Explosive Censored Presidential Debate Footage Found!

Most people thought the Presidential debates a great success.  Those on the right celebrated Mitt Romney’s victory.  And, those on the left praised the substantive nature of the debate.  But, I found the debate suspicious and disturbing. 

Was it really possible that, in the sole debate entirely dedicated to domestic policy, the topic of immigration did not come up once?  Is that possible?  I thought not. And, so I began a search, at my place of employment, for the censored debate footage that I suspected existed.

I mean, this debate focused on jobs.  And the presence of over 15 million illegal aliens means that a very significant number of Americans have been displaced from the job market.  Though he would never say so, President Obama should be especially for reducing immigration, since Latino immigrants largely take African – Americans’ entry-level jobs. 

And, maybe it is just me, but I thought terrorism would be mentioned in the domestic policy debate.  After the Fort Hood terrorist attach and our freedom of speech being denounced this 9/11, I thought domestic terror policy and Islamic immigration might have come up once.  This total omission did not make sense to me either.

Remarkably, It only took me a day of snooping around after work to find the missing footage.  I am not sure if it got spliced out from the original debate or if the networks simply aired a different debate than the one that happened.  But, the authorities clearly thought that the censored footage I found was far too explosive for the general public. 

In the missing footage, Romney starts off by saying he wishes to fence off our border with Mexico.  He also says that he would also halt Islamic immigration.  Obama repeatedly calls this racist.  And, Romney shows himself a patriot by not relenting.  But, I need not describe this footage any further, as you can watch it for yourself, here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-bwwOb0hdU&feature=g-upl

When you are done watching this censored footage, please distribute it.  Repost this introduction.  It is imperative that Americans know of this horrific and unprecedented censorship.  If enough people learn of this unforgivable manipulation, perhaps in future debates the authorities discussion of the vital topics of immigration and the threat of Islamic jihad to be aired.

John K. Press, Ph.D.

www.culturism.us

2012 Culturist Presidential Debates

Hi Culturists,

Please enjoy the Presidential debates as I'd like to see them unfurl!  This video touches on several aspects of culturist thought.  Please enjoy and spread it!  

Thanks,

John Press

www.culturism.us

Culturism Takes Sides - Vote Romney

This blog entry will likely stay up until Super Tuesday.

Culturism is a philosophy dedicated to American unity. It holds anything that divides us, multiculturalism for example, harms us. In E Pluribus Unum, it emphasizes the Unum. Culturism agrees with Benjamin Franklin's assertion that if we do not hang together, we shall surely hang separately. However, when we go into the voting booth, we don't have the opportunity to vote for a little bit of both. At such a moment our democracy demands that you take sides. So, before Super Tuesday I must tell you which of the candidates I think has the most culturist sensibility.

Culturism also holds that culture is VERY important. For that reason, culturism holds out very little hope for our turning Islamic countries into stable democracies. These countries are permanently different; and if they are to change, our military won't be the reason. The only candidate who agrees with this culturist reasoning is Ron Paul. Yet he has no realistic hope of winning. Barack Hussein Obama is the only somewhat viable canditate who is reluctant to invest a lot of our money in other countries. Unfortunately, his muslim connections make his loyalty suspicious. His backing of those dedicated to Islam in Kenya means I will not vote for him. I cannot tell which candidate is most likely to take out Iran's nukes. Foreign policy cannot be a decisive factor in our decision.

Culturism, by definition and to the extent possible, is chiefly concerned with domestic cohesiveness. One could see the Democrats running a woman and black man as a great way to foster unity. It shows that we now have no limits by race or gender. But they might use their access to recusitate ghosts of ancient gripes. Romney's Mormonism might make him a multicultural poster child. Yet, while Govenor of Massachusetts, he was strong enough to empower State troopers to enforce Federal immigration laws. This shows that he has some understanding of the need to control our culture. Nothing can foster our unity as much as letting people know that we are a sovereign nation; if you are not a nation, you cannot expect unity. McCain wrote the rejected amnesty bill, and Clinton and Obama were for it. Not believing we have a nation, none of these people can unite America. Romney is our best hope for unity and sovereignty.

Perhaps our being in the Middle East will result in some good. But leaving our borders open, giving amnesty to everyone (al queda members included) who has illegally trespassed into our nation is definetely anti-culturist. About this there can be no question; this is a bedrock of culturist thought. The only viable candidate who agrees with this assertion is Mitt Romney. Ron Paul's immigration and war policies do not violate culturist principles. He has other points of view, smaller government for example, that can be recommended by culturist principles. But we must admit that Paul has no realistic chance of winning. Culturism is practical. If immigration is important to you, please realize that every vote for Ron Paul could be given to the only other candidate who agrees with him on the crucial culturist issue of immigration. For the sake of our borders, DO NOT VOTE FOR ANYONE ELSE BUT MITT ROMNEY THIS TUESDAY!!!!