Which candidate is backed by the World's Elite?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 06:46 PM
link   
I've seen evidence of Obama and McCain being supported by the World Elite, I just want to know which they have chosen to be their pawn or if it even matters to them.

Was kind of upset that Obama started rejecting public funding :-\

What are your thoughts?




posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   
This is one easy question. Both of them. The elite didn't get to be the elite by taking chances they would lose influence. Both of them are corporate backed, even if it's not the same corporations, and pratically all corporations are tied into the financial systems that the elite control.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Obama rejected public funding because he has received so much from individual donors that he would be a fool to blow it by accepting it.

I believe this is actually a first, where the Democrats are leading the campaign fundraising race against the Republicans. Usually the republicans can count on enough big money donors to give them a large fundraising (and thus campaign advertising) advantage.

Obama's case is unusual as he has been very successful at getting smaller donations from many many individuals.

He would have to be a fool to blow that kind of advantage...

If you look at McCain, you'll find he's backed by the same oil & defense industries that have kept the Republicans in power for the last eight years.

[edit on 6/20/08 by xmotex]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Obama rejected public funding because he has received so much from individual donors that he would be a fool to blow it by accepting it.


I think it depends on how you define "fool," and if you think keeping your word is worth more than how much money you can spend on advertising. There's no need to rehash all the quotes they've been playing today of Obama pledging to accept public funding, nor is there any reason to cite all the editorials, including even the NY Times, that blasted him.

The reality is that Obama is a politician that's going to say whatever it takes to win, and there is little if any reason to believe he has the core values and principles that he claims to have.

No matter how much the "elite" back him they can only manipulate people so much. People tend to be pretty savvy at seeing through phoniness. The public is sick of being lied to and manipulated. I think Obama's in serious danger of having his popularity implode. If he doesn't pick Clinton as VP, he's going to have almost no chance of winning.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


1.) There's never been a politician "keep their word"
2.) Obama is doing what it takes to win
3.) Define "elite"
4.) show links to "a lot of what i've read"



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by jamie83
 


1.) There's never been a politician "keep their word"
2.) Obama is doing what it takes to win
3.) Define "elite"
4.) show links to "a lot of what i've read"


1. So then Obama's claims to be different are hollow, and his grass roots support which loves him because they believe he is genuine is going to implode.

2. Which includes lying and saying he's going to take the high road when he's not. People can see through the phoniness, and Obama's popularity is going to continue to sink.

3. Elite? Already having a position of power based on the existing political power structure, which includes the CFR, Bilderberg, and Trilateral folks like Lee Hamilton, James Johnson, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and others.

4. Coffee table at Starbucks. Trying looking up political editorials on yahoo or google. I'm sure you'll find a slew of editorials blasting Obama for going back on his multiple pledges about accepting public funding. And the criticisms are not that he's rejecting the money. The criticisms are the lame disingenuous excuses he's trying to make, and that he's trying to paint it like he's a victim again (big surprise!).



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Good points and the bottom line is Obama made a pledge to Public Funding. Both Obama and McCain are rich, but Obama has George Soros and lots of Hollywood backing him.

He claims the Americanp people should have the right to fund the Campaign of their chosen canidate..

If that isn't a load of BS, what is? Obama doesn't care about Middle or Lower class contributions. He cares about the large ones from large corporations and Actors and Actresses.

Did you know that Obama recently had a fundraiser where many Hollywood Actors and Actresses attended? Each ticket was $2300.00!

That is more than for a ring-side seat at a prize fight.

He doesn't believe he can win with skills so will try with big donations from the private sector.

Obama sold you out, didn't keep his word. How much more will it take before you realize he doesn't care about you?



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83

1. So then Obama's claims to be different are hollow, and his grass roots support which loves him because they believe he is genuine is going to implode.


He got that grass roots bs from Ron Paul.. If it didn't get big with him it wouldn't be in obamas bs now.



