Romney to Join Fellow Globalists at Clinton Confab
Like rats, we’ve been trained to believe in a political world view that places our loyalties to one of either of two groups, Republicans and Democrats, each supposedly of different political schools of thought. But it is merely a perception that we are supposedly divided into groups of people on the left who espouse big government progressive thinking, Marxism, globalism, etc, and people on the right who are fiscal conservatives, constitutionalists, small government advocates, and believers in the sovereign republic, etc. Tragically, many who are stuck on either side of this paradigm can’t or won’t venture outside this box when seeking the truth, and therefore will never deviate from how they’ve been trained to think. This phenomenon is often referred to as the “left/right paradigm”.
Different Parties, Same Goals?
The ardor with which some will defend anything on their ‘side’, even in the face of facts that are contrary to the supposed beliefs of the ‘party’, is mind boggling
The danger of the right/left paradigm is that it confines one to an illusion of choice, and therefore subjects one to control.
Case in point…
Recently this writer was engaged in a discussion about the bias in education on a ‘neocon’ blog. Animated commenters were having their say of outrage about a blatant incident of bias. When this writer offered a link to the book “Deliberate Dumbing Down” by the renowned author Charlotte Iserbyt, a brave whistleblower who exposed the corruption and co-opting of our educational system in the 1980s, this writer was banned. “Anyone who criticizes Reagan can’t be too smart” one indignant woman commenter declared. “You expect us to go read some radical website like that?” she added.
Is Iserbyt a radical? She certainly could be considered that for the cause of conservatism. Her tome, at least 4″ thick, lays out the proof, gleaned from her stint working in the Reagan administration before she was fired for blowing the whistle. Was anyone criticizing Reagan directly on the blog? No, but just the mere implication of this happening on his watch was enough to get me reported as a ‘troll’ when I was simply trying to shed some light on the root of the problem. Apparently, neocons and dilettantes would rather rant and rave over single incidents of bias, but ignore the bigger cause behind it.
As many of you web denizens are aware, there are literally scores of official sounding but decidedly NON-governmental entities that are pushing for global governance under guise of philanthropy. Education is one area which they have thoroughly infested with the ideas of many of the UN’s utopian schemes. (http://www.ibo.org)
Whether it is Soros’ Aspen Institute (where Rep Paul Ryan was trained in 2005), the Bilderberg Meeting, Henry Kissinger’s Club of Rome or Council of 13, David Rockefeller’s CFR and Tri-Lateral Commission, the octopus-like UN, or this “Clinton Global Initiative” which is intent on “influencing behavior and attitudes” and being billed as the new UN by the Daily Beast, many of us ask, what right do these people have to set policy for any sovereign country? Is our Congress merely ornamental?
“CGI requires every delegate to make a commitment to take action (editor: where have we heard that before?) leading to windfalls like Richard Branson’s 2006 pledge of $3 billion for adaptation to the threat of climate change. CGI wants to bring together leaders from government, civil society and big business—from all parts of the political spectrum. And rather than formal diplomatic dialogue, the CGI conversations are driven by sometimes-odd pairings.”
Which leads us to our contention that whoever attends these meetings is often ignored by the media. After all, revealing such details may smash that public perception we told you about as to whether there is any difference at all in the parties.
Having to listen to Bubba Clinton speak out against sexual violence against women is mind boggling enough (which he did) if not the ultimate irony. He didn’t waste time bashing climate change-deniers like Rush Limbaugh, who correctly calls climate change a hoax (There, I’ve just given you an example of someone I dislike and do not listen to, but quoted because he spoke the truth on that issue! NO paradigms for THIS writer.)
Even a liberal commenter refused to believe that Romney would speak at CGI even though HuffPo listed his name and the day he was to speak (Monday morning) and his photo was prominently displayed on the speakers page at the CGI website.. (A perfect example of the cognitive dissonance caused by brainwashing discussed earlier in this piece.)
*Although his name was scrubbed from the attendees page and other pages, it is listed here that he gave the opening speech.
Back to the big question… by whose authority do they get to set policy for any country and what was Romney doing there?
Others wonder if Romney isn’t just trying to lose?
Last week, Romney was visited at his home in Wolfboro, NH by Oprah Winfrey and her friend Gayle King. The two chose to take a limo home to NYC rather than call attention to themselves at the airport. Yes, you heard it first here — we knew the driver.
Now that he’s participating at this global confab that has just about the same dangerous aims and goals as the UN, I guess they figure he’s one of ‘them’.
*Edited: 1/4/2016