3 ms·

Don't you mean Ron Wyden and not Ron Paul? Otherwise you're pretty much spot on.

adventured 5y ago
They mean making it into the White House I believe. Ron Paul would certainly attempt to dismantle it, and he'd fail miserably (he'd never win election to begin with though). The larger confusion on the part of the parent is thinking the President is in charge of much of anything or has the power to dismantle any of these deep state perma structures that have been built up in the post WW2 era; these are structures that survive any given administration, regardless of political agenda, and which nobody really dares to challenge. That includes the always expanding spying systems and military industrial complex. Any President that tries it will be burned out of DC every which way possible. Instant lame duck, crippled by their own party, on the outs with the news media (which is entirely a pet of the deep state), lambasted coming and going, tripped up in staged scandals set up by deep state opponents in the FBI or CIA, probably get impeached a few times for relatively trivial things (vs, say, starting wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya that got a million plus people killed; you know, things you should actually get impeached for). The President is more of a token figurehead today than not.
- atatatat 5y ago
  > he'd never win election to begin with though How do you persevere in the face of this type of media blacklisting? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMdrwhDoZjQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMdrwhDoZjQ
  - adventured 5y ago
    I didn't watch your link (I rarely follow stray YouTube links). However regarding Ron Paul, I don't envy what he has endured in his lifetime from moronic opponents on both sides of the political aisle. The YouTube video of him being harangued & attacked by zombie anti-drug zealots on the Morton Downey Jr show is enough to feel sorry for him for a lifetime. Persevere, though? Anyone that dares to tell the truth today is begging for a blacklisting. That's what building the big tech censorship systems is all about (which will be America's version of the great firewall), being able to dictate what the supposed truth is for any given topic at any given moment in time. It's a martyrs game, telling the truth, I assume Ron Paul has known that for a long time.
    - nobody9999 5y ago
      >Persevere, though? Anyone that dares to tell the truth today is begging for a blacklisting. Indeed. Liz Cheney's fate[0] is a great example of that. [0] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/05/12/liz-cheney-live-vote-updates-gop-house-leadership/5031048001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/05/12/liz-...
  - vlan0 5y ago
    Yep. We saw it with Andrew Yang as well. Either being left out completely, or media outlets taking about 'him' without actually saying his name.
    - NotSammyHagar 5y ago
      I'm skeptical of this media blackout. I heard lots of people talking about this, he was on podcasts, I saw him interviewed. Look at how much discussion there is about him running in NYC. I think it was much more that there were a whole lot of credible people running and there wasn't enough air in the room for him to get much. I saw every losing group complain of the election being stolen from them in some way, Warren, Sanders, Yang.
      - Judgmentality 5y ago
        > I saw every losing group complain of the election being stolen from them in some way, Warren, Sanders, Yang. The irony of this statement is you see it as evidence of there being no conspiracy, but I see it as exactly the opposite. Maybe everyone complaining about the same problem means the problem is real?
        atatatat 5y ago
        Bingo. Easiest mainstream evidence is treatment of candidates in debates — which, reminder, are operated entirely by...basically whoever in academia or media.
      - TheTester 5y ago
        Sanders and Yang, Tulsi were erased from polls in order to erase them as an option for many Americans, meanwhile meanwhile Warren stayed on the election to take the progessive vote from Sanders, there is quite a big difference, and I say this as a right wing perso. It is just not about air in the room or anything like that, it is about deliberately erasing candidates and that is something that was done to Ron Paul Sanders and Yang, Tulsi simply because those in the business of control, war and fear are very close friends with those in the business of manufacturing consent period.
  - mygoodaccount 5y ago
    Am i missing something? How does the video demonstrate "blacklisting"? It looks like the feed cut out.
- NotSammyHagar 5y ago
  I don't believe that. First, a pres. in their second term can do it without fear of electoral repercussions to themselves. And these days there's so much made up stuff that half the country believes that it wouldn't make any real difference in the big picture. There was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee after all. The people that benefit from the current situation would be against changing it of course. But I agree it's extremely unlikely to be changed. I think the reason is that most federal elected politicians have a comfort with what these groups are doing that gives them a sense that we need these things. Something like "we are doing a terrible amount of spying on americans but it's protecting us". Plus they get campaign donations from the military industrial and spying complexes. And not much attention is given to the fact that a dishonorable leader could use this to start blackmailing opponents and maybe even ultimately control the population. Fortunately we haven't ever come close to a leader like that, ha ha.

