American People To Dems And GOP: Get Out Of Office, You Don’t Speak For Us

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
October 25th, 2010

A whopping majority of 62% of the American people believe it will be a good thing for the country if almost all incumbents from both parties were removed in the upcoming midterm election.

That is the finding of a new national poll that also reveals over a third would like to see a new political party formed to remove the establishment.

Only 27% said they felt their representative in Congress was the best person for the office.

Furthermore, 43% of the American people do not believe that either party in Congress represents them or their country.

That number rises to a majority of 53% amongst Mainstream voters only.

The survey, conducted by Rasmussen, highlights just how utterly sick of the phony punch and judy political paradigm a plurality of the public has become.

When asked “Is it fair to say that neither party in Congress is the party of the American people?”, only 35% of respondents disagreed with a further 22% saying they are unsure.

When asked if they agreed with the statement “Republicans and Democrats are so much alike that an entirely new party is needed to represent the American people”, 38% responded in the affirmative.

The same amount also believe that there is a distinct possibility that a third party candidate will be elected to the White House within the next decade.

The same survey also found that 29% of likely voters see themselves or someone they are close to as Tea Party members.

The disparity between that figure and the 38% who would like to see a new third party may represent the feeling among some that the Tea Party has been co-opted by the GOP establishment and the conservative leaning corporate media.

Last week a key figure in the evolution of the Tea Party movement, Karl Denninger, highlighted this backlash by penning a piece titled “To The Tea Party: Go Screw Yourself”.

Denninger, who used his website to promote one of the first major national Tea Party events, specifically hit out at Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich and Bob Barr, and warned that the movement had been severely watered down and brought into line with mainstream establishment GOP efforts.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Print this page

Anti-Establishment Fervor A Hammer Blow To Washington Elite

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Amidst the defeat two more establishment Republicans by Tea Party candidates last night, a new Rasmussen poll shows that anti-incumbent challenger Sharron Angle is now tied with Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and stands a good chance of ousting him in November, which would represent a massive blow to the Washington elite.

Angle’s popularity is excelled by Kentucky’s Rand Paul, who has taken a commanding lead over Democrat Jack Conway after trouncing establishment Republican Trey Grayson back in May.

Mirroring Paul’s success, Delaware Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell defeated nine-term Republican Michael Castle last night, despite a last minute GOP rush to help him save his seat.After the result, Republican insider Karl Rove attacked O’Donnell’s character and derided her as a “nut,” in a transparent example of how the neo-con establishment is panicked at genuinely grass-roots candidates who have not been co-opted by the Republican Party.

Meanwhile, another Tea Party-backed newcomer, Carl Paladino, easily won New York’s Republican gubernatorial race, beating establishment candidate Rick Lazio.

Given the burgeoning success of anti-establishment candidates in recent months, one wonders when the system will turn to its rigged voting machines and shady back-handers in order to counter what is increasingly looking like a peaceful revolution conducted via the ballot box.

With the establishment so vehemently discredited, repeated smear attempts against anti-incumbent candidates like Rand Paul have not only completely failed, they have in fact boosted the target of the smear.

With the corporate media having lost its power to destroy political careers, the only weapon the establishment has left is vote fraud.

Races where one candidate has a clear lead, such as Rand Paul, will be hard to manipulate, but closely fought contests like that between Angle and Reid will be wide open for abuse and dirty tricks.

A Rasmussen poll of likely voters in Nevada found that Angle and Reid were tied at 48% apiece, suggesting that Angle has the momentum going into the midterms having been 3 per cent down on Reid just two weeks ago.

The establishment has constantly attacked Angle and framed her views as “extremist” in a similar manner to how they tried to discredit Texas gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina.

Angle has closely identified herself with the Oath Keepers organization, a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters, who have sworn to not obey unconstitutional orders such as gun confiscations, warrantless searches and mass incarceration.

Angle has also publicly opposed the fluoridation of water supplies, attacking sodium fluoride as a deadly poison and voting against its use.

With a new CNN poll showing trust in government has sunk to just one in four Americans, the ground has never been more fertile for anti-incumbent success. However, this makes the establishment all the more dangerous, and don’t be surprised if we witness an “October surprise” that is exploited to demonize all Tea Party candidates as extremist radicals who have no place in government.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

What the nature of that surprise will be remains to be seen, but it would be naive to think that the system is just going to stand aside and allow its servants to be ousted by people like Paul, O’Donnell, and Angle, who have vowed to take America back from the elite and restore constitutional principles.

—

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show. Watson has been interviewed by many publications and radio shows, including Vanity Fair and Coast to Coast AM, America’s most listened to late night talk show.

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"! Print this page

A New Independent Poll is Needed on Iran

Patrick Henningsen21st Century WireAugust 24, 2010

Infowars.com Editor Kurt Nimmo’s recent piece entitled Corporate Media Poll Claims Majority of Americans Support Iran Attack, raises a number of key and timely points on the quality of Rasmussen’s poll sampling and whether such a poll actually represents American public opinion on this particular issue. But let’s take this a step further and try to construct our own independent poll on the Iranian question, one which will more accurately reflect real public feelings on this impending geopolitical face-off.

The Rasmussen Poll was designed to lend support an existing policy — a Pentagon-planned pre-emptive military strike on Iran.

