Editorial
Obama Spin Reveals Elite Roots
We track power elite dominant social themes large and small. As part of this effort, we've uncovered what we believe to be patterns of "directed history" leading toward ever-bigger government at both national and international levels.
Elites love government because they control society via mercantilism, the use of public power to enhance private advantages.
As the US has evolved along increasingly imperial lines, mercantilism has grown more obvious and intrusive. Over US$3 trillion is administered via government programs and bureaucrats. With so much money at stake, the political process itself has been increasingly rationalized. In many ways US Inc. is a large business, run by powerful people who have a great deal at stake financially.
Less and less is left up to chance these days. Candidates are vetted for malleability and cooperation within the boundaries of what is tolerable. Someone like Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) offered up well-received ideas about freedom and free markets. The "establishment" ostracized him and the GOP itself worked hard to ensure he would not win the nomination nor even have a voice at the convention.
Rules were changed to ensure that Ron Paul's delegates did not obtain clout and when this was not enough, delegates were intimidated physically and even beaten up. But someone like Democratic president Barack Obama ran into no such resistance. He was very obviously a "chosen" candidate – one selected by a US power elite for purposes that still do not seem entirely clear.
But there are many tales surrounding his background, most of which have to do with CIA affiliations not only for him but also for his family. Access to his records going back all the way to kindergarten have been barred and there is considerable evidence he was born abroad.
As president, Obama carried on with the various programs of what we might call the Imperium. He continued its wars, its domestic intimidation and its corporate empowerment.
Part of Obama's program involved the continual degradation of the US economy. By raising taxes, increasing regulation and further militarizing the US economy, Obama guaranteed both the continued rise of mercantilism and the further impoverishment of US citizens.
This is a considerable accomplishment within the context of the anger and frustration that many in the country feel. Of course, Obama has been helped by what seems to be a controlled mainstream media that faithfully reports his perspectives and refuses to probe his policies too aggressively.
Obama himself has helped his cause with a professorial wonkishness that is somewhat disarming. He doesn't come across as an especially manipulative or destructive type, not overtly anyway.
He is, in other words, a good front man for the interests that supported him and helped place him in the most powerful job in the world. His mission: To further mercantilism and increase US support for internationalism and global government.
His performance within this context has been adequate and thus those who backed him before are apparently making every effort to ensure he gets another term to "finish" whatever it is he has been charged with accomplishing.
Obama himself, as we can see from the first debate between him and challenger Mitt Romney, is probably somewhat psychologically at a disadvantage in this campaign. No matter who you are, it is difficult to defend behaviors that are intended to be destructive of the very citizenry you were elected to serve. Thus it is, perhaps, that Obama found it hard to defend his policies and term in office. Mitt Romney is said to have won the first debate.
Of course, Romney has been picked by the same special interests that selected Obama, one surmises. Nonetheless, Obama is the Chosen One. Romney is merely the backup.
And so a great many manipulations are now taking place to ensure that Obama is seen as having momentum despite his recent weak performance.
It is instructive to look at what is going on because it gives us a clearer picture of the ease with which the power elite exercises its clout on behalf of those it wants to support.
Whether you believe elites are merely a network of powerful people with similar interests or a cohesive cadre of globalists, the manipulations being applied to the Barack Obama campaign for a second term as US president are truly remarkable.
Again, they are worth noting because they show us the immense power of these elites when it comes to supporting a specific goal and personality. We can catalogue four separate elements of manipulation on Obama's behalf, as follows:
- Jobs are suddenly up.
- Media is spinning like crazy on his debate performance.
- Polls now show him drawing ahead.
- Osama bin Laden books and movies are suddenly appearing.
Here's something from just yesterday from the New York Times regarding employment, entitled "Jobs Report Brings Unexpected Good News for Obama" ...
President Obama waved to the crowd after speaking at a campaign rally at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. ... After a lackluster debate, President Obama faced the prospect of a second piece of bad political news with Friday morning's jobs report. Instead, Mr. Obama — and the economy — received some unexpected good news.
Economists will spend the rest of the day parsing the numbers and arguing over exactly the best way to describe the report, but there is little question about its overall thrust: positive. An energized President Obama, appearing at a campaign rally outside Washington, seized on the news, saying "this country has come too far to turn back."
Speaking to 1,935 supporters at George Mason University a few hours after the numbers were released, Mr. Obama said, "This morning, we found out that the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level since I took office. More Americans entered the work force; more people are getting jobs."
The rate dropped sharply, to 7.8 percent from 8.1 percent, because the Labor Department's survey of households showed a large gain in the number of employed people in September. The survey of businesses showed a smaller gain, but it also showed that hiring gains in July and August were larger than expected.
