FROM PHOENIX, ARIZONANORTH AMERICAN AFFAIRS
1. The “Dems,” Party of Firsts,
First to Blink: “Bonehead Al”
Taps “Phony Gerry” against Texas “Big Dippers”
Beware Lieberman! (By Barry Chamish)
3. Watch Lieberman’s Votes, Not
4. Electoral College: A Not-So-Secret Cornerstone of a
Two-Party System in Amerika
“Dems,” the Party of Firsts, First to Blink in 2000
PHOENIX, Aug. 8 - And so the die is now cast. The U.S. Election 2000 isn’t going to be yet another edition of the “yawn at dawn”-style American “demo farce” that has been unfolding every four years for the last several decades.
But don’t get your hopes up. The Election 2000 won’t be a slugfest, either. Most likely, it will be a laughfest.
Can’t you just see the flashing neon lampoons at the
leading national political cabarets… “Bonehead
Al” Taps “Phony Gerry” against Two Texas “Big Dippers.”
With the sub-heading… “The
man who invented the Internet and the man who perfected double-talk face
off against America’s biggest dippers in fundraising and Pentagon
contracts - Dubya and Dick.”
Yes. “Phony,” because he talks out of both sides of his mouth while posing as a moralizing Orthodox Jew. “Gerry,” because his is a male version of Geraldine “Gerry” Ferraro’s failed run as Walter Mondale’s Veep in 1984.
Phony Gerry lectures Bill Clinton on having an affair with a woman “half his age,” yet concludes that, “it's premature” to take any action at all because “we don't know for certain any of the facts.”
Phony Gerry moralizes about how a man's “word is his bond;” how Clinton has diminished this virtue; and how this Orthodox Jew (Lieberman) is supposedly so disgusted that he is not able to watch the evening news with his children because of what Clinton has done. Then, the same disgusted Lieberman votes against Clinton’s impeachment.
Phony Gerry is anti-life, anti-Christian, anti-small business, anti-gun owners, anti-Serb…
At the same time, Phony Gerry is staunchly pro-globalist wars, pro-Hispanics and pro-“colored people,” pro-government regulation, pro-taxation without representation, pro-KLA Albanian terrorists, pro-animal rights…
In short, this Phony Gerry is a New World Order stooge, as befits a longtime member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Everything else about him is… you guessed it - phony!
As for our "no love lost” for the two Texas “Big Dippers,” trust no further elaboration is needed after our last month’s editorial, “Weep Mankind!”
A Historical Perspective
When Mondale, Jimmy Carter’s Veep (1976-1980), selected Rep. Geraldine A. Ferraro in 1984 as his vice-presidential running mate, “Gerry” was billed as the first woman to run for such a high office on a major party ticket. At the 1984 Democratic convention, Mondale beat out Jesse Jackson, the first black to win a presidential primary.
When Gore, Bill Clinton’s Veep (1992-2000), selected Joseph Lieberman as his vice-presidential running mate, Phony Gerry is being hailed as the first Jew to run for such a high office on a major party ticket.
That’s a bad omen. For, all the earlier “firsts” lost! Badly.
Back in 1984, Ronald Reagan trashed the Mondale-Ferraro ticket capturing 59 percent of vote, carrying 49 out of 50 states, and getting 525 electoral votes (for more on the uniquely American “Electoral College” - see Item 4 of this Bulletin).
Wonder if the Democrats would ever consider winning as their first goal, rather than being the first in perverting our (still) predominantly Christian society? Perhaps after they put the first gay on a losing ticket?
Jay Leno and David Letterman are sure to have a ball in the next three months. By November 6, they should be indebted to the Democratic donkey and the Republican elephants for an unrelenting stream of steam that is about to pour into the nation’s TV studios from the Election 2000 braille trails.
Yes. It is a New World Order trail for the politically-blinded, intellectually-deprived, and morally-corrupt people who can still find their way to the White House. Such as the likes of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Joseph Lieberman, George W. Bush or Dick Cheney.
Read and weep George W. Washington…
Weep, yet, yes, also rejoice… liberty-lovers of America.
For, the U.S. Election 2000 may show us and the world that “the crooked are leading the blind” in this country. And that time may be nigh for enlightened Americans who still believe in the U.S. Constitution to “just say no” to the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton, or to the “Bonehead Al’s,” the “Phoney Gerry’s,” or to the “Dubya Dick” Big Dippers into our pocketbooks.
