What is the Shadow Party?
Once again, we go to
www.discoverthenetworks.org to find out what this "party" entails.
We
find that, of all people, George Soros, Hillary Clinton, along with many
others, are part of the Shadow Party, which works inside of our government to
destroy our freedom with all sorts of Marxist/Communist/Socialist ideas, many
of which would have been an open door for jail time; and the names associated
with this Shadow Party come from all over the spectrum.
"No one knows for certain who first coined the
term "Shadow Party." In the November 5, 2002 Washington Post, writer
Thomas B. Edsall wrote of "shadow organizations" that were springing
up to circumvent McCain-Feingold's soft-money ban (which is discussed at length
below). Journalist Lorraine Woellert first called the Democrat network a
"shadow party" in a September 15, 2003 Business Week article titled
"The Evolution of Campaign Finance?" Other journalists soon followed
suit.
Here, the term "Shadow Party" is used
specifically to refer to the network of non-profit activist groups organized by
George Soros and others to mobilize resources -- money, get-out-the-vote
drives, campaign advertising, and policy initatives --
to advance Democratic
Party agendas, elect Democratic candidates, and guide the Democratic Party
ever-further towards the left. The Shadow Party in this sense was conceived and
organized principally by Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Harold Ickes.
Its efforts
are amplified by, and coordinated with, key government unions and the activist
groups associated with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform
Now (ACORN). The key organizers of these groups are veterans of the Sixties
left.
The Shadow Party was first disclosed by the
Washington Post on November 5, 2002. Yet, for years, when someone states they
have a "Shadow Party" working within our government at the highest
levels, many people look at him as if he is crazy.
But the joke is on them
because little do they know that one of the main players in organizing the
Shadow Party is today running for President of the United States! Yes, Hillary
Clinton is one of the main people who decided to organize a Shadow Party within
the government.
Yes, Hillary Clinton and her dear friend the Nazi Sympathizer,
George Soros, and Harold Ickes Conceived and Organized the Shadow Party.
They
used the Government Unions, and the former organization ACORN. Members of this
elite group have names which many associate with people who seem to hate the
United States—people like, but not limited to,
David Brock, Jane Fonda, Terry
McAuliffe, John Podesta, Andrew Stern, and Richard Trumka.
Now why on earth
would these people want to have their own Shadow Party? Maybe it is because of
their ideologies? Or is it because they do not like the Constitution and the
freedoms that come with it?
Well, this Shadow Party is, in essence, a
"party" more closely linked to Communism and Socialism.
George Soros
came up with the idea, and Hillary Clinton and Harold Ickes brought it into a
real working idea. Let us continue to show this "Shadow Party" and
the link to Hillary Clinton, who is running for President of our great nation.
"George Soros had quietly laid the groundwork
for the Shadow Party apparatus from 1994 to 2002. During that period, the
billionaire spent millions of dollars promoting the passage of the
Bipartisan
Campaign Reform Act better known as the McCain-Feingold Act
which was
ultimately signed into law in November 2002 by President Bush.
Soros began
working on this issue shortly after the 1994 midterm elections, when for the
first time in nearly half a century, Republicans had won strong majorities in
both houses of Congress.
Political analysts at the time attributed the huge Republican
gains in large part to the effectiveness of television advertising most notably
the "Harry and Louise" series (which cost $14 million to produce and
air) where a fictional suburban couple exposed the many hidden, and
distasteful, details of Hillary Clinton's proposals for a more socialized
national health-care system.
Soros was angry that such advertisements were
capable of overriding the influence of the major print and broadcast news
media, which,
because they were overwhelmingly sympathetic to Democrat
agendas, had given Hillary's plan a great deal of free, positive publicity for
months.
Three weeks after the 1994 elections, Soros announced that he intended
to "do something" about "the distortion of our electoral process
by the excessive use of TV advertising." That "something"
would be campaign-finance reform."
The reason George Soros wanted this "Shadow
Party" was to control the outcome of elections by stifling the freedom of
expression during the election campaigns, especially since they were hurting
his "Democratic" party that he envisioned as being the way of the
future.
One has to wonder where he got the idea to silence his opponents like
that, but all one has to do is go back in Soros's history to see he worked with
the German Nazi Party and, in doing so, learned that, to control the outcome of
elections, the "Party" had to control the media.
George Soros
developed the "Open Society Institute" based upon an individual who
thought the world should be one huge "Open Society." Hillary Clinton joined
this Anti-United States ideology and supported the Shadow Party.
"Starting in 1994, Soros's Open Society
Institute and a few other leftist foundations began bankrolling front groups
and so-called "experts" whose aim was to persuade Congress to swallow
the fiction that millions of Americans were clamoring for
"campaign-finance reform."
This deceptive strategy was the brainchild
of Sean Treglia, a former program officer with the Pew Charitable Trusts. Between 1994 and 2004, some $140 million of foundation cash was used to promote
campaign-finance reform.