When it comes to the debate itself, the mainstream media has worked hard to transform a defeat into victory. Here's an excerpt of an article posted at Newsbusters describing this process. ("MRC" refers to the Media Research Center):
ABC's Stephanopoulos Leads Post-Debate Media Spin for Democrats ... Leading into tomorrow's presidential debate, journalists are busy setting expectations for the candidates. On Sunday's Good Morning America, ABC's George Stephanopoulos argued that Mitt Romney is under "huge, huge" pressure: "He is behind right now. He is behind nationally, he's behind in all of the battleground states. This is the last big audience that Mitt Romney is going to have with about four and a half weeks left to go."
But more undecided voters will be swayed by the media's post-debate spin about who won and who lost than by any pre-debate expectations. Reviewing the last several campaigns, MRC analysts have found a clear trend of network reporters fawning over the performance of liberal candidates, while harping on any perceived weaknesses or gaffes from conservatives.
One of the most reliable pro-Democratic pundits is none other than George Stephanpoulos — not especially surprising, given his track record as a loyal operative for Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign, but hardly the objective, unbiased voice touted by ABC News.
MRC has documented how, in eight out of the last nine general election presidential debates (every one since he joined ABC News in 1997), Stephanopoulos has gone on his network's airwaves to claim victory for the Democratic candidate, all in the guise of offering impartial analysis.
AP has joined the fray by reporting on Obama's edge in political ads. After weeks of articles asserting that Romney has a fund-raising edge, we learn suddenly that Obama is well out in front when it comes to actual political promotion. Here's an excerpt from an article written and posted yesterday:
Report: Obama campaign outpacing Romney's in ads ... A new report finds that President Barack Obama's re-election campaign has run more than twice as many TV ads in nine key states as has the campaign of his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney.
The Nielsen Co. said Friday that Obama's campaign had run nearly 230,000 ads in Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire from the beginning of the year through early September, compared with about 87,000 for Romney. All are considered battlegrounds this year, with both candidates competing heavily in those states for votes.
The biggest disparity was in Ohio. Obama's campaign ran just over 51,000 ads in the state compared to nearly 17,500 for Romney. No Republican has ever won the White House without carrying Ohio, and recent polls show Obama ahead there.
Wisconsin, the home state of running mate Rep. Paul Ryan, is the only state where Romney has edged the president in ads. Nielsen said Romney's campaign had run 1,952 ads there compared to 1,391 for Obama.
Perhaps the most startling promotional mechanism has to do with the death of Osama bin Laden. In numerous articles we've explained that it is very difficult to believe that bin Laden died on May 1, 2011. Along with many others, we believe he more likely died ten years ago of Marfan syndrome leading to kidney failure.
When proclaiming bin Laden's death the Obama administration produced no DNA, no photos, no body and no eyewitness to support the announcement. Additionally, accounts varied widely regarding bin Laden's death and even whether or not his body had actually been dumped at sea, as claimed. Search the Internet for "bin Laden" and "Daily Bell" for more on this topic.
Despite the obvious difficulties regarding the bin Laden death narrative, the Obama publicity machine has ground on. Though Pakistani eyewitnesses to the raid give a completely different story, the US mainstream media has done no investigative work. They've simply reported on the various triumphalist "spins" regarding bin Laden's death. Here's an excerpt from an article that was posted yesterday at Commentary magazine:
Bin Laden Film By Obama Bundler to Air Days Before Election ... This is Obama-bundler Harvey Weinstein's made-for-TV film about the Osama bin Laden raid, not to be confused with the much-hyped Kathryn Bigelow movie on the same subject (that one is supposed to come out at the end of the year). Weinstein's film will air on National Geographic Channel on November 4, which many have pointed out is a pretty coincidental date:
A film dramatizing the death of Osama bin Laden is set to debut next month on the National Geographic Channel, two days before the presidential election. "Seal Team Six: The Raid on Osama bin Laden," from The Weinstein Co. and Voltage Pictures, will air Sunday, Nov. 4, the channel said Thursday. President Barack Obama faces Republican challenger Mitt Romney at the polls two days later.
Weinstein co-chairman Harvey Weinstein is a prominent fundraiser for Obama's re-election campaign, which has touted bin Laden's death as an example of the president's leadership.
When we add all this up, a fairly definitive picture of massive manipulation emerges.
The US economy is moribund and slipping into what seems to be an actual depression but according to brand new Fedgov statistics, employment is up sharply! Obama's debate performance was a losing one but the media itself is defending his conduct and providing a number of alternative narratives.
