See other Editorial Articles
Title: Huntsman calls for third party: The system is broken
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Feb 24, 2012
Author: Eric W. Dolan
Post Date: 2012-02-24 13:00:47 by tom007
Keywords: None
Views: 225
Comments: 20
Huntsman calls for third party: ‘The system is broken’ By Eric W. Dolan Thursday, February 23, 2012 18:33 EST Print 114 Jon Huntsman on MSNBC screengrab Topics: 2012 Republican presidential race ♦ jon huntsman ♦ mitt romney Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman on Thursday expressed his disillusionment with the dominance of the Republican and Democratic parties in American politics. “We need campaign finance reform,” he said during an appearance on MSNBC. “The system is broken. We need term limits. We need something to compete against a duopoly that is getting old and tired.” Huntsman dropped out of the 2012 Republican presidential race and endorsed Mitt Romney in January after failing to gain traction in the polls. He blamed his failed presidential bid on his unwillingness to pander to special interests. “I think we are going to have problems until we get some sort of third party movement or some alternative voice out there that can put forward new ideas,” he continued. “That ain’t gonna be me, by the way, I know the next question. I’m not interested in that. But someone is going to step up at some point and say ‘we have had enough of this, the real issues are not being addressed.’” He noted that the “fastest growing party in America is the unaffiliated party” and said the rise of a strong third party would be a “healthy thing.” Huntsman later blamed the lack of voter turnout among the young on the belief that the system was “rigged” by the current campaign finance system. Watch video, courtesy of MSNBC, below:
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Jon and Ron were the only GOPers that were not just crazy.
Ross Perot said this in 1992. " If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11 "Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
That is only part of the problem, and to name it as the only problem is misdirection. Finance is a SYMPTOM not a cause. The system is not just rigged by a finance system that puts a premium upon kowtowing to the right "groups" with lotsa' money to "give away" but that the vote counting is rigged to ensure that real reformers are prevented from ever gaining office in any numbers sufficient to institute real reform and a clean up of the system. Even worse, and because of secrecy it is hard to gauge the extent of their manipulation, but the R-O-G-U-E AND CRIMINALLY CORRUPT CIA has a large affect on the political scene. The main centers of infection in our current mix are the International Banking Cartel (headed by the Rothschilds), The CIA (which needs to be torn apart and the pieces buried - DEEP - in a hole separate and well distanced from the one in which the FBI is buried), and a political class which is completely controlled via blackmail, bribery, and extortion. As with Ron Paul, here is the failure of Huntsman. As long as they continue to operate within "the system" no one will take them seriously, most of all the owners of the system. Ron Paul with his pledge in the Trotski memo to remain a republican til he dies, shot himself in the foot. This run by Paul has every indication of being a future run for Rand Paul in 2016. Ron originally ran on the platform of term limits and has been re-elected ten times as a "system republican".
I think you are being unfair to Ron Paul. In the current regime to run as a "third party" is to be permanently marginalized. The laws have been so rigged as to make it next to, but not quite, impossible for a third party to arise and gain traction. The so-called Trotsky memo is non-issue here because I recognize, and I know RP gets it, that running outside of either of the two halves of the 1 Party System is a road to oblivion. Had RP not made such a pledge the MSM would have used it as an axe with which to hack him to pieces. That is reality not "pie in the sky" idealistic notions of a "Third Party Savior". It is not that I would not like to see the rise of another party, actually I would like to see 5 or 6 more parties or, even better, outlaw them altogether. However, as the system is currently rigged it is suicidal for a candidate for office. As for RP continuing to run for office I am perfectly "down with it". He is better than any of the controlled alternatives in the offing. Term limits is also not a panacea. Term Limits is a wedge issue to divert attention from the real problem of deep seated systemic corruption. The correct solution is to go after the corrupt and not just "kill them all and let God sort them out". Possible. However, it has been my position for a long time that this time Ron is NOT running for president at all. Rather, he is running WITHIN THE SYSTEM, HAND AND HAND with system republicans in such a fashion that in 2016 the Grand Olde Party will owe a debt to Rand. Below is an excerpt from todays Wash Post that raises the very issue of Ron really running at all, let alone a third party venture. "If he can’t win the nomination, Paul’s interests at this point are threefold. He wants: 1) to be influential on issues he cares about (the Fed, fiscal sobriety); 2) to been seen as a responsible figure who brings his followers into the party; and 3) to leave his son Rand in a position to lead his segment of the party. With Romney, those are within his grasp. With the other two, they become increasingly remote." In 2012 I gave a LOT of money to the Paul cause, hoping for a third party run, only to have Ron pledge his fidelity to the system.