Far from being objective, the Rasmussen Poll was designed to lend support an existing policy — to test the public waters on a Pentagon-planned pre-emptive military strike on Iran. The actual results produced are far from useful in measuring the country’s true public opinion on the matter, much less America’s willingness to add a new front to its already bloated global “war on terror”. In addition to this, their poll  contains some obviously loaded questions — questions which solicit amateur opinions on facts which polling participants are not even privy to know one way or the other. The Rasmussen Poll contained questions like:

1. Iran is an enemy?

2. Iran’s uranium enrichment program is developing nuclear weapons?

3. If Israel attacks Iran, the United States should lend a helping hand?

Clearly, polling participants cannot have an opinion on a factual matter like whether or not Iran’s uranium enrichment program is developing nuclear weapons. Therefore, the results from such questions are fairly useless, unless, however, Rasmussen is trying to measure the level of  the public’s disinformation on that issue (there is a touch of irony there). The last question is particularly loaded in itself, casually characterizing US support of Israel as a mere “helping hand”, but not considering for a second whether or not Israel’s pre-emptive strike is wrong in the first place. The US mindset has become so conditioned in accepting Israeli policy objectives (regardless of their effects on real US interests), therefore this is reflected in standard language we see throughout corporate media polling. Here we can see the way in which these types of mainstream corporate  polls are used to reinforce and construct a simplistic streamlined groupthink on very complexed issues.

By asking a series of loaded and pejorative questions as they have done, Rasmussen can only produce poll results akin to that of an uneducated angry mob, thus containing very little useful information which can be used later in intelligent political discourse on the subject. Rather, these type of polls are used as supports within a larger propaganda exercise.

The painful lessons of 2001 and 2003 should be clear by now — that the US and its allies can and will go to war on the basis of fabricated intelligence and will do so without a declaration from Congress, preferring instead to use a House Joint Resolution Authorizing a Use of Force against the country it wishes to attack. This has already been set in motion by HR 1553: Expressing support for the State of Israel’s right to “defend itself” with apre-emptive attack — you can’t get any more Orwellian than that. Nonetheless, it goes without saying that certain public opinion polls are key tools used by Washington and her major media outlets for bolstering any pre-emptive strike which is on the drawing board.

Alex Jones has commissioned polls in the past on very important issues, the results of which have been valuable in building a case for common sense. Of all the issues that are facing Americans directly today, none is potentially more hot than a US or US-supported pre-emptive strike on Iran. It would certainly be a valuable exercise should Infowars.com consider commissioning its own independent Zogby Poll into whether Americans really consider Iran a national security threat. A new poll should contain questions which gauge relevant public opinions and not whether participants believe general hearsay, rumours of possible intelligence on Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions, or general mainstream media propaganda designed to prime the war pump — all of which were demonstrated by Rasmussen’s latest hit piece on Iran.

An independent poll should probe into the essential and fundamental questions about Iran including:

1. Would you support a pre-emptive US strike on Iran?

2. Is Iran a genuine threat to US national security?

3. Do you think that the Iranian threat is being exaggerated?

4. Do you see parallels between the current campaign to characterize Iran as a WMD threat and the previous case against Iraq?

5. Should Israel be launching a pre-emptive strike on Iran?

6. Is the US obligated to support Israel if it carries out a pre-emptive strike on Iran?

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

With so much at stake, we cannot afford to get the fundamentals of this conversation wrong. What could be worse than another fake war that will cost our economy millions and our morality a priceless fortune? The conversation about Iran must be set straight on record and free from the obvious spin we have become so used to in the New American Century. Together, conscious members of the alternative media must keep working to reframe the conversation based on the principles of critical thinking, rather than the predictable mainstream media’s popular innuendo that caters to the whims of the mob.

One would hope that better and more intelligent polling might influence better and more intelligent foreign policy.

Corporate Media Poll Claims Majority of Americans Support Iran Attack

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 22, 2010

According to a Rasmussen poll posted last week, most Americans consider Iran an enemy of the United States, believe Iran’s nuclear program is developing weapons, and they would support the United States helping Israel attack the Islamic country.

	A large number of Americans supported the Iraq invasion and were hostile to the opposition.

57% say Iran is an enemy. 66% say Iran’s uranium enrichment program is developing nuclear weapons (53% state an Iranian nuke is very likely). 51% say if Israel attacks Iran, the United States should lend a helping hand.

Is it possible these numbers are correct? Should we trust Rasmussen and other corporate media polling operations?

If you doubt the numbers, consider the overwhelming support for the attack on Iraq. Before the invasion in March 2003 polls showed 47-60% of the U.S. public supported an invasion. A Gallup poll conducted after Bush made his neocon fabricated case against Iraq showed that an astounding 67% believed the neocon generated propaganda and outright lies. Following Colin Powell’s dog and pony show at the United Nations claiming Iraq had biological weapons, only 27% opposed military action. Most Americans actually believed Saddam Hussein posed a direct threat to the United States.

The invasion launched by Bush’s daddy enjoyed even larger support. 79% of polled Americans were in favor at the beginning of the Persian Gulf War, more accurately described as the Persian Gulf Turkey Shoot. The numbers during Bush Junior’s invasion may be somewhat smaller because opposing information was available on the internet. The web did not exist in 1990.

(See Popular opinion in the United States on the invasion of Iraq.)

As Scott Horton pointed out on RT, there is absolutely no evidence Iran is manufacturing nuclear weapons and in fact does not have the capability to do so.

So, if we are to believe Rasmussen, why do Americans believe otherwise? Because millions of them get their news from the corporate media — and the corporate media is the lick-spittle handmaiden of the military-industrial complex and the global elite that have a vested interest in back-to-back wars of the sort we have endured since the establishment of the national security state.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Of course, it is possible most Americans oppose attacking Iran or helping Israel to attack Iran. But that is irrelevant to the propaganda machine.

The numbers will be used to make the case for mass murder the same way the numbers were used during all previous illegal, immoral, and criminal invasions.