2. Which includes lying and saying he's going to take the high road when he's not. People can see through the phoniness, and Obama's popularity is going to continue to sink.


agreed



3. Elite? Already having a position of power based on the existing political power structure, which includes the CFR, Bilderberg, and Trilateral folks like Lee Hamilton, James Johnson, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and others.


I can tell you the only candidate that wasn't elite sponsored. but we already know the answer to that..



4. Coffee table at Starbucks. Trying looking up political editorials on yahoo or google. I'm sure you'll find a slew of editorials blasting Obama for going back on his multiple pledges about accepting public funding. And the criticisms are not that he's rejecting the money. The criticisms are the lame disingenuous excuses he's trying to make, and that he's trying to paint it like he's a victim again (big surprise!).


Both are backed by big corps, gas car whatever...

You people believe these idiots... I quit giving a crap when they started limiting debates with Ron Paul..

Other than that you are screwed, that is all you need to worry about now.. How far up the pooper we will take it before the people get pissed..

Apparently a lot cause our country is going to hell and nobody gives a crap, and when they do they get shot down like some loon idiot.. Interesting side note however..

All of us on ATS knew everything Ron Paul stated so its no big shock to us that they would limit him and have him pull out.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83
post by jamie83
 

1. So then Obama's claims to be different are hollow, and his grass roots support which loves him because they believe he is genuine is going to implode.
What you describe is true for any politician. They're going to make promises to all, and disappoint a few in the process because there will always be political opposition to do things that favor the American people



2. Which includes lying and saying he's going to take the high road when he's not. People can see through the phoniness, and Obama's popularity is going to continue to sink.


I see. So Obama takes the low road by avoiding attacks on Mccains religion/skin color/family. I'd hate to know your definition of morals





3. Elite? Already having a position of power based on the existing political power structure, which includes the CFR, Bilderberg, and Trilateral folks like Lee Hamilton, James Johnson, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and others.

You throw around those entities like you just learned how to say them man. I understand your definition of elite. And your definition of elite is that it applies to anyone with a lot of money. So i guess i should ask you to define a lot of money.



4. Coffee table at Starbucks. Trying looking up political editorials on yahoo or google. I'm sure you'll find a slew of editorials blasting Obama for going back on his multiple pledges about accepting public funding. And the criticisms are not that he's rejecting the money. The criticisms are the lame disingenuous excuses he's trying to make, and that he's trying to paint it like he's a victim again (big surprise!).


i see. So....you still can provide no links? Oh - and blogs? Heh give me a break. Blogs, for the most part, give a voice to ignorant fools whose opinion has no value any where else than their own blog.

There are going to be a few million republicans flaming obama
there are going to be a few million democrats flaming mccain


notice i say "flaming" instead of "challenging" or "debating"
Ignorant fools blasting a candidate with nothing to back up their name calling belong on blogs. Because its the only venue they can have a voice and feel important.


[edit on 20-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

[edit on 20-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Andrew, did Obama not make a pledge to only use Public Funding and not Private Sector donations? Yes or No? When you make a pledge, you give your word.

If Yes, then .. why did he not keep his word? John McCain stuck to the pledge.

Why does this man make a pledge, gives his word, and then backs out and says that what he signed to was "A broken system"?

Why should everyone have to apply to a different set of rules, but Obama does not when he doesn't feel like it, even when he agrees in the first place??



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Obama overestimated the honesty of a republican-ized broken system



It's not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections. But the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who've become masters at gaming this broken system. John McCain's campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special-interest PACs. And we've already seen that he's not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations.


Though you and i, jetx, should save our opinions of Obama for the upcomming battle


We dont wanna put all of our material out there before that date comes do we?

[edit on 20-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

3. Elite? Already having a position of power based on the existing political power structure, which includes the CFR, Bilderberg, and Trilateral folks like Lee Hamilton, James Johnson, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and others.

You throw around those entities like you just learned how to say them man. I understand your definition of elite. And your definition of elite is that it applies to anyone with a lot of money. So i guess i should ask you to define a lot of money.

No, I just told you my definition of elite. Why ask me a question, wait for my answer, and then change my answer?