Beware Lieberman! (By Barry Chamish)
Aug. 8 - So the American Jews should be rejoicing as one of their own
becoming the first Jew ever to be nominated a U.S. vice president? Not so fast, says a Jerusalem-based journalist Barry Chamish,
a Jewish author to whom we have lent our Internet airwaves many times
during the last four years. Here’s
an excerpt from what he had to say about Lieberman, under the title,
Candidate Joseph Lieberman is a member of the Council On Foreign Relation
(CFR), as are Dick Cheney, and Al Gore. The only candidate not on the
members list is G.W. Bush Jr. who is a member by proxy. His grandfather
Prescott was a CFR pioneer, while dad, George Sr. was an executive of the
accursed cult whose aim is a one world government. With only 3000 members,
it is clear that only CFR members and loyalists may become President. Last
time around the figures were the same, Gore, Dole and Clinton were CFR
members. The story has been similar for the past two generations.
Marvin Antleman has been fighting the CFR for three decades. In 1972, he
submitted a proposal to the Rabbinical Council of America to condemn the
CFR and prevent its members from infiltrating Jewish institutions. In
1974, his book To Eliminate The Opiate was published. Long considered a
classic in many circles, the book exposed the CFR's program to wipe out
Judaism by planting its members throughout Jewish media, charitable and
called last night to tell me that, "I just went through the CFR
roster. Lieberman's name is on the membership list. We're being sold a
bill of goods again."
TiM Ed.: For what it’s worth, Lieberman’s name has been on the CFR roster since at least 1991.
CFR's Middle East Task Force Report of July 1996 spells out the
organization's position in no uncertain terms; Israel must return to its
undefendable 1948 borders and Jerusalem is to be divided into two national
capitals. Rabbi Antleman thus doubts the authenticity of Lieberman's
commitment to Orthodox Jewry.
can you be Orthodox and belong to an organization which promotes the
division of Jerusalem and which, in the past, has financially backed such
irreligious movements as communism and nazism?" he asks. "The
CFR's purpose is to promote and arm violent and disruptive national
movements in order to upset the world's status quo and replace it with
their alternative world order. There is no place within for a religious
Jew unless he is dangerous window dressing."
that will mean for Israel is more suicidal concessions with American Jews
unable to accuse the administration of being anti-Israel.
trick was used in 1972, when CFR executive Henry Kissinger was named
Secretary of State. Equally proud of Kissinger as they are of Lieberman
today, the Jewish community could not accuse the administration of
deliberately trying to eliminate Israel in the Yom Kippur War of 1973, nor
could they find sinister motives for the isolation of Israel in the peace
process which followed it.
time around, not only does the current "peace" process get a
boost, so does the Hillary Clinton campaign for a New York senatorial
seat. And the Jews, so excited by Lieberman's nomination, as usual, do not
suspect how cynically they are being set up.
signs are there for anyone to see. Last year Lieberman welcomed Arafat to
America, and even prayed for the success of his mission. And he initiated
a publicized letter to President Clinton nixing any chance of CFR victim
Jonathan Pollard's release from prison. As the Jerusalem Post noted,
Pollard's website has long accused Lieberman of being "a willing tool
of the CIA."
of later Lieberman's possible dual
allegiance to America and Israel will become a debating point.
Antleman, "And that will miss the real issue, which is Lieberman's
allegiance to the CFR. It will prove stronger than all his sentimental
ties to America, Israel and to Judaism itself."
TiM Ed.: True. But treason comes in different shades of gray. Lieberman may feel ambivalent toward Israel, but is there a chance he would urge NATO to bomb that country? Not that we can see. Yet not only was Lieberman one of the loudest cheerleaders on the Hill of the NATO bombing of Serbia, but his kow-towing to, and support of, the KLA Albanian terrorists (see Item 3 of this Bulletin) - a paramilitary group much more brutal than the Arafat-led PLA - has contributed to murders of thousands of innocent civilians, and expulsions of nearly a quarter of a million of Serbs from Kosovo.
