newsletter for an undisclosed number of subscribers, the spokesman said.
Writing in the same 1992 edition, Paul expressed the popular idea that government should lower the age at which accused juvenile criminals can be prosecuted as adults.
He added, "We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."
Paul also asserted that "complex embezzling" is conducted exclusively by non-blacks.
"What else do we need to know about the political establishment than that it refuses to discuss the crimes that terrify Americans on grounds that doing so is racist? Why isn't that true of complex embezzling, which is 100 percent white and Asian?" he wrote.
In later newsletters, Paul aimed criticism at the Israeli government's U.S. lobbying efforts and reported allegations that President Clinton used cocaine and fathered illegitimate children.
Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, "By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government" and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.
Relaying a rumor that Clinton was a longtime cocaine user, Paul wrote in 1994 that the speculation "would explain certain mysteries" about the president's scratchy voice and insomnia.
"None of this is conclusive, of course, but it sure is interesting," he said.
------------------------
Someone wrote that his statements were "true." Well, that's not so at all. The studies Paul reffers to are unidentified and anyone believing this is looking for some "emprirical" reason to hold a racist viewpoint. Racism is a mental illness that must be treated and eliminated. Congressman Paul must deal with this question of racism because it's based on material produced by him and his campaign.
Moreover, Paul has White Supremacist David Duke as a supporter and gives interviews to the John Birch Society. Yikes.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Well I Guess I've Got To Get Skype - Much Discussed On Technorati
Wow. Skype's the most searched for term right below Noella's Sex Video and over Ron Paul! I'm impressed to see that the device has become so widely used!
Friday, July 13, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)