The President is in many ways a puppet, a figurehead. His (or her) strings are pulled by "the Establishment." President Bush was in the hip pocket of the Establishment. So were McCain, Giuliani and Rodham-Clinton. Richard Harwood was deputy managing editor of The Washington Post until he retired in 1988. His article, "Ruling Class Journalists," (The Washington Post, October 30, 1993, p. A21) confirms the existence of America's ruling class, or "the Establishment." Describing the Council on Foreign Relations, Harwood writes:
The president is a member. So is his secretary of state, the deputy secretary of state, all five of the undersecretaries, several of the assistant secretaries and the department's legal adviser. The president's national security adviser and his deputy are members. The director of Central Intelligence (like all previous directors) and the chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board are members. The secretary of defense, three undersecretaries, and at least four assistant secretaries are members. The secretaries of the departments of housing and urban development, interior, health and human services and the chief White House public relations man, David Gergen, are members, along with the speaker of the House and the majority leader of the Senate. . . . In the past 15 years, council directors have included Hedley Donovan of Time Inc, Elizabeth Drew
of the New Yorker, Philip Geyelin of The Washington Post, Karen Elliott House of the Wall Street Journal and Strobe Talbott of Time magazine. . . . The editorial page editor, deputy editorial page editor, executive editor, managing editor, foreign editor, national affairs editor, business and financial editor, and various writers as well as Katharine Graham, the paper's principal owner, represent The Washington Post in the council's membership. The executive editor, managing editor and foreign editor of the New York Times are members, along with executives of such other large newspapers as the Wall Street Journal and Los Angeles Times, the weekly news-magazines, network television executives and celebrities - Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, and Jim Lehrer, for example - and various columnists, among them Charles
Krauthammer, William Buckley, George Will and Jim Hoagland. . . . They do not merely analyze and interpret foreign policy for the United States; they help make it."
This was Clinton's Presidency (1993). It applies to Bush's as well -- different names, but all members of "the ruling class." Some members of the Establishment serve in both Republican and Democrat administrations. And if "We the People" vote out one group of Establishment figures and replace them with another group of Establishment figures, the television networks, the newspapers, the magazines, radio, and major corporations -- whose leaders don't have to campaign for your vote -- will still be managed by members of "the Establishment."
"The Establishment" is not conservative. "The Establishment" is not Christian. "The Establishment" has no loyalty to the U.S. Constitution. The Establishment's preferred candidates will be the nominees of the Republican and Democrat parties, whose leadership is dominated by the Establishment.
You have been trained by the Establishment to never vote for a non-Establishment or third-party candidate because you would be "wasting your vote." You have been trained by the Establishment's schools and media to believe that any action you take that does not conform to or perpetuate the ideals of the Establishment is a "waste." To be outside the Establishment is to be on "the fringe."
- You believe in restoring the Constitution? You're a "kook."
- You believe in the Second Amendment? You're a "gun nut."
The Establishment promotes candidates that support the Establishment agenda and "mainstream" thinking. This is why the Republican and Democrat nominees are look-alike candidates:
Nobody becomes the nominee of either the Republican or Democrat parties without the support of the mainstream media, which is controlled by people who are committed to the secular socialist ideals of the the Establishment's "New World Order" and oppose "fringe" candidates. This is why "the perfect candidate" -- which we define as someone who opposes the secular socialism of the Establishment and champions capitalism, the Constitution, and Christianity -- will always be portrayed as a "kook" and dismissed in favor of a more "responsible" candidate -- one who believes in a "mixed" economy (socialism paying lip-service to capitalism), a "living" Constitution (one which means whatever the Establishment wants it to mean), and a "secular"
The Establishment believes in international secular socialism. A vote for either the Republicrat or the Demoblican will promote international secular socialism. Both nominees support this worldview, not the worldview of America's Founding Fathers.
Your vote for the "lesser" of two Establishment evils says "I SUPPORT INTERNATIONAL SECULAR SOCIALISM."
You do? Is that the message you want to send with your vote?
Books to Read