So there are traitors and there are proxy mass murderers. Lieberman's membership in the CFR alone does not make him a traitor. But his boisterous support of the NATO bombing and of the KLA does make him an accomplice to their crimes.
PHOENIX, Aug. 9 - When “Bonehead Al” made the announcement about his selection of a running mate on Aug. 7, the liberal media pounced on an opportunity to cast “Phony Gerry” a.k.a. Joseph Lieberman, as a “conservative liberal” (never mind the oxymoronic aspect of this term!).
But serious Washington watchers have learned to watch the candidates votes, not their lips or the New York Times quips. And as you can see below, our quick look at Lieberman’s recent votes shows that he is not only a phony conservative, he is a phony liberal, too. In other word, he is just a plain, vanilla phony. Like his new boss, Lieberman is only consistently for the globalist New World Order. No matter from what direction their “wind de jour” is blowing, Lieberman and Gore have always been there, dutifully helping fan it around the country or the world.
Take a look for yourself at the details below, but here's a summary first…
· Lieberman is against human life (i.e., he is for abortion), but he is also for animal rights and the children defense fund.
· He is for protection of the environment, but has also voted for all Clinton administration’s overseas wars, including last year’s bombing of Serbia that devastated both human life and the environment in the Balkans.
· He is for normal trade relations with China, and for the controversial Defense Missile Defense system, the dying-gasp gift of the Clinton administration to America’s “death merchants.”
· He is against the interests of the Christian Coalition, but he is for those of the Hispanic Leadership Agenda and of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
· He is against the interests of gun owners, small businesses, and scores of other populist groups in America.
· He is for government regulation and against those who wish to curb the tax and spending habits of Congress and the Clinton administration.
Joseph Lieberman on… (Details)
Abortion / Family Planning
· On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the The Humane Society of the United States considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Fund For Animals considered to be the most important in 1995-1996, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 75 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the National Federation of Independent Business considered to be the most important in 1999-2000, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 22 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Business-Industry Political Action Committee considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 11 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the The Small Business Survival Committee considered to be the most important in 1998, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 30 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the National Federation of Independent Business considered to be the most important in 1997-1998, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 43 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Children's Defense Fund considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
Christian Family Issues
· On the votes that the Christian Coalition considered to be the most important in 1997-1998, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 9 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Human Rights Campaign considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the American Civil Liberties Union considered to be the most important in 1999 , Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 50 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Conservative Index-The John Birch Society considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 10 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the The Republican Liberty Caucus - Economic Policy considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 10 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the The Libertarian Party - Economic Freedom considered to be the most important in 1995, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 30 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Totals considered to be the most important in 1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 26 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Sierra Club considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the League of Conservation Voters considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Environment considered to be the most important in 1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 22 percent of the time.
· Lieberman voted for the resolution Authorizing Air Operations in Yugoslavia, a resolution introduced by Senator Biden, D-DE - 03/23/1999, and for the Emergency Supplemental Spending on US Troops in Kosovo - 03/23/1999.
· On Mar. 25, 1999, two days after NATO’s bombing of Serbia started, Lieberman introduced a “Kosovo Self Defense Act,” a proposal for the U.S. to arm and train the Kosovo Albanian terrorists, the KLA. In May 1999, Lieberman co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, that again called on the United States to arm the KLA Albanian terrorists against the Serbs. Lieberman and McConnell wanted to provide $25 million to equip the KLA’s 10,000 men or 10 battalions with small arms and anti-tank weapons for up to 18 months (see the Washington Times, May 3, 1999).
· Lieberman voted for Authorizing Use of all Necessary Force in Kosovo, i.e., he voted against a motion introduced by Trent Lott, R-MS, to kill that resolution - 05/04/1999.
· Liberman voted against an amendment requiring the President to get Congressional approval before sending U.S. ground troops into Yugoslavia. The amendment also would prohibit funding without Congressional approval except for peacekeeping personnel, unless authorized by a declaration of war or a joint resolution authorizing military force.
· Tabling motion introduced by Warner, R-VA; amendment introduced by Senator Specter, R-PA, bill introduced by Senator Warner, R-VA - 5/25/99.