There are polls being reported that show how the president's campaign has been able to muster considerable promotional clout in "battleground states." And most disturbing of all, a flood of media reports continue to celebrate the recent death of an archenemy of the US who apparently died ten years ago.
There are many who dispute – who cannot psychologically tolerate – the idea that the US and the West are subject to massive elite manipulation on a number of fronts. We are told that to proffer the idea that Money Power has created a virtual false universe of sociopolitical and economic assumptions is simplistic and "paranoid."
But please observe these elections and the vastness of resources being brought to bear on reelecting Barack Obama. More eloquently than anything we can write, this barely concealed display shows how deeply elite control actually runs.
If all else fails, of course, the votes themselves may be miscounted. Conveniently, ballots are being sent to Spain. We've written about that here: VIDEO: Who's Counting the Votes?
Directed elections, anybody?
l 
|
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits. Want to learn more? click here |
|||||
|
|
||||
 |
Posted by budwood on 10/06/12 11:43 AM
Just because a person is paranoid does not mean that someone or some group is not out to "get" him.
In any event, political history shows that the masses are easily led. That may be why "democracy" is so popular. Like is said, "it doesn't matter for whom you vote; just (support the system) vote"!
 |
Posted by SSMcDonald on 10/06/12 12:02 PM
Dumbasses (an IQ at the same as the local school zone speed limit sign) that answered the poll with, "I choose to NOT Vote" may as well pull the lever for Obama. Not voting is EXACTLY what they are accomplishng. Such abject stupidity!!
 |
Posted by Don from the Republic of Lakotah on 10/06/12 12:20 PM
@SSMcDonald
You're on the right track. This election is an IQ test. That's why I wrote in "Ron Paul."
Not that it matters. As DB surmised many months ago, the powers-that-be want Obama for a second term. Given yesterday's upbeat job report, it is now clear that mass media ridiculed Obama's debate only to give false hope to Romney's supporters in order to tighten up their "horse race."
 |
Posted by runderwo on 10/06/12 12:42 PM
@SSMcDonald: How is it that not voting for Romney is a vote for Obama, but not voting for Obama somehow isn't then likewise a vote for Romney?
 |
Posted by Jaque on 10/06/12 12:57 PM
@SSMcDonald
The only dumb statement I see here, is that which you scripted. You are obviously in need of a cross walk supervisor, but not a revisitation to public school - in your case it obviously worked wonders the first time around!
|
Posted by MetaCynic on 10/06/12 01:15 PM
Regardless of who you vote for, the government always wins.
|
Posted by dimitri on 10/06/12 01:22 PM
Glad to see that at least 40% of DB readers are abstaining from the "pick your dictator" elections.
The debate was a head fake. They need to make it look as though the contest is still on. Obama was told to throw it. His abject posture during the debate said it all.
While on the subject of head fakes, I think that Ron Paul's Republican candidacy was also a head fake of sorts. Libertarians are still promoting him as a wonderful educational asset, exposing the poverty of our system as it stands today and all. Bull! Paul understands this system and knew damned well that it would give him the 1.3 liter quick-flush at the appropriate time. Nothing happens by chance in this power elite's world, right DB? The Ron Paul episode was a planned delusion.
Libertarians talk a good game when it comes to anarcho-capitalism, but when push comes to shove they're hardly the ones to be good at it . Their fall back always seems to be some well argued version of one authoritarian order or another.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Just because history is full of "directed" episodes doesn't mean that each individual action is fully in line with the larger narrative. Was Nixon told to participate in the Watergate scandal? People can have "off" days. Perhaps Obama did. He certainly seems to have an affection for his teleprompter. Of course, it is possible that Obama "threw" the debate in order to come back stronger next time." Time will tell ...
Ron Paul - like the larger libertarian effort run out of the Mises Institute - was roundly ignored for years. He and the Austrians had little or not impact on the larger socio-political debate until the advent of the Internet. Was the Internet a false flag as well? And DARPA a secret Misesian Institute?
|
Posted by Bluebird on 10/06/12 01:54 PM
Excellent! At first, I thought Romney was the new choice. But as I watch, I have come to believe you are right and Obama was never meant to be replaced. I feel Romney has some powerful people behind him, but not THE power elite. Either way, it is a lose/lose election and I won't participate. If the elite want Obama, every citizen in the US could vote for Romney and surprise (!) the winner is Obama. America is gone.
 |
Posted by taxesbyanyothername on 10/06/12 02:45 PM
As you say, the elite promotions, the statistical distortions, the outright lies, are more obvious by the day. Romney can't win, because he is the one that more people think will win. All of the preparation for "civil unrest" is necessary because the elite are ensuring that there will be civil unrest. We can not just be angry about the economy, we must bGe angry at the government and its puppet masters so that mass mayhem ensues. That is the only way that a truly tyrannical crackdown can be justified.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Good points.
|
Posted by speedygonzales on 10/06/12 03:33 PM
Standing ovation! Bravissimo! Maestro Wile
Looking for forces behind? Rulers of Evil : Useful Knowledge about Governing Bodies, by E. Tupper Saussy. Why Jus Gentium and not Roman law?
