Don’t Fade Away – George Soros and the Mainstream Media (Part One)

Exclusive to The Bold Pursuit – a series by Sandy Stringfellow

Articles have begun to appear in the mainstream media that portray Democrat Party loyalists as shaking in their boots, quivering in nervous anticipation of a projected Republican landslide in the House of Representatives this November, based upon unprecedented voter turnout predominantly generated by the sour mood of our nation.

Nothing would be more satisfying than to witness a Conservative landslide victory in the House and Senate, a human tsunami of registered voters consisting of Republicans, New Conservative Democrats, and Independents, forming a groundswell of momentum to begin undoing the devastating effects of “change” from our previous elections in 2008.



But there is more than enough promotional and campaign work to be done in the meantime by Conservatives before our November D-Day, and one may rest assured the Democrats will be working hard as well to implement whatever they have planned, legal or not.

Perception may not constitute empirical reality, but it’s more than close enough to determine an election.

It’s been suggested by a confident Republican friend that I am a cynic, and that I have given too much credit to the collection of Progressive Marxists currently holding power in Washington, D.C., and in the White House; that the writing is on the wall, the sleeping giant is awake, and nothing will alter the inevitable outcome of the November mid-term elections in 2010 as Republicans sweep both Houses of Congress.

I would counter that others haven’t given enough credit where due, and that those who underestimate King Barry, and especially his fiscally quasi-omnipotent benefactors (George Soros, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Peter Lewis/Progressive Corp., Jeffrey Immelt/G.E., etc.) do so at their peril, and the peril of our nation.

If King Barry and his power brokers can sustain control of the House and Senate, it’s going to be game, set, and match for America; there will be no place else for a freedom-loving people to go.

As far as being a cynic, I’ll gladly accept that label if it’s intended to represent the traditional definition of the word: one who believes that virtue is the greatest good, that its essence lies in self-control and independence, and that human conduct is motivated by self-interest and personal gain.

Let’s establish right away that I’m neither a professional pollster nor a paid political prognosticator; I’m just a hard working American with a deep sense of love and appreciation for his country, and of the mutually beneficial goodness that wells up from the spring of opportunity that America represents.
 
Nonetheless, I present to you this “think piece” as an exercise in the creative visualization of alternative political possibilities to those being widely discussed mere weeks before these critical and historic elections.

Is it possible that an increase in mainstream media reports of Democrat doom and gloom are designed to impart a feeling of overconfidence among the ranks of Conservatives and the Republican Party faithful, conceivably resulting in lower voter turnout at the polls?

Is there any doubt whose side the mainstream media is on, or the power they wield to influence the outcome of elections?

Is it possible Democrat strategists have a plan to win enough seats in the November mid-term elections to retain control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate?

Does anyone actually believe the Democrats will concede more than a few congressional races this November, in spite of mainstream media reports indicating a mood of pessimism, or that they are cowed by Republican efforts or those of the Tea Party and other grass roots groups?

Is it possible the eerie silence coming from the Democrats is an approaching storm, as the finely-tuned Democrat political machine prepares to take advantage of its superior organizational network, extensive fundraising capability, and the exceptional net worth of its most wealthy contributors and sympathetic Liberal ideologues?

It was George Soros (net worth of over $14 billion) who made the pledge that he would spend his last dollar to keep Bush 43 out of the White House in 2004 if “someone guaranteed it.”

Reporter Laura Blumenfeld wrote in The Washington Post on November 11, 2004, that Soros said removing Bush 43 from office was “the central focus of my life” and “a matter of life and death.”

As is apparent to the shrewd observer, the real news is often not the “news.” The real news is frequently the story behind the news.

George Soros is the story behind the news, and yet he barely receives mention as a major league heavy-hitter.
Soros, an atheist, Progressive Marxist, and proponent of a global New World Order, has aligned his generous support behind every conceivable organization that could help destroy America, as we know it.

He almost succeeded at placing John Kerry in the White House, thanks in part to the un-Constitutional and idiotic sophistry of the John McCain/Russ Feingold campaign finance reform bill (supported by Soros).
Bush 43 supported McCain/Feingold and signed it into law in March of 2002. While expressing reservations about the bill, Bush 43 said it would “improve the system.” What a deal.

Soros and others simply circumvented the limitations on “soft money” McCain/Feingold was supposed to prevent by using 527 groups, thus allowing them to contribute millions of dollars, without legal liability, to candidates that would readily support the enactment of legislation to help further their agenda.

The McCain/Feingold bill was struck down by a 5-4 Supreme Court majority that reversed itself in January of 2010. They correctly deduced (barely) that government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections, since government has no Constitutional authority to regulate political speech.

It may be redundant, but there’s an important point that bears yet another mention in such times of maliciously co-conspiratorial mainstream media, shameless obfuscation at every level, improbable spin, and the sizeable contingent of not-very-well informed voters nationally: the amount of money in a candidate’s “war fund” can determine whether they win or lose an election, and Democrats these days will typically raise considerably more money than Republicans.

For example, during the 2008 presidential campaign an auditor for the Federal Election Commission (FEC) sought permission to begin a formal investigation of more than 200 million dollars of bundled illegal foreign donations to King Barry. Most of these illegal contributions appeared to have Middle East origins, primarily from Saudi Arabia.

These requests to audit that portion of King Barry’s 500 million dollar plus campaign kitty were not only denied by the auditor’s superiors at the FEC, but also by the Department of Justice (DOJ), from whom the auditor also sought assistance. The Attorney General in the Bush administration DOJ at that time was Michael Mukasey, another graduate of Columbia University and the Yale Law School.

The mainstream media ignored the story, as they consistently did with virtually every other story about King Barry that raised big, red warning flags.
It was as if instructions on avoiding the matter had been delivered from “on high” by some entity of the ruling class with the monetary muscle and political pull to pose a career threat to any intrepid reporter with a misplaced sense of altruism.

The American Spectator, publishing a Washington Prowler column in October of 2008 by The Prowler, quoted the unidentified auditor:

“I can’t get anyone to move. I believe we are looking at a hijacking of our political system that makes the Clinton and Gore fund raising scandals pale in comparison. And no one here wants to touch it.”

It would be completely out of character for Democrat strategists and financiers (Soros, et al) to remain unaware of the political landscape, and to operate without having formulated a plan of their own well in advance of the November showdown.

When it comes to strategy, Democrats usually outsmart Republicans. The problem is in the way they do it, and right now, they are playing their cards close to the vest.
King Barry and his Chicago-style Democrat party machine will generate votes, as they always do, and they will use every dirty trick they can get away with to influence results at the polls.

Sandy Stringfellow is a writer and musician with an interest in history, economics, and politics.