· Lieberman voted for the FY 2000 Defense Auth.--Restriction of Yugoslavian Funds, a vote to table or kill an amendment prohibiting U.S. funds for military actions in Yugoslavia after October 1, 1999 with the exception of intelligence and surveillance activity. Tabling motion introduced by Warner, R-VA, Amendment introduced by Smith R-NH, Bill introduced by Warner, R-VA - 05/26/1999.
· Lieberman voted against an amendment to eliminate the existing ban on privately funded abortions for military personnel and dependents in overseas military hospitals. Tabling motion introduced by Smith, R-NH, Amendment introduced by Murray D-WA, Bill introduced by Warner, R-VA - 5/26/99.
· Lieberman voted for the extension of China's Normal Trade Relations Status - a Discharge Motion introduced by Smith, I-N.H.- 07/20/1999.
· Lieberman voted for the Richard Holbrooke Nomination-Confirmation as the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. - 08/05/1999.
· Lieberman voted for the National Missile Defense Act of 1999, a policy of the U.S. to deploy a National Missile Defense system as soon as it is technologically possible - 3/17/1999.
· On the votes that the National Rifle Association considered to be the most important in 1993-1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Gun Owners of America considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 9 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence considered to be the most important in 1999 , Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Handgun Control, Inc considered to be the most important in 1993-1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Liberty Lobby considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Liberty Lobby considered to be the most important in 1997, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 20 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Deregulation considered to be the most important in 1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Taxes considered to be the most important in 1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Americans for Tax Reform considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 5 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Citizens Against Government Waste considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 14 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Taxpayers for Common Sense considered to be the most important in 1998, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 36 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the National Tax-Limitation Committee considered to be the most important in 1997-1998, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 25 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Spending considered to be the most important in 1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 23 percent of the time.
· On the votes that the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Budget considered to be the most important in 1994, Senator Lieberman voted their preferred position 19 percent of the time.
TiM Ed.: The above analysis has been based on - http://www.vote-smart.org . This web site also provides the following information about how to contact our “Phony Gerry:”
Washington DC E-Mail Address: firstname.lastname@example.org
Washington DC Web Address: http://www.senate.gov/~lieberman
Washington DC Address: 706 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510-0703, Phone: 202-224-4041
Electoral College: A Not-So-Secret Cornerstone of a Two-Party System in
“Demo Farce,” Anything But Our Founding Fathers’ Vision of America
for Which They Fought and Died
PHOENIX, Aug. 9 - Not many Americans, and no foreigners this writer has ever met, realize that the American people actually do NOT vote for President. They vote for the Electors from each State who later (typically in mid-December) choose a President. At least that’s what the U.S. Constitution and federal law state.
Choosing NOT to have direct presidential elections was one of the many checks and balances the Founding Fathers had created in order to protect the states’ powers from being usurped by Washington. And to preserve a fledgling country from being ruined by the rule of the mob, i.e., ignorant masses’ choices of a President. Which is why they chose an indirect election through a College of Electors.
Explains William C. Kimberling, Deputy Director, Federal Election Commission, Office of Election Administration, in his essay, “The Electoral College:”
function of the College of Electors in choosing the president can be
likened to that in the Roman Catholic Church of the College of Cardinals
selecting the Pope. The original idea was for the
most knowledgeable and informed individuals
from each State to select the president based solely on merit and without
regard to State of origin or political party [TiM
Ed.: emphasis added]
structure of the Electoral College can be traced to the Centurial Assembly
system of the Roman Republic. Under that system, the adult male citizens
of Rome were divided, according to their wealth, into groups of 100
(called Centuries). Each group of 100 was entitled to cast only one vote
either in favor or against proposals submitted to them by the Roman
Electoral College system, the States serve as the Centurial groups (though
they are not, of course, based on wealth), and the number of votes per
State is determined by the size of each State’s Congressional
delegation. Still, the two systems are similar in design and share many of
the same advantages and disadvantages.
similarities between the Electoral College and classical institutions are
not accidental. Many of the Founding Fathers were well schooled in ancient
history and its lessons.”
“Democracy” and direct elections, therefore, was clearly NOT on the Founding Fathers’ minds. Creating a working constitutional Republic with “fairness and justice for all” is what they were after. Calling the U.S. a “democracy” is one of the 20th century’s perversions and deceptions.