If you want to be taken even slightly seriously, or earn any respect from fellow ATS members, you might want to consider staying on topic and addressing the points raised rather than fabricate straw man arguments.







i see. So....you still can provide no links?


Re: Editorials Blasting Obama

I'm tired of doing your research for you. I've read through your posts and you are long on parroting talking points and short on any original content or thought. I would be doing you a disservice if I continued to hand to you on a silver platter sources of information. Do yourself a favor and buy the NY Times or Washington Post, or some other publication and at least attempt to educate yourself instead of demanding that others do it for you.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   
the words of a scared person who's in over their head.

Its not you "doing my research for me"

if you make a claim, back it up.

Otherwise it is you who looses credibility.

Sorry things dont cater to ignorance for you. But thats just the way things are



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:52 PM
link   
I am amazed that you would state that the Americans having a choice to fund the candidate they prefer is B.S.!

That is exactly what is happening with Obama. Don't you like it?

Lots of little individual Americans. Not a few major corporations. He will not accept donations over 10K so he is not indebted financially. Financial favors cannot be called in.

Does this threaten you or the people you work for?

Please explain! What else could this possibly mean?

And I do not accept deflection as a response. Answer the question directly or be seen for a shill, a manipulator and a hack.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:55 PM
link   
wow.. you can`t even make a simple thread asking a very simple question
without some shill/debunker coming in and asking the dumest questions to throw the whole discussion of topic....

wanting to hear all the little details over again when we have already been through all of them .

the reason this thread ask this question is because YES it is already a fact that the N.W.O/ ELITE exist....

so why come and debunk instead of discussing what the Op has
asked.??

so now a "SHILL" will come on and say something like
"there is no evidence of a N.W.O" and waste tons of time
arguing over it.

Obama
McCain
both= N.W.O/ELITE SCUM



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Donations of any kind should be outlawed. Plain and simple. By accepting donations they are basically selling future favors and pledging to look the other way when push comes to shove.

To minimize unwarranted influence:

1)Shorten the campaign period to a few months, therebye decreasing costs.

2)All campaigns be funded from taxation and each party having an equal, pre-determined budget.

Off course there is no fool proof method to limit corruption and "under-the-table-deals" are inevitable but at least officially it can be considered a crime and punished if any candidate/party is caught red-handed.

Donations equate to bribery.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
And to think I thought we had some gleaming bit of hope coming from Barack Obama. I still maintain he has more character and more to him than Hillary but all of that means nothing when your mouth is just the puppet for the shadow of power behind you...




posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Since you're asking which the cabal are supporting, then I'm going to give my honest opinion, since its conspiratal. Many businesses and holders of US bonds is Saudi Arabia, Japan, and China. These are the bankers. If you believe in the pyramid with the all-seeing eye on the dollar and the fact that all the leaders are inter-related and from 13 bloodlines, then you understand the Freemason thing, and perhaps the Black Pope thing as well. Leo Zagami told Project Camelot that he was Obama. Alot of people are not paying attention to Obama's family, which contains alot of muslims, and they consider it to be right-winged bashing or racism to bring anything up. I am left of Obama by a long shot. I'd be living in Norway in a flash if I could. But it seems that America is being diminished, after all these years and other forces are rising. However, you must note that those who blame US for world trouble really have to blame those 13 families and the massive media control. I find the entire thing frightening and wish there was some way to get Hillary back!!! Of course,it may be in some people's interests for McCain to win, and he may anyway, unless its all going to be rigged again. I really can't see a den of vipers being undivided.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 09:37 PM
link   
actually

the thread is "which is backed by the worlds elite"
not "which belongs to the NWO"

i swear, every time i hear that acronymn, i think of hollywood hulk hogan and that lame excuse for entertainment - WCW

that could be the main reason i don't take it seriously

my question to you was "why are only 7 of the people on your list listed as NWO scum"

if the others arent NWO sum, why are they on your list?



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 09:39 PM
link   
I notice you're always working hard there to jump on anyone who brings up Obama.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join