The Jus Gentium was designed to govern the peoples of Italy and the provinces, without giving them Roman citizenship and the other rights of the ius (Jus) civile. One of the provinces was Britain. So Brits also get Vulgar Latin which we today call english language.
Click to view link
In america it was called Admiralty law. But actualy it is legal system of The (Roman) Empire of The City.
Conspiracy theory is theory but it looks like it works right at front of our eyes.
|
Posted by speedygonzales on 10/06/12 03:40 PM
Charlemagne's Merovingian bloodline:
The world's largest online family history resource has discovered that Mitt Romney leads the pack in presidential lineage with six former Commanders-in-Chief in his family history. The former Massachusetts governor's family tree includes relations to Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt, Coolidge, Pierce, Hoover and both President George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush.
* Romney is connected to Presidents George W. Bush (10th cousins, twice removed), George H. W. Bush (10th cousins, once removed) and Franklin D. Roosevelt (8th cousins, twice removed) through Ann Marbury Hutchinson, a key figure in the development of religious freedom in America and early settler of Rhode Island and New York.
* Romney is related to Presidents Calvin Coolidge (10th cousins), Herbert Hoover (10th cousins) and Franklin Pierce (6th cousins, 4 times removed) through Thomas Richardson, an English landowner in the late 1500s from Hertfordshire.
Click to view link
Reply from The Daily Bell
Interesting ...
|
Posted by johnblenkins on 10/06/12 04:43 PM
Obamas timid body language and rope a dope tactics
against Mitt the Merciless.
"The soap opera of modern politics"
Obama may well be the Elites Chosen One.
Is not just a little bit of his embarrassment
The dead eyed look, Due to looking into the eyes of The American People
minus Hope and Change .
The most slippery authoritarian Liberal yet to grace The White House.
Another 4 years to finish the Job:
"this country has come too far to turn back"
Like "Hope and Change"
He is true to his sound bites, Only the message was never for us!
Cheering for our own demise, In truth if Mitt The Twit wins,
All will be the same.
|
Posted by EdwardUlyssesCate on 10/06/12 05:47 PM
I've always thought that Obama was like Eddie Murphy's Billy Ray Valentine character in the movie "Trading Places." There was probably a dollar bet, perhaps between someone like Peter G. Peterson and Stephen A. Schwarzman of Blackstone Group, that they could take a black man who wasn't born in America and make him a U.S. president. Romney seems like the Dan Aykroyd's Louis Winthorpe III character when they try to restore things back to "normal." I'm sure I'm not too far from the truth. Fortunately, I don't know exactly who the real puppet masters are. If I did, I'd be suicided.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Obama's seeming incompetence has nothing to do with color. You think George Bush was better?
|
Posted by earnst on 10/06/12 07:35 PM
I have often thought, these past four years, that Obama was chosen simply as an arrogant display of power. Much like the movie "Trading Places".
|
Posted by Danny B on 10/06/12 08:39 PM
"making every effort to ensure he gets another term to "finish" whatever it is he has been charged with accomplishing."
"whatever" ???
Obummer was pictured in Bozeman Mt. with the book, "The post-American World".
"Part of Obama's program involved the continual degradation of the US economy"
Yup, he's destroying it as fast as he knows how.
Click to view link
Search on DE-industrialization of America.
It's simple; if we're to have a world GOV, this world gov can't have a super power lurking about.
This isn't about money and/or power. It's about destruction. Don't look for
"cui bono"? A couple of quotes;
"David Rockefeller Sept. 23, 1994 "This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World "
Also in 1994;
"[The New World Order] cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change it's perceptions." - Henry Kissinger, World Affairs Council Press Conference,
Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel, April 19th 1994
Lest you doubt that the bankers are pulling the strings: "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." -- Statement made before the United States Senate on Feb. 7, 1950 by James Paul Warburg ("Angel" to and active in the United World Federalists), son of Paul Moritz Warburg, nephew of Felix Warburg and of Jacob Schiff, both of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. which poured millions into the Russian Revolution through James' brother Max, banker to the German government - See the Sisson Report "
Keep in mind that this is all bait-and-switch. "Even Kennedy wanted a NWO; "All of us will ultimately be judged on the effort we have contributed to building a NEW WORLD ORDER." -Robert Kennedy, former U.S. Attorney-General, 1967."