Notice that the Founding Fathers wanted the President of the United States of America selected by “the most knowledgeable and informed individuals,” likened to the Cardinals at the Vatican by Mr. Kimberling? Well, nothing could be further from that electoral model than our today’s presidential elections, could it? Today, money and mob rule, wisdom and liberty suffer.
Just look at the mass media circuses into which the New World Order Washington and Hollywood stooges have turned the Republican and Democratic conventions, for example. Is that how you would imagine a dignified process by which a Roman Catholic Pope is chosen? Only if you haven’t a clue as to who the Pope is.
Well, that’s the face of today’s American “Demo Farce,” a glitzy, klutzy, schmaltzy soap opera, in which Bonehead Al and Phony Gerry face off against two Texan Big Dippers.
“Glitzy, klutzy, schmaltzy? What’s that?” our stupefied, yet well-educated, Founding Fathers would have asked.
Well, this writer would be tempted to tell them that they are contemporary America’s replacements for the Three Wise Men they knew and admired. But in reality, these three Yiddish (i.e., non-English) words that have crept their way into “official” American dictionaries, are merely examples of why the U.S. today is the antithesis of not just the Roman Catholic, but even more so of the Orthodox Christian traditions.
(Orthodox Christianity is more egalitarian and decentralized than Catholicism. There is no “Pope,” for example, only a Patriarch elected by the Synod, a rough equivalent of the College of Cardinals. But this is done strictly at a national church level. There is no “Orthodox Pope,” although the New World Order forces are trying to turn the Patriarch of Constantinople into one. But that’s a different story…).
In short, the fact that so many people, including Mr. Kimberling, most of whose thoughts we reference here with admiration, still cling to the idea that our today’s Electoral College is an institution that has successfully survived more than 200 years and over 50 elections, only goes to show us that you “CAN fool some people all the time” (borrowing from Teddy Roosevelt here).
Writes Mr. Kimberling, in one of the “conclusions” of his lengthy essay:
Electoral College has performed its function for over 200 years (and in
over 50 presidential elections) by ensuring that the President of the
United States has both sufficient popular support to govern and that his
popular support is sufficiently distributed throughout the country to
enable him to govern effectively.
there were a few anomalies in its early history, none have occurred in the
past century. Proposals to abolish the Electoral College, though
frequently put forward, have failed largely because the alternatives to it
appear more problematic than is the College itself.
that the Electoral College was originally designed to solve one set of
problems but today serves to solve an entirely different set of problems
is a tribute to the genius of the Founding Fathers and to the durability
of the American federal system.”
Actually, the truth of the matter is that deception and perversion that have occurred in this country in the 20th century, has been made possible by gullible or corruptible Americans who have been willing to accept a “glitzy, klutzy, schmaltzy” vision of the world as our Founding Father’s reality. Which is why all those who have bitten into the poisoned New World Order apple are to blame, not just those who had offered it as sinful enticement.
On the other hand, it is easy to see how the American voters were duped into believing they did vote for President. They are told by the New World Order media year-round that they will have a chance to vote for President come next November. They are also deceived at the polls. Names of candidates are printed in bold print on every ballot. It’s only in fine print that observant voters can find the true intent of our Founding Fathers.
Explains Mr. Kimberling:
the individual party candidates for Elector are seldom listed on the
ballot. Instead, the expression "Electors for" usually appears
in fine print on the ballot in front of each set of candidates for
president and vice president (or else the State law specifies that votes
cast for the candidates are to be counted as being for the slate of
delegates pledged to those candidates)…. Voters are actually casting
their votes for the Electors for the presidential and vice presidential
candidates of their choice rather than for the candidates themselves.”
And so, successive generations of unscrupulous Washington politicians have basically reduced a key provision of the U.S. Constitution to a fine print. No wonder 62% of Americans don't even bother to vote anymore! (see "Election '98: Much Ado About Nothing" (Nov. 11, 1998).
As to when and where the Electors choose the President and the Vice President, once again, Mr. Kimberling explains:
established in federal law) each State’s Electors meet in their respective State capitals and cast their electoral votes - one for president and one for vice president.
TiM Ed.: Here are some additional historical facts that may help put the Electoral College idea in perspective:
When the Founding Fathers of
America created the Electoral College, the U.S. consisted of 13 large and
small States, each jealous of its own rights and powers, and suspicious of
any central national government.