They mean making it into the White House I believe. Ron Paul would certainly attempt to dismantle it, and he'd fail miserably (he'd never win election to begin with though). The larger confusion on the part of the parent is thinking the President is in charge of much of anything or has the power to dismantle any of these deep state perma structures that have been built up in the post WW2 era; these are structures that survive any given administration, regardless of political agenda, and which nobody really dares to challenge. That includes the always expanding spying systems and military industrial complex. Any President that tries it will be burned out of DC every which way possible. Instant lame duck, crippled by their own party, on the outs with the news media (which is entirely a pet of the deep state), lambasted coming and going, tripped up in staged scandals set up by deep state opponents in the FBI or CIA, probably get impeached a few times for relatively trivial things (vs, say, starting wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya that got a million plus people killed; you know, things you should actually get impeached for). The President is more of a token figurehead today than not.

atatatat 5y ago
> he'd never win election to begin with though How do you persevere in the face of this type of media blacklisting? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMdrwhDoZjQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMdrwhDoZjQ
- adventured 5y ago
  I didn't watch your link (I rarely follow stray YouTube links). However regarding Ron Paul, I don't envy what he has endured in his lifetime from moronic opponents on both sides of the political aisle. The YouTube video of him being harangued & attacked by zombie anti-drug zealots on the Morton Downey Jr show is enough to feel sorry for him for a lifetime. Persevere, though? Anyone that dares to tell the truth today is begging for a blacklisting. That's what building the big tech censorship systems is all about (which will be America's version of the great firewall), being able to dictate what the supposed truth is for any given topic at any given moment in time. It's a martyrs game, telling the truth, I assume Ron Paul has known that for a long time.
  - nobody9999 5y ago
    >Persevere, though? Anyone that dares to tell the truth today is begging for a blacklisting. Indeed. Liz Cheney's fate[0] is a great example of that. [0] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/05/12/liz-cheney-live-vote-updates-gop-house-leadership/5031048001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/05/12/liz-...
- vlan0 5y ago
  Yep. We saw it with Andrew Yang as well. Either being left out completely, or media outlets taking about 'him' without actually saying his name.
  - NotSammyHagar 5y ago
    I'm skeptical of this media blackout. I heard lots of people talking about this, he was on podcasts, I saw him interviewed. Look at how much discussion there is about him running in NYC. I think it was much more that there were a whole lot of credible people running and there wasn't enough air in the room for him to get much. I saw every losing group complain of the election being stolen from them in some way, Warren, Sanders, Yang.
    - Judgmentality 5y ago
      > I saw every losing group complain of the election being stolen from them in some way, Warren, Sanders, Yang. The irony of this statement is you see it as evidence of there being no conspiracy, but I see it as exactly the opposite. Maybe everyone complaining about the same problem means the problem is real?
      - atatatat 5y ago
        Bingo. Easiest mainstream evidence is treatment of candidates in debates — which, reminder, are operated entirely by...basically whoever in academia or media.
    - TheTester 5y ago
      Sanders and Yang, Tulsi were erased from polls in order to erase them as an option for many Americans, meanwhile meanwhile Warren stayed on the election to take the progessive vote from Sanders, there is quite a big difference, and I say this as a right wing perso. It is just not about air in the room or anything like that, it is about deliberately erasing candidates and that is something that was done to Ron Paul Sanders and Yang, Tulsi simply because those in the business of control, war and fear are very close friends with those in the business of manufacturing consent period.
- mygoodaccount 5y ago
  Am i missing something? How does the video demonstrate "blacklisting"? It looks like the feed cut out.
NotSammyHagar 5y ago
I don't believe that. First, a pres. in their second term can do it without fear of electoral repercussions to themselves. And these days there's so much made up stuff that half the country believes that it wouldn't make any real difference in the big picture. There was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee after all. The people that benefit from the current situation would be against changing it of course. But I agree it's extremely unlikely to be changed. I think the reason is that most federal elected politicians have a comfort with what these groups are doing that gives them a sense that we need these things. Something like "we are doing a terrible amount of spying on americans but it's protecting us". Plus they get campaign donations from the military industrial and spying complexes. And not much attention is given to the fact that a dishonorable leader could use this to start blackmailing opponents and maybe even ultimately control the population. Fortunately we haven't ever come close to a leader like that, ha ha.