This is what we currently see with most Western leaders. Simple-minded world leaders have been convinced that the bankers want a BENEVOLENT NWO. The sign up to the idea, thinking that they will get some kind of cozy, happy, nice standard of living. The bankers didn't mention that a ruthless fascism is the planed-for embodiment.
Here's another Rockefeller quote; "Sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National auto determination practiced in past centuries"--David Rockefeller in an address to a Trilateral Commission meeting in June of 1991" This is where Rockefeller shows his stupidity concerning human nature. "Intellectual elite" has been replaced by psychopathic criminals. WHAT did he think would be drawn to that enormous amount of power???
"The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power--Political, Monetary, Intellectual, and Ecclesiastical."- U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater from his 1964 book "No Apologies" Once again, absolute power corrupts ABSOLUTELY. What else do you expect?
Click to view link
I don't see a lot of confusion about what obummer's plans are. Bush, obummer, Cameron, Sarkozy, Berlusconi, et al. All Shallow people who were fed the lie that NWO would finally bring peace and prosperity. It will definitely bring peace,,, eventually. It will also bring corporatism and fascism. That is bad enough. But, since the leaders who rise to the top will be those persons who have the most tolerance for collateral damage [psychopaths], they will destroy anyone who gets in the way.
Read Clinton and Arkancide. A lot of opposition people ended up in hog pens, never to be seen again.
Obummer is following the guiding light of the messiah to a better world. Just as Valéry Marie René Georges Giscard d'Estaing could not envision the dark side of a FORCED Euro union, obummer has no conception of the depravity of the power brokers who are waiting in the wings. He will make his contribution to world consolidation secure in his knowledge that he will receive future validation and recognition. The psychopathic criminals who are our future controllers/owners will thank him profusely.
Yes, we will crash. Yes, America will be destroyed to make way for fascist totalitarianism. Yes, the requisite command economy and police state will destroy productivity. We will implode in steps. The total control of mass media has left Americans mentally debilitated. We will turn on each other and prove that the incredible complexity of our society is not very resilient.
While it would be nice to think that the masses will experience a renaissance of morals and spirit, the abruptness of the collapse won't allow any renaissance.
Reply from The Daily Bell
A bit negative today, Danny B!
|
Posted by Danny B on 10/06/12 09:07 PM
Yup, While none of this is written stone, the PTB have done well at closing off all? avenues of citizen action. Too many unthinking people. Look at Madrid.
The police beat the snot out of the protesters without thinking about the larger picture. What hope is there if the Spanish parliament can't follow the obvious example of the Icelandic parliament?
Instead of reasonably defusing the situation, world leaders march in lockstep towards the hoped-for cataclysm.
David Icke says that the NWO people are doing quite well with their plans.
Click to view link
I'm bummed ):
|
Posted by EdwardUlyssesCate on 10/06/12 10:04 PM
Reply from The Daily Bell: "Obama's seeming incompetence has nothing to do with color. You think George Bush was better?"
You're absolutely right. I didn't intend to appear racist, but simply meant a person from a minority group. Certainly George Bush was no better; just another sock puppet of the puppet masters.
|
Posted by kenn on 10/06/12 10:59 PM
Wow! comments back on line! Got rid of most of your "troublemakers"?...
Oh well, glad to see free speech gets another try. Good luck...
|
Posted by Charlie on 10/07/12 07:07 AM
The obammunist had to make Rombama look like he had a chance. It de-legitimizes the farce when people don't participate in choosing their own masters. I am amazed that anyone bothered to watch this staged fake "debate" after the farce of a primary season. The amusing spectacle of the "religious" right hypocrites cheering the cheating and smearing of the principled, logical, and moral Ron Paul (and no, he's not part of the cabal although, sadly, it appears his son is) in state primaries has only furthered the ends of the elites. Those hypocrites think if Rombama wins they will be able to wield the sword of state and smite THEIR enemies for a while, which is much more satisfying than allowing people to live as they please and make their own life choices. The same goes for the liberal people pushers and "nudges". Deck chairs on the Titanic.
 |
Posted by dave jr on 10/07/12 07:36 AM
@ Danny,
The main tool of the NWO, the fiat currency, is under tremendous strain and Rockefellers "window of opportunity" IS closing, AND they haven't yet gained consent for a lawfull (in their view) world tax needed for a means of world governance.
A carbon tax would do the trick. Carbon credits - a tax and a currency rolled into one. It won't matter who gets elected. Watch for it to be back in front of Congress or buried in an international treaty, or both.
|
|