The U.S. was a country of only four
million people, spread up and down a thousand miles of Atlantic seaboard,
and barely connected by transportation or communication (so that national
campaigns were impractical even if they had been thought desirable).
Furthermore, people felt that
gentlemen should not campaign for public office. A saying back then was, "the office should seek the man,
the man should not seek the office."
Each State was allocated a number
of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always two) plus the
number of its U.S. Representatives (which may change each decade according
to the size of each State’s population as determined in the decennial
census). This arrangement built upon an earlier compromise in the design
of the Congress itself and thus satisfied both large and small States.
The manner of choosing the Electors
was left to the individual State legislatures, thereby pacifying States
suspicious of a central national government.
Members of Congress and employees
of the federal government were specifically prohibited from serving as an
Elector in order to maintain the balance between the legislative and
executive branches of the federal government.
Each State’s Electors were
required to meet in their respective States rather than all together in
one great meeting. This arrangement, it was thought, would prevent
bribery, corruption, secret dealing, and foreign influence.
In order to prevent Electors from
voting only for a "favorite son" of their own State, each
Elector was required to cast two votes for President, at least one of
which had to be for someone outside their home State. The idea,
presumably, was that the winner would likely be everyone’s second
The electoral votes were to be
sealed and transmitted from each of the States to the President of the
Senate who would then open them before both houses of the Congress and
read the results. The person with the most electoral votes, provided that
it was an absolute majority (at least one over half of the total), became
president. Whoever obtained the next greatest number of electoral votes
became vice president - an office which they seem to have invented for the
occasion since it had not been mentioned previously in the Constitutional
In the event that no one obtained
an absolute majority in the Electoral College or in the event of a tie
vote, the U.S. House of Representatives, as the chamber closest to the
people, would choose the president from among the top five contenders.
They would do this (as a further concession to the small States) by
allowing each State to cast only one vote with an absolute majority of the
States being required to elect a president. The vice presidency would go
to whatever remaining contender had the greatest number of electoral
votes. If that, too, was tied, the U.S. Senate would break the tie by
deciding between the two.
In all, this was quite an elaborate design. But it was also a very clever one when you consider that the whole operation was supposed to work without political parties and without national campaigns while maintaining the balances and satisfying the fears in play at the time. Indeed, it is probably because the Electoral College was originally designed to operate in an environment so totally different from our own that many people think it is anachronistic and fail to appreciate the new purposes it now serves.”
TiM Ed. Meanwhile, what the clever “glitzy, klutzy, schmaltzy” newcomers to America did achieve, again, thanks to corruptibility of the indigenous populace, is to drive a Mack Truck through the Electoral College and the U.S. Constitution. And to turn them both into American Revolution relics, rather than the living, breathing parts of American life that the Founding Fathers had intended them to be.
Worse, even though no political parties existed when the Electoral College was created, they succeeded in turning it into a cornerstone of a two-party American “Demo Farce.” But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what Mr. Kimberling says about the “Arguments for the Electoral College:”
of the Electoral College system normally defend it on philosophical
grounds that it:
Contributes to the cohesiveness of
the country by requiring a distribution of popular support to be elected
Enhances the status of minority
Contributes to the political
stability of the nation
by encouraging a two-party system
Maintains a federal system of
government and representation.”
“Political stability by encouraging a two-party system?” When and where was it the last time you heard nonsense like that? Today - on CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS…? Or on some other “glitzy, klutzy, schmaltzy” network that’s supposed to make Americans feel enchanted while being dumbed down?
Why not call a spade a spade? Our electoral system has been converted into a two-party "political monopoly." Thanks, in part, to the Electoral College - a constitutional tool that our Founding Fathers had devised for one purpose, and which America's 20th century constitutional wrecking crews have subverted into another.
(also see “Dancing ‘round the Golden Calf,” this writer’ Washington Times column on the "Dumbing Down of America," Aug. 31, 1997).
Also, check out... Djurdjevic's WASHINGTON TIMES columns: "Christianity Under Siege," "Silence Over Persecuted Christians", "Chinese Dragon Wagging Macedonian Tail," "An Ugly Double Standard in Kosovo Conflict?", "NATO's Bullyboys", "Kosovo: Why Are We Involved?", and "Ginning Up Another Crisis"