Nearly 90 percent of this amount derived from just
eight foundations, one of which was the Open Society Institute, which
contributed $12.6 million to the cause.
Among the major recipients of these
OSI funds were such pro-reform organizations as Common Cause ($625,000); Public
Campaign ($1.3 million); Democracy 21 ($300,000); the Alliance For Better
Campaigns ($650,000); the Center For Public Integrity ($1.7 million); the
Center For Responsive Politics ($75,000); Public Citizen ($275,000); and the
Brennan Center for Justice (more than $3.3 million).
Millions upon millions of dollars were pumped into
an idea that was not what it seemed to be, but what leftists, who are aligned
deeply with Socialists, Communists, and Marxists, used to get what they wanted
done without allowing the people to see.
In simple words, they lied to get what
they wanted, at the expense of the Constitution and freedom—much like the Nazis
did during their way into control.
But what they did here was just the
beginning, and Hillary Clinton was up to her eyeballs with their ideas. Let
that sink in, be sure to show that to people who have the dumb idea that
Hillary Clinton is out to help poor people.
"The "research" which these groups
produced in order to make a case on behalf of campaign-finance reform was
largely bogus and contrived. For instance, Brennan Center political scientist
Jonathan Krasno had clearly admitted in his February 19, 1999 grant proposal to
the Pew Charitable Trusts that the purpose of the proposed study was political,
not scholarly, and that the project would be axed if it failed to yield the
desired results:
"The purpose of our acquiring the data set is
not simply to advance knowledge for its own sake, but to fuel a continuous
multi-faceted campaign to propel campaign reform forward. Whether we proceed to
phase two will depend on the judgment of whether the data provide a
sufficiently powerful boost to the reform movement."
The stated purpose of McCain-Feingold was to purge
politics of corruption by:
(a) putting restrictions on paid advertising during
the weeks just prior to political elections, and
(b) tightly regulating the
amount of money that political parties and candidates could accept from donors.
Vis à vis the former of those two provisions, the new legislation barred
private organizations including unions, corporations, and citizen activist
groups from advertising for or against any candidate for federal office on
television or radio during the 60 days preceding an election, and during the 30
days preceding a primary.
During these blackout periods, only official
political parties would be permitted to engage in "express advocacy"
advertising i.e., political ads that explicitly urged voters to "vote
for" or "vote against" a specified candidate.
Equally important,
major media networks were exempted from McCain-Feingold's constraints; thus
they were free to speak about candidates in any manner they wished during their
regular programming and news broadcasts. This would inevitably be a positive
development for Democrats, who enjoyed the near-universal support of America's
leading media outlets.
In addition to its limits on pre-election political
advertising, McCain-Feingold also placed onerous new restrictions on the types
of donations which candidates, parties, and political action committees (PACs)
could now accept.
Previously, they had been permitted to take two types of
contributions. One of these was "hard money," which referred to funds
earmarked for the purpose of express advocacy.
Federal Election Commission
(FEC) regulations stipulated that in a single calendar year, no hard-money
donor could give more than $1,000 to any particular candidate, no more than
$5,000 to a PAC, and no more than $20,000 to any political party.
The other category of pre-McCain-Feingold donations
was "soft-money," which donors were permitted to give directly to a
political party in amounts unlimited by law. But to qualify for designation as
"soft money," a donation could not be used to fund "express
advocacy" ads on behalf of any particular candidate. Rather, it had to be
used to pay for such things as "voter-education" ads or
"issue-oriented" ads political messages that carefully refrained from
making explicit calls to "vote for" or "vote against" any
specific candidate. So long as an ad steered clear of uttering such forbidden
instructions, there was no limit as to how much soft money could be spent on
its production and dissemination."
The entire act about McCain-Feingold was nothing
more than an elaborate way to get money and make people believe they had
created reform.
This is a glaring example of how the Shadow Party uses deceit
and lies to get what the extreme left wants, and it also shows why Hillary
Clinton is not afraid to lie to get what she wants.
Remember, the Shadow Party
was mainly organized by Hillary Clinton and her dear friend, George Soros.
Today, this Shadow Party is deeply rooted in the "Democratic Party,"
and they do not help the poor people: they abuse them for their own objectives,
keeping them poor but promising them anything they wish to hear.
Please feel free to pass this on so people will see
that the Democratic Party is really now a Shadow Party!
"In addition to its seven core members, the
Shadow Party also came to include at least another 30 well-established left-wing
activist groups and labor unions that participated in the America Votes
coalition.
Among the better-known of these were ACORN;
the AFL-CIO; the
AFSCME;
the
American Federation of Teachers; the
Association of Trial Lawyers of
America; the
Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund;
EMILY's List; the
Human Rights
Campaign; the
League of Conservation Voters; the
NAACP;
NARAL Pro-Choice
America; the
National Education Association;
People for the American Way;
Planned Parenthood; the
Service Employees International Union; and the
Sierra
Club.
No comments:
Post a Comment