AH, the CONman makes his return and immediately starts to attack Ron Paul. He never attacks Obama, he loves our wars in the ME and he wants you to not vote. Give me a F'en break. Crawl back in your hole you government agent. Ron Paul and his legions of spam monkeys ain’t gonna win shinola. - Jim Robinson - (comment #1) OI... Should read 2008 not 2012, I gave to Paul cause.
Possible. However, it has been my position for a long time that this time Ron is NOT running for president at all. Rather, he is running WITHIN THE SYSTEM, HAND AND HAND with system republicans in such a fashion that in 2016 the Grand Olde Party will owe a debt to Rand. Below is an excerpt from todays Wash Post that raises the very issue of Ron really running at all, let alone a third party venture. "If he can’t win the nomination, Paul’s interests at this point are threefold. He wants: 1) to be influential on issues he cares about (the Fed, fiscal sobriety); 2) to been seen as a responsible figure who brings his followers into the party; and 3) to leave his son Rand in a position to lead his segment of the party. With Romney, those are within his grasp. With the other two, they become increasingly remote." In 2012 I gave a LOT of money to the Paul cause, hoping for a third party run, only to have Ron pledge his fidelity to the system. However, I made that point in the last (s)election cycle. RP knows that the controlling elites will not allow him to win even if he did win. That is a reality that a lot of people have not wanted to acknowledge. No, I think RP has some very noble purposes in his run(s) and it is not to set up Rand for 2016 (although it might). Rather, I think he has very pragmatically made the run both times in order to kick start a revolution of the spirit against the growing tyranny, and at that he has been more successful than in my wildest hopes. I'm a realist, with romantic tendencies, who does not expect an easy overnight victory. I also have, I believe, a fair understanding of who is actually pulling the strings. No, I can't name every name, or even every connection, but on a global level I understand the game, and the real enemy is not even in the United States. The real "High Command" of the enemy resides in the Banking District of The City of London. I got it. I know from what you have said that you were more than a little disappointed, but my perspective is more that this is an evolution - it is a program not an end in itself. No single "Great White Hope" is going to turn this around. RP, I am sure, recognizes than now. If he did not before the last run he gets it now - he is not a stupid man. Like the criminals that built the empire of evil over multiple generations that empire is not going to be undone in one fell swoop. It is too entrenched and too strong, and so it must be overwhelmed by a tidal wave that is too massive and too widespread for it to control. I'm pretty sure that RP gets that as well. So, what he has done, as I said at the end of the last campaign, is an inestimable service to liberty - he has begun building the wave which will swamp the criminals. Got it. I read it as 2008 anyway. :-) I knew you were commenting on the last election because of our prior "conversations" on the issue.
He is clueless as to why we only have two parties. I'd love to tell him about the shenanigans the Ds and the Rs go through to kill third parties. changing the puppet does not change the play.
He is clueless as to why we only have two parties. I'd love to tell him about the shenanigans the Ds and the Rs go through to kill third parties. Huntsman is a "made man" he is just doing his job in "catapulting the propaganda". Campaign finance reform is desirable, but as I pointed out above it is a SYMPTOM not a cause. It is simply ONE of the levers used by the uber-wealthy Banksters and their Pet Psychiatrists to control and manipulate the system and the dumbed down electorate. One of the "against" campaign finance reform arguments is that it would effectively only allow the rich to run for office. Those prognostications have born out. It is now a rich man's game. changing the puppet does not change the play.
There is the crux of this stalemate. Ron Paul is a REALIST.... Ron Paul has one big burden to carry that the others do not, namely he is an honest man. Honesty and politics are not bedfellows. To my mind, if Ron were to tell his followers, "I am running now to pave the way for my son, in hopes he can rescue this nation" many of those followers would drop away. I however would be glad to join the bandwagon. Hope is all we have left, the moral cupboard of this country is bare
Valid point. I still think my idea would be an elegant solution and that is to limit campaign donations for any elective office to REGISTERED VOTERS RESIDING IN THE DISTRICT FOR WHICH THE ELECTION IS HELD. One of the things that has amplified money corruption and made it possible for a few uber-wealthy interests to control the system has been the ability of people outside the district of an election to control the outcome through massive financial support that overwhelms the opposition. That is why the Israel-Lobby (Fifth Column) has been so successful is that by being able to funnel in large dollar support of those pledging allegiance to Israel they ensure that they are sucked up to by the political class. The other immediate action that could be taken is to repeal or invalidate the 17th Amendment thus returning election of Senators to the State Legislatures. It would not eliminate local corruption but it would insulate against outside corruption and make for a Senate that looks after the welfare of the Several United States and not The State of Israel. There is the crux of this stalemate. Ron Paul is a REALIST.... Ron Paul has one big burden to carry that the others do not, namely he is an honest man. Honesty and politics are not bedfellows. To my mind, if Ron were to tell his followers, "I am running now to pave the way for my son, in hopes he can rescue this nation" many of those followers would drop away. Again, I must respectfully disagree. It is not at all apparent that his purpose is to set Rand up for a run at the Presidency. That might be a secondary consideration but I do not think him so venal that it would be his primary purpose. As a consequence I do not see any artifice in his withholding comment on any possible, speculative, run of Rand. Because he is a realist, as well as an idealist, I think his actions quite clear and honest - to raise awareness of the real issues and build support for the reinstitution of individual liberty. Rome was not built in a day Kemosabe, and we have a fight yet to win to restore liberty in this land, but the battle lines are drawn and the forces engaged. For me I stand always under the banner of liberty. with all due respect, Flint, i think you're very wrong about this opinion. Cyni is a supporter of the "grunts," but not of the wars or of those who send them to those wars.
Christine, have I ever been wrong about disinfo agents? Remember "Honey Girl"? The CONman reeks and his continual attacks on Ron Paul are proof of his hidden agenda. This election we have a victory in the making, a chance to be heard and maybe even to restore the Republic. Do you think the system is going down without a fight? If I was you, I'd be suspicious of any posters return at this critical point in time who attempt to undermine Ron Paul in any way. To quote Jesus "By their fruits ye shall know them" Ron Paul and his legions of spam monkeys ain’t gonna win shinola. - Jim Robinson - (comment #1) I could live with that. changing the puppet does not change the play.
The nice thing about it is that it is a twofer - it eliminates outside money from pressure groups and corporations are NOT registered voters. While I would oppose any restrictions of freedom to speak a candidate for office is not being hobbled nor his speech restricted to be limited to raising campaign funds only from those people whom he or she is proposing to represent. And requiring that whatever independent group buys ads or airtime fully disclose in the ad or commercial would not be a restriction upon them. 
"Satan / Cheney in "08" 
#2. To: tom007 (#0)
someone is going to step up at some point and say ‘we have had enough of this, the real issues are not being addressed.’”
#3. To: tom007 (#0)
Huntsman later blamed the lack of voter turnout among the young on the belief that the system was “rigged” by the current campaign finance system.
#4. To: tom007 (#1)
“We need campaign finance reform,” he said during an appearance on MSNBC. “The system is broken. We need term limits. We need something to compete against a duopoly that is getting old and tired.”
#5. To: Cynicom (#4)
#6. To: Original_Intent (#5)
I think you are being unfair to Ron Paul.
#7. To: Cynicom (#6)
(Edited)
In 2012 I gave a LOT of money to the Paul cause, hoping for a third party run, only to have Ron pledge his fidelity to the system.
#8. To: Original_Intent (#5)
#9. To: Cynicom (#6)
I think you are being unfair to Ron Paul.
In 2012 I gave a LOT of money to the Paul cause, hoping for a third party run, only to have Ron pledge his fidelity to the system.
#10. To: Cynicom (#8)
#11. To: tom007 (#0)
“We need campaign finance reform,” he said during an appearance on MSNBC. “The system is broken. We need term limits. We need something to compete against a duopoly that is getting old and tired.”
#12. To: farmfriend (#11)
“We need campaign finance reform,” he said during an appearance on MSNBC. “The system is broken. We need term limits. We need something to compete against a duopoly that is getting old and tired.”
#13. To: Original_Intent (#12)
Campaign finance reform is desirable, but as I pointed out above it is a SYMPTOM not a cause. It is simply ONE of the levers used by the uber-wealthy Banksters and their Pet Psychiatrists to control and manipulate the system and the dumbed down electorate.
#14. To: Original_Intent (#9)
No single "Great White Hope" is going to turn this around. RP, I am sure, recognizes than now. If he did not before the last run he gets it now - he is not a stupid man.
#15. To: farmfriend (#13)
One of the "against" campaign finance reform arguments is that it would effectively only allow the rich to run for office. Those prognostications have born out. It is now a rich man's game.
#16. To: Cynicom (#14)
No single "Great White Hope" is going to turn this around. RP, I am sure, recognizes than now. If he did not before the last run he gets it now - he is not a stupid man.
"As for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
#17. To: Flintlock (#7)
He never attacks Obama, he loves our wars in the ME and he wants you to not vote.
#18. To: christine (#17)
with all due respect, Flint, i think you're very wrong
#19. To: Original_Intent (#15)
limit campaign donations for any elective office to REGISTERED VOTERS RESIDING IN THE DISTRICT FOR WHICH THE ELECTION IS HELD.
#20. To: farmfriend (#19)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest